Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-01-26 Minutes• • MINUTES OF THE PLAT REVIEW MEETING A meeting of the Plat Review at 9:00 a.m. at the Central Fire UTILITY REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT: CITY REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Committee was held on January 26, 1984 Station. James Crownover, Ivan Faulkner, Connie Skinner, Kenneth Wagner, L. 0. Ferguson. Clayton Powell, Wally Brt, Don Bunn, Don Osburn, Bobbie Jones & Jeanette Crumpler. Collier Pierce, Jerry Sweetser, Steve DeNoon, Gary Carnahan, George Faucette, Jr. & Rudy Hatcher. The meeting was called to order by Bobbie Jones. The first item to be reviewed was the large scale development plan of Jerry Sweetser Construction Company to to construct an office and warehouse at W. Poplar. Collier Pierce to represent the proposed plan. JERRY SWEETSER W. Poplar LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT and Jerry Sweetser were present Freeman Wood, (City Building Inspector): Wood was not present, but wished that his comments be placed into the record, those comments being presented by Jones. Wood stated that the proposed building is not in the flood plain but very close and would recommend that the floor area be raised. Sweetser stated they would more than do this as they will be using this building and certainly do not want the building to flood. 2) Clayton Powell, (City Street Superintendent): Poplar Street has been under controversary with regard to the Master Street Plan. It is currently called a local street, 50' of right-of-way being required. It has been a collector in the past, 60' of right-of-way required. There is current consideration of reclassifying it back to a collector again. Some of the reason for this is that it does serve as a collector street. Also the bridge across Skull Creek at the West property line is priority #5 under the Federal Highway Adminis- tration Bridge program and should be constructed in 1985. Determination has not yet been made as to whether this will be 31' back -of -curb to back -of -curb plus sidewalks on each side or 48'. If this were to be determined as a collector street, 60'or 10 additional feet would be required. If it were a local street, the City would only require 5 additional feet. Sweetser questioned what it was right now. Powell Ip PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE January 26, 1984 Page 2 advised that it was currently a local street. Sweetser felt that it should be considered as the local street (or what it is right now), and this is what he would agree to. Powell advised that the City Code also required any multi -family dwelling or commercial business developed along a street which does not meet current standards, that being 31' back -of -curb to back -of -curb for a local street, to be brought up to current standards on that side which would be widening 15.5' from the centerline to the back -of -curb. Powell advised that the only thing that would be needed would be that a straight edge be sawcut on the existing pavement, extending from the existing edge of the pavement (after sawing) straight to the curb and gutter which can be monolithic or concrete curb and gutter. Sweetser stated it would be his preference to give a Bill of Assurance that when the street is fixed, they would make their improvements; the reason being that the elevation of the street will be changed when the bridge is changed. At that point, all of his street improvement would have to be destroyed. Sweetser stated he would pay the expense at the time the street is constructed so this, would not have to be reworked. Powell stated he agreed that this was a reasonable proposal. Sweetser stated he would like to hold this proposal open as he wants this area to look very nice, and if the appearance is affected drastically, they may need to place the curb and gutter now. Jones advised that a Bill of Assurance would have to be approved by the Board of Directors. Powell advised that the storm drainage which was reflected in this area was put in some years ago, through a cooperative effort between the City and Mr. Sweetser. The only problem with this drainage is it is about 1/2 the size it should be, but at the time, it was better than nothing. Therefore, Powell advised he would recommend whatever was the Planning Commission's wish on this. Powell stated the collection box on the east end was never finished. Powell advised that he felt the future inlet boxes along the frontage should be put in now in conjunction with any street improvement that may be required. Sweetser requested to know why the drainage was a problem and was 1/2 the size that it needed to be. Powell advised that if you would follow the water upstream to Ash Street where the drainage structure is twice the size, and continue upstream to the Frisco Railroad where it comes under Gregg Street, this is the only drainage channel to drain that area. Powell advised that the only place this water can get out is to construct a drainage channel west of Skull Creek between Sycamore and Poplar or continue in the present fashion as it is choked down, or split the flow and have it go on each side of Poplar which would be Powell's recommendation. Sweetser advised this would be his preference on the method of improvement as well. Sweetser requested that this drainage system be further explained in order that the Planning Commission will understand Powell's statement with regard to drainage more readily. Sweetser clarified that the 13 • • PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE January 26, 1984 Page 3 drainage was only big enough to take care of that side of the street, and if one is constructed in the same size on the other side of the street when the street is improved, at that point, the drainage would be deemed adequate? Powell reiterated that the drainage should be split flow from the east corner of this property on both north and south side of Poplar to give adequate drainage. Powell advised there should be a junction box on the south side of Poplar to split the flow to get it all back to Skull Creek due to elevation. Jones requested that Powell address the driveway width with Mr. Sweetser. Powell advised that the maximum width of a driveway would be 40' for industrial or commercial, measured at the curbline or where the curbline should be if there is no curb, at the end of the radius. Otherwise, there would be a problem with overlapping driveways. Sweetser advised that the beginning of the opening at the curb entrance is 40'. Powell further advised that a 25' drainage easement would be required on this property. Sweetser stated that all the utilities which will be needed for this large scale development are in the street right-of-way. Powell advised 22' from centerline of street for the existing storm drainage should not fall within the existing right-of-way, dedicating a drainage easement there. Sweetser stated this would be agreeable to him, but did not know whether or not they had located the center of the street right-of-way. 3) Connie Skinner,(Southwestern Bell): Skinner requested to know if there was any type of a utility closet which will be located in the building for purposes of placing the terminal. Sweetser advised it would make no difference, but might be more convenient on the outside. Skinner advised they would need a conduit across the parking lot as well. 4) Ivan Faulkner, (SWEPCO): Faulkner requested to know if Sweetser was going to want overhead or underground electrical service. Sweetser stated that he preferred the underground, advising that the load would be a minumum. Faulkner advised that if there was any future building along the back side of this development, a 25' utility easement would be required. • 5) Kenneth Wagner, (Arkansas Western Gas Company): Wagner asked if the building would need gas. Sweetser advised that I'1 /S � • • • PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE January 26, 1984 Page 4 he would want gas to the building. Wagner advised there was gas along the south side of the property and he could enter along the east corner. Wagner advised that if the gas were to be placed 24' from the edge of the drive to the east property line, he would like to request this be a utility easement. Sweetser advised that if this ended up to be the case, he would render the easement. 6) Don Bunn, (City Engineer): Don Bunn advised he felt the water and sewer were very accessible for this property, and would be able to go into a manhole, even though it may be a slight bit inconvenient. Bunn stated he felt it would be a reasonable distance. Sweetser stated there was already water service at this location and would not be a problem. Bunn advised that the meter may need to be moved, and would like to move it in the island between the curb and the sidewalk if this can be placed without being on top of the storm drains. Sweetser requested that when his services are placed, that the meter be buried approximately 30" deep to correspond with the requirement which is placed on him. His greatest problem during the last freeze was the meter freezing. Bunn advised that 12" is usually deep enough to have a meter buried. 7) Don Osburn (Water Meter Superintendent): Don Osburn expressed concern over the location of the water meter with Sweetser advising that he would place the water meter wherever would be most convenient for the City and would be happy to work this out. Osburn also requested that the service address be placed on the sign. Osburn stated he would also need to check on the building number as he was not sure it was correct. Sweetser advised that he would prefer to stick with round numbers if possible. 8) L. 0. Ferguson, (Warner Amex Cable): Ferguson requested to know if Sweetser was going to need cable service with Sweetser advising that they would probably at least want it to be available. Ferguson advised they would need conduit and will go in with the Electric Company. 9) Bobbie Jones, (Planning Administrator): (a) Jones'reiterated the right-of-way dedication and stated that under the Master Street Plan, this does require an additional 5' • • PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE January 26, 1984 Page 5 right-of-way dedication before the building permit can be issued. (b) Jones advised that a drainage easement would also be needed and should be shown on the development plan. (c) Jones advised there is a 5' concrete sidewalk required and if the Bill of Assurance is accepted for the delay of the street construction, unless the Board of Directors were to overrule this, Jones stated she would accept a Bill of Assurance on the sidewalk as well. Sweetser interjected that he felt for the good of all concerned, that a Bill of Assurance would probably be better than going ahead and constructing this; however, he stated he would have no objection to doing it either way. (d) Jones questioned the setbacks advising that the requirement is 50' from the new right-of-way dedication to the roof or any part of the building. Jones advised that all of the building and parking setbacks appeared to be adequate, however, she stated the driveway would have to be 12.5 feet from the east property line. (e) Jones stated that her calculations revealed the immediate construction warehouse building at 6560 square feet in lieu of 2810, which would require a total of 10 parking spaces with one being marked as handicapped and 12' wide. (f) Jones advised there was screening required from the north, east and west. The Planning Commission may accept a minimum of 10%, landscaping in lieu of the screening. Jones requested that a letter be submitted to her requesting this if Mr. Sweetser wants a Waiver. Sweetser stated that if the property to the north were to develop, he would place trees along this boundary. Jones stated that he would also need to put his request for Bill of Assurance on the street work rather than the immediate work in writing. (g) Jones stated that the maximum driveway width needed to be shown as 40'. (h) Jones stated that a permit must be obtained from the City Engineer's office prior to cutting a curb, putting in a driveway, constructing sidewalk, or anything on a City Street. (i) Jones advised that Sweetser will need to notify the adjoining property owners to the north, west and east, either by publication of notice in the paper, by getting signatures on a copy of the plat drawing, or by sending certified letters, return receipt requested. PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE January 26, 1984 Page 6 If the latter is used, Jones stated that these should be mailed at least 10 days to two weeks prior to the Planning Commission meeting, that if all receipts are not returned in time, the matter will just be tabled. (j) Jones advised that the parking would need to be paved, and need the spaces stripped and wheel stops or curbs to keep the cars within the designated parking area by the time the building is ready to be occupied. (k) Jones stated she would require an as -built plot plan that will show what is constructed, show the future development and show the location of all utility service lines as they cross the property before a Certificate of Occupancy will be issued. (1) Jones advised that she would need ten (10) revised copies of the plat submitted to her no later than February 6, 1984, preferably February 3, 1984. This matter will go to the Subdivision Committee Meeting on February 10, 1984 at 1:30 p.m. and Planning Commission on February 13, 1984 at 5:00 p.m. The second plat to be reviewed was that of Lindsey Construction, development to be located at the corner of Gregg and Township. LINDSEY CONSTRUCTION GREGG AND TOWNSHIP Jones advised that the Township line has been platted incorrectly on the plat which has been submitted, and requested that this be changed. 1) Clayton Powell (City Street Superintendent): Powell stated that he would like the right-of-way annotated since the City of Fayetteville did acquire the property for the purpose of improving Township at the intersection of Gregg and Township, which it appears, that the right-of-way line comes back to the proposed driveway and then there would be an additional 10' dedication for Township at that location. Powell advised that Township and Gregg are arterial streets, and there has been some comment the State Highway Department's might change Township to four lanes. Powell stated he would like to have the plat annotated with the installation of the sidewalk both on Gregg and Township. Powell stated that Policy is such that no improvement would be required other than sidewalks on State Highways. Powell advised he would like to see the drainage split on this lot, stating that on the southwest corner, there is an existing underdrain going to the west side of Gregg Avenue where there is more natural drainage. Powell stated the drainage structure on the north end, 17 • PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE January 26, 1984 Page 7 west side of the proposed driveway goes back under the driveway into the north side of Township with the ditch there not being adequate t o handle the drainage. Powell advised, however, that this would require a State Highway Department permit and approval. Carnahan advised they would try to handle the drainage in this manner. Jones asked if the driveway as it is shown is far enough away from the intersection on Township. Powell advised that it was 40' from the radius of the intersection and will require the State Highway Department permit; thus, Powell felt it met the criteria. Jones stated that the curb breaks along Gregg were up to 60'. Powell suggested that a variance be granted on this matter due to the fact that there may be tractor/trailer traffic, and they would require this 60' radius t o get in and out of the driveway. Jones advised Mr. Carnahan that he would need to present a Request for Waiver in writing addressed to the Planning Commission. Carnahan requested to know if the State Highway Department had jurisdiction over Gregg Avenue. Powell advised t hat Gregg Avenue is not a State Highway; that the State Highway designation begins at the intersection of Gregg and Township. Jones advised he would need to get the permit for his driveway on Gregg and permit for the sidewalk from Don Bunn. Powell advised that Gregg is considered a City Street. Carnahan stated they would like to place the sidewalk on the highway side of the property line if possible, but Powell advised that the State Highway Department wishes the sidewalks to be placed on the property side of the right-of-way line rather than on the highway side. Powell stated that if the Highway Department agreed, then he would concur as well. After extensive discussion, the placement of the utilities in the easement east of the building will be as follows: There will be a private sewer line running to the west side of the building in the six foot planter. In the back, the gas will be located 5' from the east property line, the water 3' west of the gas line, and under the driveway; the electricity must be 5' from the building and 10' from any door and within that 5' that the electric line is from the building, all meters, telephone risers, etc. will be located. Telephone will be located 3' east of the electric line. The driveway will also be located over the water and gas line, thus allowing room for the electrical pads with clearance in front of them, along with the steel poles on either side of the transformer pad. Jones questioned the turning radius of the driveway located in the back of the building. Carnahan advised that the intent of the driveway was strictly for tenants. Carnahan stated he would like to enter into a contract with SWEPCO for the four lights which are shown on the plat, located in the parking lot. Faulkner requested conduit be placed on the north end of the building to get to the lights in the parking lot. • • PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE January 26, 1984 Page 8 2) Don Osburn (Water Meter Superintendent): Don Osburn requested to know if the proposed building would be one building or two. Carnahan responded that this would be one building with a breezeway. Osburn questioned the address, with Carnahan requesting to use 121 W. Township with the suite numbers being located on the door. Osburn advised this would need to be checked. Osburn requested that the meter be set no more than 2' from the building. Osburn requested suite numbers on both the back and front doors. 3) L. 0. Ferguson (Warner Amex Cable): Ferguson stated it would be difficult to get down through the walls after it was built, and requested to know how many fire walls there would be. Ferguson questioned the location of a utility closet with Carnahan advising there was a utility closet present in this building. Ferguson advised if Carnahan would call during construction, they would go ahead and place the cable wire at that time. 4) Ivan Faulkner, (SWEPCO): Faulkner requested 3" Schedule 40 PVC along the entire back side of the building from the power pole at the northeast corner of the property. Carnahan advised they would like to submit a Utility Plat along with their standard required plat. Jones advised that would be fine, however, the "as -built" would still need to be kept current. 5) Kenneth Wagner, (Arkansas Western Gas): Kenneth Wagner advised that he would like the property to be "to -grade" before the utilities are placed. Carnahan advised that all the grading would be done before anything was constructed. 6) Wally Brt, (City Sanitation Superintendent): B rt requested there be one (1) meter for the sanitation to be billed to with the owner collecting from the various suites. B rt expressed concern for his approach area, stating he would make his approach off of Gregg Avenue. Carnahan advised they would design the Southwest corner of the lot, Northwest corner of the building and cut radius from 20' to 15', thus rounding it out and enabling the Sanitation Trucks to access this area. • Carnahan advised there would be a sprinkler system to be placed for the planter island. Iq J PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE January 26, 1984 Page 9 7) Bobbie Jones, (Planning Administrator): (a) Jones advised there would be an additional 20' right-of-way dedication needed on Township. (b) A 5' concrete sidewalk is required along both streets, and Carnahan would need to work with Clayton Powell on Gregg and the Highway Department on Township. Jones advised that if Carnahan wished to pursue the matter of a Bill of Assurance on the sidewalk, the City may accept this, however, Jones stated that on a corner, she would prefer to go ahead and have the sidewalk placed. A Bill of Assurance for the sidewalk would have to be approved by the Board of Directors. (c) Jones stated there were two basic problems. Carnahan would either need to eliminate the two parking places shown north of the building or there would need to be 21' feet taken off the north end of the building. Jones advised she thought there was already one parking space short. Jones advised the setback is either 50' from the street right-of-way or it can be reduced to 25' if there is no parking between the building and the street, and there is 10% of the area between the building and the street in plants. Jones stated she though it would be easier to eliminate the parking spaces. Carnahan requested to keep the driveway and Jones advised she would let him keep the driveway as long as it was not wide enough to park in, and figure the 10% area that the plants are in as being the total area between the building and the right-of-way. Jones advised there would be one more handicapped parking space needed. Jones also recommended that some of the parking spaces furthest from the building be changed into compact parking to try to come up with the 99 required spaces with 4 handicapped. (d) Jones advised she would need Request for Waiver of maximum width of driveway submitted in writing. (e) Jones advised the permit for the driveway for Gregg Avenue would be issued by Don Bunn, City Engineer and the permit for the driveway on Township should be obtained from the Highway Department. (f) Jones advised Carnahan should provide proof of notification to the property owners to the south and east. The plat may be signed, or this may be done by certified letter. Carnahan stated that certified letters had already been sent out. (g) Jones advised that the parking would have to be paved, be equipped with wheel stops, be stripped. (h) Jones advised that each tenant should be informed to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy from the City of Fayetteville. • • PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE January 26, 1984 Page 10 (i) An "as -built" plot plan should be submitted upon completion showing all the improvements including the utility service lines. The "as -built" plans must be dated, signed and marked "as -built". (j) Jones stated that the sign was scaled as being 24' from the right-of-way, and at that setback, the maximum sign size would be 28 square feet; maximum height would be 22 feet. (k) Jones advised that the Township line would need to be replatted. (1) Jones advised that she would need 10 revisions submitted back by February 6, preferably February 3, the matter will go to the Subdivision Committee on February 10, 1984 at 1:30 p.m. and to Planning Commission on February 13, 1984 at 5:00 p.m. The third plat to be reviewed was that of George Faucette, Jr. George Faucette, Jr. and Rudy Hatcher were present. GEORGE FAUCETTE, JR. DEANE STREET LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT 1) Clayton Powell, (City Street Superintendent): Powell advised that he thought the duplexes proposed by Faucette was an area of chronic drainage problem currently. Powell advised that the plat does not have a topography, which he feels it should to show the drainage direction; Powell said it says it shows an elevation of 2.5-2.6 feet out on the street and 0 at the back of the 3rd proposed lot. Powell stated that he felt in this development, now is the time to correct the drainage problems that currently exist. Powell stated that he would recommend that Deane Street be widened to the 15.5' to the back -of -curb from the existing centerline of the right-of-way which would currently have 60' of existing right-of-way to meet the collector street classification. Powell stated the City would need continuous storm drainage across the front of the lot to the east side so that street drainage is not impaired and try to get it around the corner down Lewis Street. Otherwise, there would need to be some type of a drainage improvement down the west property line and across the south property line to the east to get the water out of the area. Powell advised that the City would not accept the respon- sibility of on-site drainage problems, and drainage easements would have to be improved structures if they were expected to be maintained by the City (improved meaning concrete lined ditches or storm drainage with positive elevation to guarantee flow). In widening the street, the ditch will be eliminated, and the water which has been ponding in front of the two existing duplexes is not going to have any place to drain. Faucette advised it was now draining 91 PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE January 26, 1984 Page 11 back along the west side of the property (toward the southwest corner). Hatcher advised that the intention for improvement of the drainage was to improve the street, and to bring a ditch down the west side and south side of the Faucette property and bring it back to the natural drainage. Powell advised that curb and gutter which is 2' wide would be necessary. The additional width may not be more than 2-3'. Powell stated he would be agreeable to monolithic concrete curb and gutter and concrete slab paving to tie into the existing edge of the pavement. Powell advised that a sidewalk would be required on the south side and may be placed on top of the storm drainage if engineering construction requirements were made easier. Powell stated he would like a construction drawing stating this did not have to be a formal drawing with an engineer's seal, however, he would like to see what is intended. If this is unimproved, this must be shown as a private drainage easement to be maintained by the property owners. 2) Don Osburn, (Water Meter Superintendent): Osburn requested to know if these were going to be individually petered. Osburn stated that each apartment would need to have an individual house number. Letters of the alphabet were not acceptable to use on the apartments, but numbers may be used (1 or 2), (no A & B). Osburn advised that several in this area would have to have their addresses changed. Jones advised that in numbering these apartments, Osburn may wish to leave some uneven numbers in between due to the fact that only 1/2 of the allowable density has been used on this property. Osburn questioned the fact that the water meters are set in concrete, with the possibility of Don Bunn, City Engineer objecting. Bunn concurred and stated that the meters should not be set in concrete. Osburn advised that the meters should be in number order with the apartments and lines should not be crossed. Osburn advised there should be a site card up on the building before the construction meters are set; and current numbers up upon completion. Osburn advised these numbers should contrast with the house and be of a metal substance. The numbers should not be stick on. Osburn advised that the City would notify all the concerned parties, i.e., post office, etc. of the new addresses. 3) Wally Brt, (City Sanitation Superintendent): Brt advised that the current location of the trash cans made it impossible for him to exit the area. Hatcher asked if there would be a turnaround area in the back which would be adequate for the sanitation truck which is 24'. Brt advised this would not be enough area. Faucette asked if 32' would be adequate. It was finally decided that the area would be placed into a semi -circular manner with no stripping, etc. being • PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE January 26, 1984 Page 12 placed on this area, ascertaining that it would not be mistaken for parking. Brt advised that two trash cans per unit would be permitted. 4) L. 0. Ferguson, (Warner Amex Cable): Ferguson requested knowledge of the utility easements, advising that he would prefer to go overhead, and requested to know where Mr. Crownover would enter. Crownover advised he did not believe there would be enough room to go overhead. Crownover advised that the easiest way would be to go underground from the street. Ferguson advised that The Cable Company was on the south side going overhead, and was running out of room. 5) Kenneth Wagner, Arkansas Western Gas: Wagner wished to know how far the existing duplexes were from the existing gas line. Faucette advised they were easily 25' from this point. Wagner advised he would like to see a 25' utility easement along the front outside of the 30' right-of-way. Wagner advised there is a 2" high pressure gas line there, and there are several acres back to the west which are to be developed. Arkansas Western Gas will be replacing this high pressure gas line which will be under the road when it is widened, as it is currently one foot from the blacktop now. 6) Connie Skinner, (Southwestern Bell): Connie Skinner advised she was going to request a 25' easement along the front as well, but will actually need an easement along both east and west sides. Hatcher advised he did not think a 20' easement along Deane Street would be a problem, but did not know about the 25'. He requested to know if the 20' would be adequate if they could supply that. Wagner advised that since the telephone and gas would be the only ones using this easement, the 20' would be sufficient. Jones advised there was 8-9/l0ths feet from the corner of the duplex to the property line on the west side and on the east side there is 19-1/2 feet. 7) James Crownover, (Ozarks Electric Cooperative): Crownover advised he would definitely need an easement down the west side of the property. Crownover advised he would need to look at this job before he would be able to make a decision, and did not think it would be possible to go overhead. Hatcher requested knowledge of the expense to the developer if they �3� • • PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE January 26, 1984 Page 13 decide to go underground. Crownover advised that the trench, transformer pads and backfill would be the responsibility of the developer, as well as the wire from the transformer to the building. Crownover advised that the service must be within 8-10' of the building, and recommended that the pads be placed 1/2 way between the two south buildings on each side. 8) Don Bunn, (City Engineer): Bunn advised he did not want the meter to be placed in concrete. Bunn advised that the sewer line is straight between the manholes. and that the manholes need to be checked to see if the sewer line is where the easement appears. Bunn advised that the developer could not build over the sewer line. Bunn advised that if the sewer ended up to be very close to the building, he would not even want concrete patios placed over the top of it. Hatcher advised there would be 4' from the building, if it is at all in the easement. Bunn advised he would need a total of a 10' waterline easement. Hatcher stated he would try to run this within 3' of the pavement and give 10' from the pavement over. Bunn requested that the sewer easement information be placed in the abstract the next time the abstract is brought up to date. 9) Bobbie Jones, (Planning Administrator): (a) Jones advised that the Planning Commission has already approved lot splits on this so that the two existing duplexes could be sold separately and apart from this property. At the time this was done, the 90' frontage requirement for this parcel was waived, down to the 30' shown. (b) Jones advised that the front setback is unclear and requested to know if they were 10' from the proposed duplexes to the south property line of the existing duplexes. Jones advised she could not think of a rule that would require any more than that. Jones stated she is treating the east and west property lines as sidelines and the south property lines as the rear property line. Faucette advised there is 31'6" between the existing duplex and the 1st duplex currently in the plans. (c) Jones advised that there are two (2) parking spaces more than are required. (d) Jones advised that this development brought them to less than 1/3rd of the density that could be placed on this property. • (e) Jones advised there was no required landscaping or screening. Qy • • PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE January 26, 1984 Page 14 (f) Jones advised that the existing driveway would need to be shown to the existing duplexes for their parking areas. (g) Jones advised that an easement would be required for the two duplexes which are served by one single driveway, in the event the property were to be sold, but the existing drives and the parking areas to the existing drives should be shown on the plat for the Planning Commission Meeting. (h) Jones advised that the driveway safety zone is 12.5'from side property line, once the radius has been placed, Jones stated this would probably bring it out to the full 30'. A driveway on the property line and shared by two (2) properties has an automatic waiver. (i) A permit willneed to be obtained from the City Engineer's Office to widen the pavement, place the curb and gutter, the new driveway location. (j) Jones advised there Deane, and the permit would for this as well. Jones cover all of these items at is a 4' concrete sidewalk required along be obtained from the City Engineer's office advised that one permit can be obtained to the cost of $2.00 per item. (k) Jones advised that the parking would need to be paved, stripping placed, and have wheel stops which will keep the cars in the parking areas, by the time the buildings are ready to be occupied. (1) Upon completion of the project, an "as -built" plot plan will need to be submitted to the Planning Office which will show everything including separate utility lines for electric, gas, etc., marked "as -built", dated and signed. The Certificate of Occupancy will not be issued until the "as -built" plot plan has been submitted. (m) 10 copies of the revised plat should be submitted no later than February 6, preferably February 3, 1984; going to Subdivision Committee on February 10, 1984 at 1:30 p.m. and will go to Planning Commission on February 13, 1984 at 5:00 p.m. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:50 a.m. 0,5