Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-05-17 MinutesMINUTES OF THE PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING A meeting of the Plat Review Committee of the City of Fayetteville was held on Thursday, May 17, 1984 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain, Fayetteville, AR. UTILITY REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT: CITY REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT: Kenneth Wagner, Ivan Faulkner, Connie Skinner and L.O. Ferguson Clayton Powell, Larry Poage, Don Osburn, Sid Norbash, Bobbie Jones and Paula Brandeis OTHERS PRESENT: /,' Ralph Gray, Michael Moore (.Hood land /4 lls Wed;h3Mu nee-/ Smith PARES AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT V aYlQhLi Bobbie Jones reported some comments from Connie Edmonston, City Parks and Recreation Representative, who was unable to attend the meeting. She said that the Green Space Ordinance was written so that only the Board of Directors could waive the Parks requirement of .01 acre of land per multi -family unit (or $85 per multi -family unit if accepted in lieu of land). The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board will meet at 4 P.M. Tuesday, May 22, 1984 to make a recommendation to the Planning Commission. and Kevin Ralph Gray, Joplin, Missouri, then gave an overview of the project being reviewed at this meeting. CLAYTON POWELL, STREET SUPERINTENDENT Powell advised that in any PUD there must be Property Owners Association to perform the maintenance of the streets and all related items, such as sidewalks and storm drainage. He said that the only difference between the private streets in a PUD and a dedicated street for public maintenance is that the width may be reduced and the curb and gutter may be eliminated; open bar ditches may be used for drainage. He stated that the number of units determine the minimum width of the private streets and based on the number of units in this particular development, the minimum width will be 24 feet. He reported that he conducts three inspections during the construction phase and he said he wants detailed engineering plans and profiles for the approval of the private street within the perimeter of the PUD. In answer to Moore's question, Powell stated that he requires detailed plans and profiles of streets whether or not type of curb and gutter elevations have been indicated on the plat. He added that when the street is built, an "as -built" is required, unless the plan reverts to an apartment complex whereby there would be no stipulation. q/'0 • • • Plat Review May 17, 1984 Page 2 Powell stated that Wedington Drive is a State highway and the developer must have a permit from the State Highway Department for the divided threshhold. He said he would like a separate legal deed for dedication of a 40 foot right-of-way for this developers half of Wedingtion Drive. He added that if 40 feet of right-of-way doesn't exist, the developer will be required to dedicate 40 feet from the center line of Wedington to the North property line. The next issue addressed by Powell was that of construction of a sidewalk abutting the State Highway. He said this 5 foot sidewalk must begin on the property line and extend into the property. Powell said that, due to the density of this development, he recommends that there be more than one access road. He advised that the portion of James Street that will need to be brought up to current City standards (based on rational nexus) is 360 feet, measured from Mt. Comfort Road to the street's west end and to this property. Powell stated that condensed specifications of these street standards are available and that one of the provisions is that grades of 10% or greater must be of Portland Cement Concrete, 6" thick. Another provision provision is that storm drainage must be provided. Currently, Powell said, James Street has 40 feet of right-of-way with a 35 ft. radius cul-de-sac on the end. In answer to Mr. Gray's question, Powell stated that the Planning Commission or the City Board of Directors may waive the recommendation previously stated by Powell but that he felt that James Street was currently inadequate to meet the needs of this proposed development. Powell advised that he was not the final authority but merely pointing out the needs based on requirements of the City code. He added that he was not requiring anything unusual or anything that would not be required of anyone else developing in an identical or similar situation within the City. Powell went on to say that he would like to see the payment scale of the Homeowners Association for the assessments of the private drive. He said that the City is a part of the covenants for a PUD to insure that the facilities do not deteriorate to a point whereby emergencies may be created. Powell then cited Resolution 36-84, passed within the last 90 days, that requires any development in any hillside to have controlled storm drainage run-off. He stated that this builder is developing 7 -plus acres of water -shed which currently has about a 20% run-off. This will increase to about 90% run-off when development is completed. Powell said that detention and retention ponds are now required and he would like to see a detailed drainage plan worked up using the City's 25 year flood criteria. He added that he thought the northwest corner of this development would be an ideal place for a detention pond. Powell said he thought that part of the drainage could be handled Plat Review May 17, 1984 Page 3 on James Street and from the intersection of existing James Street to the north, drainage would have to be carried to Mt. Comfort Road. He added that, on the extension of James Street, the street specifications require a sidewalk on one side of the street, but because it is off-site, it may be possible to waive this requirement. Powell recommended that no sidewalk be required on the improvements to the existing James Street if it should be required. Bobbie Jones reported that she was in possession of a survey drawn up by Blew & Assoc. that shows existing right-of-way for Wedington, but it was not clear whether the right-of-way is existing or the if property line has been set back and what the developer has gotten is title to allow for what should have been an 80 foot right-of-way. Powell next addressed the problem of the ingress/egress from Wedington Drive with regards to the steepness of the grade. He stated that for about six weeks of the year the street is at its worst because of the mist and percipitation. He said that for this particular time there is a constant thin glaze of ice across the streets and that the dedicated street specifications require that within 100 feet of an intersection the grade cannot exceed 4%. He offered to work with the developer in any way that he could. Jones advised that she will be contacting the City Attorney in regards to the issue of private drives vs. public streets. She said the dif- ference, if any, between a Large Scale Development and a Planned Unit Development, is the issue to be decided because of the liberty a developer may take with planning the drives or streets. Jones stated that the Zoning Ordinance defines a condominium as a series of attached single- family residences submitted to a Horizontal Property Regime under the State Statute. This definition affects the drives as well as the open space required. She then explained that a more significant effect is that a PUD requires at least a 30% open space, part of which can be considered the pool and club area. Jones stated that not any part of the private drives, parking areas or individually owned areas could be included as "open space". She explained that this project could be set up under the Horizontal Property Regime, in which the prospective buyer owns only the unit within the development. This type of development needs to filed with the County Circuit Clerk's office and a Master Deed will also need to be filed which shall include floor plans. Powell said that if the street is private, the setback requirement .would be less than if the street were public. Jones added that backing into a private drive is allowed, whereas it would not be on a public street. Jones advised the developer of the concerns expressed by a Planning Commission member of developers planning narrow streets (or drives) in a subdivison with insufficient ingress/egress. cf • • • Plat Review May 17, 1984 Page 4 Powell stated that according to a survey drawn in 1980, the property line on this property reads from the center of the street and that if this condition remains the same, this developer will have to dedicate a 40 ft. right-of-way. Michael Moore, Engineer, stated that the newest boundary survey indicates that this 40 ft. right-of-way has been given. Powell requested proof of the dedication. Powell clarified that the 25 year flood plan will be sufficient for use a a guide for storm drainage provisions. Ralph Gray asked if Powell could release him from the obligation of improving James Street to which Powell stated that it was not his place to do so. Powell reminded Gray that he can only make recommendations. Jones stated that a request for a waiver of this improvement would have to be in writing and presented to the Planning Office by Monday, May 21, 1984. She stated that the request would have to be accompanied by 10 copies of a plan with all revisions required at today's meeting. Jones acknowledged that the Planning Commission would be the final body that Gray would come before unless he requested a waiver of the Parks Fee or waiver of sidewalks, in which case he would go before the Board of Directors. She said if Gray wished to request a waiver he would need to let it be known before the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board meets on Tuesday, May 22 and that they will make a recommendation of either land, or cash in lieu of land. Jones explained to Gray that the Planning Commission is hesitant to set a precedent as far as granting waivers for Parks Fees as this issue has become pertinent of late and has not yet been clarified by the City Attorney. She added that the Planning Commission is also hesitant to do anything contrary to recommendations by the Board of Directors' desires. Jones stated that there has been a lawsuit regarding the Parks Fee which resulted in the court ruling that there was no provision for the actual expenditure of the monies exacted for the fees. She said the Ordinance has been amended to say that the money nust be expended for the acquistion of land for park purposes by December 31, 1990 or the City must hold a Public Hearing to determine whether the money will be returned to the developer (or his assign) or if the money should then be expended, and how it will be so. Gray stated that he felt he is a quality developer and he is very disappointed with the restrictions or apparent unwillingness to conpromise on the part of the City. He stated that he was wondering whether Fayetteville was prejudiced against out-of-town developers to which City representatives assured him that the same requirements applied to all developers building in Fayetteville whether they were local or not. 13 Plat Review May 17, 1984 Page 5 Jones stated she thought the Fayetteville Board of Directors was concerned at least as much about the quality (of life in the area) as quantity. Powell explained "rational nexus" to Moore as being a need created by the builder, and the builder, in turn, addressing that need. This pertaining to the improvement of James Street. Gray asked if he could develop this area with apartments instead of condominiums. Jones responded that Gray would have to comply with previously imposed requirements with regards to an apartment complex and that he would still need to meet the newer drainage requirements. Powell responded to Gray's indication that he was "grandfathered" on drainage by reminding Gray that, if construction had not commenced within one year of approval that there wasn't any approval. Powell added that in order to obtain a building permit, Gray would need to have the streets cut to sub -grade and prior to this action Powell would need the engineering plans and profiles for approval. Jones stated that there is a question of whether one can develop a Large Scale Development Condominium and not call it a PUD. She repeated that the Planning Commission has requested a clarification of this difference from the City Attorney. Jones explained that a PUD requires streets to be constructed to City standards with the exceptions of the width and curbs and gutters. She said that PVDs also require covenants with the City being made a third party so that maintenance can be forced if the Property Owners Association does not execute required maintenance. SID NORBASH - WATER & SEWER Norbash stated that installing water mains in the right-of-way but clear of the pavement was required. Moore assured Norbash that he would take care of this. Norbash requested a 15 ft. permanent easement for the water main. He added that if this easement is not centered from the middle of the water main the requirement will be 20 ft. because of the need to maneuver equipment. Moore asked to use a system that will utilize a collector sewer service rather than a collector main. He said that instead of having manholes encircling the development, there would be a 8" service line with clean -outs every 100 ft. (or whatever code requires). Norbash said that this was satisfactory as long as code requirements were maintained. Norbash said he wants a situation that will avoid future problems. He stated it would be better to have a public sewer all around the project, and indicated the point at which City maintenance would stop. cry • • Plat Review May 17, 1984 Page 6 Moore said the drives in this development had been planned as 5" concrete slab over 2" of sand and 6" stabilized sub -base. He said paving materials would not be mixed; it would be either all concrete or all asphalt. Moore said that he would like to dedicate the water line to the City. DON OSBURN - METER SUPERINTENDENT Moore stated that each unit will have a water meter and they will be installed somewhere in the landscaping near the curbline. Moore said that he will manipulate the fire hydrants to any position that was required. Osburn stated that there will be a charge each month of $22.50 for unmetered fire protection from the fire hydrant that is inside the perimeter of the development because it is on private property and can only be used on private property. Larry Poage, Fire Inspector, clarified that this would mean there could 'be unlimited use of this hydrant for the one monthly charge and if a fire occurred there would be no additional charge. Osburn continued by advising that only one street number shall be used, along with unit numbers for the individual units He explained that these unit numbers must be displayed on the front of the buildings facing the street to facilitate meter readings as well as emergency services. Osburn stated that the Water Department will make the tap on the main but the developer will be required to provide the materials and pay a service fee for the tap. He explained that there will be four meters and two meter boxes on each structure. He advised that if a sign is erected listing the contractors, the street address will need to be displayed on such sign before any meters will be set for construction. Osburn added that a permanent sign will need to erected with the street address on it before any water meter will be set for domestic use and repeated that the unit numbers will need to be displayed on the buildings. Osburn asked Gray to have the mechanical contractors meet with him so that he could advise them on installation of yard lines to meters. He said he does not want the service lines to cross each other between the meters and the sturctures. Osburn and Norbash said that a 6" water main loop was sufficient for domestic use and that for fire use it would be up to the developer if they would like to use 8". Osburn advised that there will be between 125 and 150 pounds of pressure. Norbash advised that ductile iron, class 51 water piping was required. Is J • • • Plat Review May 17, 1984 Page 7 Osburn advised that, before any meters are set, there will need to be a finished grade or curb line. Osburn stated that meters must be placed outside of any privacy fences if such are built. He added that if any digging needs to be done that any planter boxes in the way will need to be removed. LARRY POAGE — FIRE DEPARTMENT Poage stated that he required two fire hydrants for this development and that he will not need a fire lane. He said the requirement for spacing fire hydrants is 1000 ft. apart. Poage advised that, he too, would require that the unit numbers be displayed on the fronts of the units facing the street. Poage advised that this development will be about 3 blocks from the responding fire station. Poage explained that Arkansas has recently adopted the 1983 version of the Standard Building Code and the Standard Fire Prevention Code Volumes I and II. He said that this is the code that he enforces. Poage added that smoke detectors are required and that he may inspect the club area at any time and home inspection would be done upon request. He also said that he may require at least one fire extinguisher built into the wall in the club. Poage stated that the. City of Fayetteville is a Class IV Insurance Premium rating presently, and that there are plans to go to a Class III rating within one to five years. IVAN FADIKNER — SWEPCO Faulkner stated that if utilities are run underground that a 25' easement is required. He said that without gas lines being included, only a 20 ft. easement will be required between the buildings in this project. Kevin Smith responded that he could arrange for the 20 ft. easement running east and west through the center of the project. Faulkner stated that most utilities don't have to loop but Swepco does. He noted that the plan is presently allowing for 25' along the north and south sides but that the east and west side do not show this much easement and will have to be adjusted. Faulkner said he would be satisfied if this developer could gain a dedicated utility easement from the adjoining property owner but it will need to be shown on the plat and would have to be obtained by this developer. Faulkner next addressed the question of the utility easement being cleared and brought to grade which would entail removal of several large trees in this development as well as bringing the property to 96 • Plat Review May 17, 1984 Page 8 a finished grade. He said SWEPCO would try to work with the developer in maintaining the trees wherever possible. Faulkner stated that he will need to bury an electric line 3' deep and will need the space available to maneuver equipment and to set pedestals and transformers. He advised that if overhead utilities were installed, right-of-way would still have to be dedicated and the easement area would still need to be cleared. Smith reported that working drawings will be finished by mid-June and Faulkner stated that he needs advance notice to order the transformers which have a six months delivery date. Faulkner said that SWEPCO facilities will stop at the pedestals which will be on the easement at the transformer. He added that, if the street is paved before SWEPCO installs their lines, they will require 2" schedule 40, PVC across the street in line with the easements. Faulkner stated that he will need an easement on the access to James Street in order to get onto the property with overhead facilities and from that point he would go underground. CONNIE SKINNER - SOUTHWESTERN BELL Skinner said she was in agreement with SWEPCO about the easement but that she would require 2" schedule 40 PVC across the northeast corner. She stated that there is a major conduit run through the property with 30" of depth. Skinner added that she would probably not move the telephone vault that is presently in the middle of the drive. She said if it needed to be moved or brought up to street grade, it would be done at the developers expense. KENNETH WAGNER - ARKANSAS WESTERN GAS Wagner stated that if natural gas was desired, he would run the gas lines from the meter service to the buildings at the developer's expense. He said the main would be run at no cost. He reiterated that if gas were desired, a 25 ft. easement would have to be dedicated across the north and south side and 20 ft. easement on the east and west. Wagner added that he will need to see a final plat before the utility is installed. L. 0. FERGUSON -WARNER AMER CABLE Ferguson stated that, if cable were desired he would have to run a line between the buildings in the easement requested by SWEPCO and he will require 2" schedule 40 PVC across the double entrance and at James Street where the phone company has requested same. He added that 2" schedule 40 PVC will be required on the west side as well. Plat Review May 17, 1984 Page 9 WALLY BRT — SANITATION SUPERINTENDENT Brt stated that there would no problem as far as where the dumpster was located. He added that the dumpster site will have to be open on the front and may be closed on the other three sides. He reported that there have been incidences of rat infestation because of improper trash disposal due to the screening in of dumpsters. Tenants tend to throw trash into the enclosure rather than put it into the containers. However, he said, he will still accept screening on three sides. Brt added that he requires a letter giving him permission to travel on these streets. He advised the developer that containers are in stock and may be purchased from the City. Brt added that he requires the area opening be 12 ft. deep by 15 ft. wide. He advised the use of concrete because of the use put on the street by the 30 ton sanitation trucks. Powell added that there is a requirement of 6" concrete on grades that are 10% or steeper. BOBBIE JONES — PLANNING ADMINISTRATOR Jones stated that there would be no requirement for screening on the bulk of the project nor will there be a landscaping requirement. She said that her one concern was the pool and club area. Currently the setback requirements for a pool are 100 feet, and a clubroom has a 100 ft. setback as well. Jones said that the Planning Commission has the authority to reduce these requirements but it must be requested in writing. She said she would like to know the exact distance the proposed clubhouse and pool will be from the east property line and the heigth of the clubhouse as well. Jones requested that the 24 ft. dimension of the proposed access to James Street noted on the plans. She added that a copy of the easement for the storm drainage, as recorded in the Circuit Court, will be necessary. Jones stated that she wanted a dimension of the distance between the east property line and the closest building, as well as the heigth of that building. She said the same would be necessary for the west side. Jones specified that setbacks are measured from the overhangs, fireplaces, decks, balconies or any other part of the structure that exceeds a heigth of 30" above grade. Jones repeated that she would talk to the City Attorney regarding the Green Space Ordinance and method of administration. She reiterated that the codes pertaining to PUDs and Large Scale Developments are vastly different. Jones said that the procedure to follow would be for that of a Large Scale Development with condominiums. She said that, prior to an amendment of the code, she had held that a condominium was a PUD. Jones said the code was amended February, 1981 and can be found in Art. 5, Page 819. Jones said, per a conversation with the City Attorney in January, 1983, she was to determine the maximum density by using 1,815 square feet of land area per unit. She told • Plat Review May 17, 1984 Page 10 Gray that the City Attorney said that if the width of the property becomes a factor in developing the property, that she requires proof that the development will be condominiums or townhouses. This proof, she said, shall be that thedevelopment has been recorded under the Horizontal Property Regime. Jones said that if the development were townhouses, that a plat would need to be filed and approved by the Planning Commission. Jones said that in a PUD, a 30% green space is required, but that the pool and clubhouse would be considered as part of that requirement. She added that in a PUD, when there are common recreation facilities proposed, they must be constructed by the time the eigth building is finished. Next, Jones explained that an issue that the Subdivision Committee and the Planning Commission will probably address would be the point in time that the private drive in this development will connect to James Street. Jones said that the parking in the first developed units will have to be completed by the time the units are ready to be occupied. She stated that the parking spaces will need to be 19 ft. X 9 ft. At Smith's suggestion that a temporary drive be cut from the project out onto Wedington, Jones answered that she would not approve this unless the Planning Commission also gave approval. Approval of the driveway onto Wedington would have to come from the Arkansas Highway Department, Jones said. She added that the AHD also would have to approve the location of sidewalks. Jones advised that the Board of Directors has sometimes allowed acceptance of a Bill of Assurance for sidewalks, and that that she would need to look into the possibility for this development. Jones stated that a "as -built" site plan is required upon completion. She added that if the pool, clubhouse and first three units are completed with no other permits issued at that time, an "as -built" will be required covering that phase. Jones said that if a sign is constructed, that the developer will need to check with Bert Rakes, Sign Inspector. She then recited the reasons that a Large Scale Development Plan may be refused, Art. 4, Sec. I, Page 946. The developer was notified by Jones that a State Board of Health permit will be needed for the pool and clubhouse. She also said that the bedroom windows in the units must open 5.7 sq.ft. and a clear opening of 24" high and 20" wide. Jones said that the parking spaces were more than adequate in this development plan. The meeting was adjourned at 12:15 P.M.