Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-07-21 Minutes• • • MINUTES OF A PLAT REVIEW MEETING A meeting of the Fayetteville Plat Review Committee was held on Thursday, July 21, 1994 in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. UTILITY REPRESENTATIVES: CITY REPRESENTATIVES: Jack Regal, Andy Calloway, Chris Vaught, Johnson and Rick Evans Tim Don Bunn, Mandy Bunch, Alett Little, Tim Conklin, Randy Allen, Perry Franklin, Mickey Jackson and Sharon Langley OTHERS PRESENT: Harry Gray, Bill Rudasill, Jerry Kelso, and others LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT - ROLLIN BARNES DUPLEXES ROLLIN BARNES - OFF FRANCISCAN TR, E OF CARRIAGE WAY The first item was a large scale development for Rollin Barnes Duplexes submitted by Harry Gray on behalf of Rollin Barnes for property located off Franciscan Trail, east of Carriage Way. The property contains 2.23 acres and is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential. In response to a comment by Ms. Little, Mr. Gray explained they would be extending Chickadee Street to the south property line. He further stated they would end up with two lots on the east side and one on the west side of Chickadee which could be sold. He pointed out he would need to prepare a subdivision plat for those three lots. Me. Little stated the private drive did not look as though it lined up with the existing Franciscan Trail. She requested the streets line up. Mr. Gray agreed the streets should line up. The utility representatives expressed concern that, should the street be moved over, they might not have room for an easement. Mr. Gray stated there would only be approximately a street. 5 -foot shift of the Mr. Vaught requested that the subdivision plat for the three lots come back through plat review. Mr. Calloway asked if there was a chance to get an off-site easement. Mr. Gray advised he was sure they could get an off-site on the west side but he did not know if they could get one on the east side. Mr. Calloway requested a north -south easement parallel to Chickadee Street. He stated he did not care on which side of the street the easement would be located. Mr. Vaught stated he would need to know where the ease property line of the large scale development would be located. Mr. Gray advised it would be approximately 120 feet to the west of the curb line for Chickadee. He stated he would get the city staff and utility representatives a revised plat as soon as possible. • Plat Review Meeting July 21, 1994 Page 2 • • RICK EVANS - ARKANSAS WESTERN GAS Mr. Evans stated that, if the developer provided a 20 -foot easement along the east property line, they would be able to work with it. He also requested an easement parallel to the water line. ANDY CALLOWAY - SOUTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE Mr. Calloway requested the same easements. TIM JOHNSON - WARNER CABLE Mr. Johnson also requested the same easements. CHRIS VAUGHT - OZARK ELECTRIC Mr. Vaught also requested the same easements together with additional crossings. After discussion, he also requested an additional easement for a street light. RANDY ALLEN - STREET DEPARTMENT Mr. Allen asked if the private drive would have curb and gutter. Mr. Gray stated he did not know. Mr. Allen asked if a drainage plan had been filed. Mr. Gray stated advised a plan was in the process but the drainage was to Carriage Way. He further noted storm drainage did exist with an inlet at the northeast corner of Franciscan running north on the west side of Carriage Way. PERRY FRANKLIN - TRAFFIC DEPARTMENT Mr. Franklin asked about the name of the private drive. Ms. Little advised Jim Johnson, 9-1-1 Systems, had requested the street name be extended and continue with Franciscan Trail. MICKEY JACKSON - FIRE DEPARTMENT Chief Jackson requested one hydrant be moved. TIM CONKLIN - PLANNING DEPARTMENT Mr. Conklin requested a notation be made on the plat as to the number of units. He asked if the units would contain garages. Mr. Barnes stated they would contain garages. Mr. Conklin advised sidewalks would be required on Chickadee. In response to a question from Mr. Conklin, Mr. Barnes stated they would be using City trash service but there would not be a dumpster. It was determined the plat would go before the Parks Board on August let. Mr. Conklin asked the surface of the private drive. • Plat Review Meeting July 21, 1994 Page 3 • • Mr. Barnes stated he planned on concrete. DON BUNN - CITY ENGINEER Mr. Bunn stated they needed a drainage plan and a grading project. He further advised he would like the water line inch line and pointed out where he would like the line to plan for the looped in with a 6 - run. In response to a question from Mr. Bunn, Mr. Gray stated they had planned on a private sewer line but, since they might be selling three of the lots, he would need to discuss it with the petitioner. Mr. Bunn advised they would need to provide 15 -foot easements for both the water and sewer. Mr. Bunn also noted that, in the past, some private developments had, at a later date, decided to sell the lots. He advised that, should they believe at some future date they would sell off the lots, they would need to plan for it now by constructing the street to city standards and provide lot widths and setbacks to city standards. • Plat Review Meeting July 21, 1994 Page 4 • • FINAL PLAT - BRADLEY ACRES BILL GRAUE - N OF HUNTSVILLE, S OF WYMAN, E OF STONEBRIDGE The next item was a final plat for Bradley Acres submitted by Bill Rudasill on behalf of Bill Graue for property located north of Huntsville, south of Wyman, and east of Stonebridge Road. The property contains 3.90 acres with 4 proposed lots and is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential. RICE EVANS - ARKANSAS WESTERN GAS Mr. Evans advised the easements shown were fine. ANDY CALLOWAY - SOUTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE Mr. Calloway pointed out the 10 -foot utility easement running north and south on the west side of the tract and stated he believed they had requested 15 feet. Mr. Rudasill stated he could change it. He explained he had originally had a 20 -foot easement for both the utilities and drainage but had split it, making the drainage easement 15 feet and the utility easement 10 feet. TIM JOHNSON - WARNER CABLE Mr. Johnson advised the easements shown were fine. CHRIS VAUGHT - OZARK ELECTRIC Mr. Vaught requested the 15 -foot drainage easement be both a drainage easement and utility easement. He explained they would have overhead service and he would like to be able to trim any trees. Mr. Rudasill stated the drainage easement was a ditch and there should not be any trees in it. Mr. Allen advised he did not care if they used the drainage easement to trim trees but, at some future date, someone might want to use the drainage easement to install underground utilities. He stated they never wanted to combine utilities and drainage. He suggested making some type of agreement between the utility company and the City to allow the utility company to use the drainage easement to trim trees. Mr. Vaught asked if he could get the utility easement widened to 20 feet. Ms. Little pointed out that would hurt lot 4. Mr. Rudasill agreed and pointed out there was only 47 feet of buildable area. Mr. Vaught stated they could increase it to 20 feet on only lot 1 and he could serve lots 3 and 4 off of Highway 16. Ms. Little reiterated the agreement - a 15 -foot drainage easement on the east side of the tract, 20 -foot utility easement on Lot 1, a 15 -foot utility easement on Lot 2, and a 10 -foot utility easement. Mr. Calloway requested a 15 -foot utility easement on Lot 4. After discussion, Mr. Calloway advised that if the easement on the west side of lot 4 was increased from 16 feet to 20 feet (split between lot 3 and 4), he Plat Review Meeting July 21, 1994 Page 5 could forego the utility easement on the west side of lot 4. The utility representatives also agreed to remove the 10 foot easement on the west side of lot 3. RANDY ALLEN - STREET DEPARTMENT Mr. Allen asked if a grading and drainage plan had been filed. Mr. Rudasill advised he was working on it. He reviewed the drainage plan. Ms. Bunch asked about perimeter control on the drainage. Mr. Rudasill reviewed all plans for erosion and perimeter control. • Plat Review Meeting July 21, 1994 Page 6 • • PRELIMINARY PLAT - MAGNOLIA CROSSING MAGNOLIA PROPERTIES - N OF 6TH, W OF DINSMORE TR. The next item was a preliminary plat for Magnolia Crossing submitted by Harry Gray on behalf of Magnolia Properties for property located north of 6th Street, west of Dinsmore Trail. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential, contains 36.58 Ms. Little advised that, on the entryway, the entire width needed to be public right-of-way or four stub -outs provided for street extensions to adjoining property owners. JACK REGAL - SWEPCO Mr. Regal requested the following additional easements: Lot 79 - a building setback and utility easement on the west and south sides; between Lots 76 and 77 - a 15 -foot easement for street lighting; between lots 74 and 75 - a 15 - foot easement; between Lots 69 and 70 - a 15 -foot easement; Lot 107 - a building setback and utility easement on the north and east sides; Lot 123 - a building setback and utility easement on the north and ease sides; between Lots 65 and 66 - a 15 -foot easement; Lot 139 - building setback and utility easement on the north and east sides; between Lots 61 and 62 - a 15 -foot easement; Lots 59 - an 8 -foot easement adjacent to Lot 60 and the setback in the front to be a utility easement. Mr. Franklin advised he would like to move the street light on the corner of Jasmine Lane to lot 53. Mr. Regal stated he would need on Lot 53 - a building setback and utility easement on the east and south sides; along the west property line of the tract (the area crossing the transmission right-of-way) - a 20 -foot easement. Mr. Gray stated originally the developers had thought they would use 100 -foot easement for a park area but the Parks Board had voted to take money instead. He explained the lots on both sides of that easement would be extended to the center of the easement. Mr. Regal continued with requested easements: between Lots 50 and 51 - 15 - foot easement and a setback and utility easement in the front of lot 50; between Lots 45 and 46 - a 15 -foot easement; between Lots 44 and 45 - a 15 - foot easement; Lot 43 - building setbacks and utility easements on the south and west; between Lots 1 and 2 - a 15 -foot easement and building setback and utility easement on the north and west sides of Lot 1; between Lots 128 and 129 - a 15 -foot easement; between Lots 112 and 113 - a 15 -foot easement; between Lots 102 and 103 - a 15 -foot easement and the front of Lot 102 a building setback and utility easement; Lot 23 - a building setback and utility easement on the west and south sides; between Lots 4 and 6 - a 15 -foot easement; between Lots 9 and 10 - a 15 -foot easement; in the front of lots 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 - all setback shown as a utility easement; between lots 16 and 17 - a 15 -foot easement; a 10 -foot easement between Lots 84 and 99; the building setback shown as an easement on the south side of Lot 18; Lot 16 - building setback shown as an easement on the south side; along the east side of the property, extending the 20 -foot easement across the 100 -foot right-of- way; Lot 17 - building setback shown as an easement on the south side; between Lots 80 and 81 - 15 -foot easement and building setback shown as an easement on the front of Lot 81. Mr. Franklin stated that at the intersection of Jasmine and Camellia Lane they would need a street light. • Plat Review Meeting July 21, 1994 Page 7 • • Mr. Regal advised he could come from the east and put in a crossing. After discussion, Mr. Franklin stated that, in order to get better spacing, they would move one of the lights to the southeast corner of Lot 31. Mr. Regal advised he would need the building setback on the south side of Lot 31 also be shown as an easement. He further stated he was not sure of the location of the 2 -pole transmission structure but it was very close to the east side of Chinaberry Lane. He noted that, if the poles needed to be relocated, it would be done at the developer's cost. Mr. Gray stated they could adjust the street. He also advised if the entrance was right-of-way he would not need an easement but, if the developer chose to provide stub -outs, he would need an easement for the street light. The developer stated he had planned on placing a sign on the property. Mr. Regal stated there was an overhead power line on the highway and there would be some clearance requirements. He also requested the sidewalks be shown on the plat. Ms. Little noted that, in regard to the entryway, signs were not allowed in public right-of-way so an allowance would be needed. She suggested a divided entryway and keep the portion in the middle. Mr. Regal advised that, if they wanted a street light in the middle, they would be required to put in a 2 -inch conduit. RICK EVANS - AREANSAS WESTERN GAS Mr. Evans requested the following crossings: off of Dinsmore Trail across Chinaberry (from the east side of Lot 79 to Lot 80); on Jasmine between Lote 52 and 53; on Camellia Lane from Lot 44 to Lot 1. He advised the gas company also had a main line within the 100 -foot easement. He further noted there were some meters sitting south of Lot 83 which fed property to the north with private lines. He stated he did not know if there were any easements. He further stated the meters would have to be moved. ANDY CALLOWAY - SOUTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE Mr. Calloway requested the following easements and crossings: a 15 -foot easement on the east side of Camellia up to Lot 1; from Lot 1 to Lot 15 the building setback also be shown as an easement; between Lots 14 and 15 - a 15 - foot easement; the east sides of Lots 79 and 80 a 4 -inch crossing; the west sides of Lots 52 and 53 a 4 -inch crossing; the north side of Lot 52 to Lot 44 an easement; a 4 -inch crossing from Lot 44 to 43 and from Lot 43 to Lot 1; from between Lots 1 and 2 over to Lote 31 and 24 a 4 -inch crossing; from between Lots 5 and 6 over to Lots 19 and 23 - a 4 -inch crossing; and between Lote 9 and 10 over to Lote 17 and 18 - a 4 -inch crossing. He further stated any clearing of the easement would be at the developer's expense. He further noted they did have facilities on the north side, parallel to the highway which, if required to be relocated, would be at the developer's expense. TIM JOHNSON - WARNER CABLE Mr. Johnson stated the cost was 90 cents a foot if the developer wanted the cable installed at the time other utilities were installed. • Plat Review Meeting July 21, 1994 Page 8 • • In response to a question from Mr. Gray, Mr. Johnson stated cable would be installed at no cost when there were 18 homes per linear mile of cable. He requested the following crossings: at Chinaberry Street; at Jasmine Street (on the west side); from between Lots 45 and 46 over to Lots 42 and 43; from the southeast corner of Lot 32 over to the southwest corner of Lot 1; and the same crossings requested by the telephone company. He further noted that, if any existing utilities had to be relocated or lines raised, it would be at the developer's expense. RANDY ALLEN - STREET DEPARTMENT Mr. Allen advised he wanted to look at the grading and drainage plan on the development. Mr. Gray stated he anticipated the property draining to the southwest into the natural drainage channel. Mr. Allen advised he had some concerns regarding the drainage. Mr. Regal advised that, if they were considering a drainage easement along the west property line, he would want the utility easement separate from the drainage easement. PERRY FRANKLIN - TRAFFIC DEPARTMENT Mr. Franklin asked if there had been discussion as to how this development would relate to an extension of Rupple Road. Ms. Little noted Dinsmore Trail would be a connection. Mr. Franklin also requested the entryway be labeled as Camellia Street so it would be clear as to the name of the entryway. MICKEY JACKSON - FIRE DEPARTMENT Chief Jackson requested relocation of one hydrant. LISA 00R - PARRS DEPARTMENT Ms. Cox lieu of on $300 advised the Parks Board had reviewed this plat and requested money in land in the amount of $51,120. She stated the figure had been based for single family homes and $240.00 per unit for multi -family units. TIM CONKLIN - PLANNING DEPARTMENT Mr. Conklin stated Jasmine Lane and Chinaberry Lane would have to be changed; they could not have a lane and a street with the same name. He also asked about access for adjoining property owners. Ms. Little stated they had discussed providing an access to the north, but not off of Camellia. Mr. Conklin also requested a notation on the plat restricting access to Dinsmore Trail for Lots 76, 77, 78, 79, 80 and 81. Ms. Little noted public right-of-way was not shown on Dinsmore Trail. She requested that be drawn on the plat. • • • Plat Review Meeting July 21, 1994 Page 9 DON BUNN - CITY ENGINEER Mr. Bunn stated they would want stub -outs on both the water and sewer lines wherever appropriate. He also requested the sanitary sewer be stubbed -out on the north side. He noted he would need to review the drainage plan as soon as it was submitted. ALETT LITTLE - CITY PLANNER Ms. Little advised the city would require off-site improvements for a bridge crossing on Dinsmore Trail. She stated they had not determined the cost of those improvements at this time. She stated they believed there would need to be a box culvert at that location. MANDY BUNCH - ENGINEERING Ms. Bunch recommended Mr. Gray contact Bill Sanders at the Corps of Engineers for a recommendation for the size of the crossing. Mr. Bunn also advised one-half of Dinsmore Trail would need to be improved to city street standards for whatever length it adjoined the subdivision. a • • Plat Review Meeting July 21, 1994 Page 10 EASEMENT PLAT - CITIZENS BANK Ms. Little advised this was the first easement plat under the new large scale development process. She explained easement plats would be presented to the utility company representatives at plat review meetings for their signatures. She further advised Mr. Kelso, the engineer for the developer, the City would like the right-of-way to be shown from the centerline. Mr. Calloway pointed out there was a joint utility -drainage easement shown on the plat. He also noted there was a 15 -foot off-site easement not shown on the plat. After discussion, Mr. Conklin recommended Mr. Kelso contact the adjoining property owner and get a 15 -foot off-site utility easement. It was also determined a drainage easement was not needed and the word "drainage" would be removed from the easement. Mr. Bunn advised he believed they needed a separate instrument dedicating the 15 -foot off-site easement. It was agreed the utility company representatives would sign the easement plat after the off-site easement was dedicated by separate easement. The meeting was adjourned at 11:15 a.m.