Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-12-08 - Minutes• • MINUTES OF A SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE MEETING A meeting of the Subdivision Committee of the Planning Commission was held at 4:00, P.M., Monday, December 8, 1980, in the Board of Directors Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Keith Newhouse and Don Hunnicutt. Newton Hailey and Beth Crocker arrived late. MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: None. Jim Vizzier, Frank Sharp, Larry Wood. Jim Hill, Delvin Nation, David Keith Taylor, Cynthia Stewart, McWethy, Director Bobbie Jones, The minutes of the November 10, 1980, MINUTES meeting of the Subdivision Committee were approved as mailed. The only item for consideration WASHINGTON MOUNTAIN was the approval of the preliminary A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT plat of Washington Mountain, A JIM VIZZIER Planned Unit Development to be located West • of Highway 71 by-pass, South of Highway 62 West and East of Finger Road; Washington Properties - Owner and Developer. Part of the development is located outside the City Limits. Property located inside the the City Limits is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District. Jim Vizzier and Jim Hill were present to represent the Developers. David McWethy, Delvin Nation and Frank Sharp were present to represent the Parks Board which is interested in acquiring park lands within this development. Also, Mr. Keith Taylor, an adjoining property owner was present. Keith Newhouse stated that the Developers are requesting several waivers, and that the Developers are not sure which phase of the Development will be developed first. Mr. Vizzier stated that the requests for waivers are a result of the Plat Review Committee Meeting. Keith Newhouse asked Mr. Vizzier to outline what the requested waivers consist of. Mr. Vizzier stated that Clayton Powell, City Street Superintendent, had recommended three points of access for the development, and that Mr. Powell wants two points of access installed with the first phase of development. Mr. Vizzier said the Developers do not own the property where access would be feasible on the West and East and that would have to be negotiated with those property owners. The three points of access are located in such a way that no matter where the first phase of development occurs (the Developer proposes 30-35 acres for the first phase), it will be difficult to provide two points of access. Vizzier said a waiver has been requested for the required open space. He stated there is an error in the Plat Review Committee Minutes and that the 24 acre figure is incorrect. He said the entire development is 173 acres, and '51 acres of open space is required by ordinance. The Developers are requesting permission to provide 47.8 acres. Vizzier further stated there is an FAA omni station located on top of the mountain, and development will be restricted somewhat by that station. The lease for the omni station expires in June of 1982, at that time some of the Subdivision Committee Meeting December 8, 1980 Page 2 restrictions may be lifted. Also, the City may acquire some properties in the development for park lands. The developers are requesting a three acre waiver on the open space requirements. The Developers are requesting that the streets within the PUD be private. Clayton Powell had not objected to the private streets, but recommended a 24 ft. width on the pavement. The Developers are requesting a waiver on the easements. The utility companies had requested a 25 ft. easement on each side of the streets. The Developers plan to run sewer at the rear of the lots. This 25 ft. easement on each side of the street is in addition to the 24 ft. street. That would total about 75 ft. of area that would have to be cleared of trees. The Developers propose 25 ft. easements on one side of the streets with 10 ft. by 10 ft. easements located on every other lot line for meters, phone pedestles, and transformers. An alternative, proposed by the Developers, would be a 15 ft. easement on each side of the streets. Vizzier said that the Developers would have to meet with the Plat Review Committee again. Another waiver requested is a waiver of the maximum number of units on a loop street or cul-de-sac. Vizzier stated that he and Bobbie Jones had not interpreted this requirement from the same point of view. Vizzier said there is one street that will have 90 lots and the maximum is 80 lots. These are large lots and will not have a large traffic density. He felt it was a matter of how far one would have to travel before he could turn around. Bobbie Jones said that private streets must be either loop streets or cuts -de -sac. The maximum density for a cul-de-sac is 40 units and the maximum density for a loop street is 80 units. Keith Newhouse said the Developers are requesting only one point of ingress/egress for the first phase, and that would make the entire first phase either a loop street or a cul-de-sac. Vizzier stated that is correct. Bobbie Jones said the restrictions on the number of units on a loop or cul-de-sac is mainly for safety reasons. She pointed out that if a utility line broke and had to be repaired, those persons living on that particular street would have their access blocked. Vizzier said that two access points may be feasible in the first phase if the City purchases the adjoining property for parks and allows the developer access through the 250 ft. of private property to the parks lands. Otherwise, in order to purchase the property to provide access, it would make the development of the first phase awfully expensive. The Developers are requesting a waiver of the street light requirements. Vizzier stated that at Plat Review, Clayton Powell had been insistent that street lights be provided for the Development to City Standards. In an urban subdivision, where the streets are public, the utility company puts the street lights in, and the City is charged for the installation, electricity, and maintenance costs. The City will not pay for street lights on private streets. The utility companies said they would not work with the PUD because they do not want to deal with a Property Owners Association. Vizzier said the Developers are proposing installation of lights in recreational areas and, also, that in the covenants, the individual property owners would be required to install yard lights. McWethy stated he thought the utility companies had changed their position on this. Jim Hill said they had, but that the costs would be prohibitive. McWethy asked what the advantage was to having private streets. Vizzier said that it would reduce the size of the streets and therefore, fewer trees would have to be cut down. Also, drainage can consist of swales rather than • • Subdivision Committee Meeting December 8, 1980 Page 3 curb and gutter, and that street lights would not have to be installed. Vizzier said the advantage was partly due to wanting to preserve the rustic character of the development and partly due to cost. Beth Crocker arrived at 4:30, P.M. McWethy said that the Board of Directors does not like waiving of street lights. He wondered if the Developers interest might be better served by installing public streets. Jim Hill said there is no more revenue generated from a public street than from a private street. Vizzier said that Clayton Powell had also recommended that all lot lines be cleared, grubbed and lined for drainage. Vizzier felt by doing so, water would be speeded up, and erosion would be creatdd where the water ends up. He said he would like to spread it out and let the natural plant life help disperse and slow the water down. It does not make sense to tear down all the trees on the lot lines and line them with concrete. Don Hunnicutt asked if the streets could be built as private streets, then turned over to the City later. Bobbie Jones said the Board of Directors would have to agree to accept them. Keith Newhouse said he did not think these streets would have a prayer of being accepted by the City as they will be too narrow, there will be no sidewalks, and no street lights. Jim Hill said the Developers plan to install sidewalks, and that the narrower streets are permitted within a PUD, the only waiver being requested as far as street standards is the elimination of the street light requirement. Jim Vizzier said he felt the City should make up their minds whether or not they are going to permit this rural type of development or impose Urban requirements on all subdivisions. McWethy stated that the City would like certain areas of this Subdivision set aside for park lands. These areas are; Lots 4 and 5 in Block 10, and Lots 23, 25, 26, 27 in Block 7. A small area of the common property may be utilized, and a trail will be needed to connect the two areas. Community Development funds will probably be used to purchase access to the park areas on either East or West Farmers Road. McWethy said that if the City does develop the park and access to it, the City would probably not object to the Developers of the subdivision tying onto the public street. He said this may solve the Developer's problem of two points of access. Vizzier said the two points of access would be required for the first phase of Development. McWethy stated the funds that would be used would be available this summer. Keith Taylor, an adjoining property owner, addressed the Committee. He stated that he owns most of the property on the East side of the Development. He said that the lane that comes up to this point from Root Avenue allows only 20 ft. for public access. He said there has been a lot of trouble with persons using the road and it being ever widened by the Street Department's graders. He would be against the Development of that lane as a point of access, unless the street is taken off the West side of the property and does not encroach any further on his property. Mr. Taylor said that another concern of his is drainage. He does not want drainage affecting his property as there is only a quarter mile of the Development that does not affect his property. He stated that if these two things are taken care of he would have no objections to the Development. Bobbie Jones corrected a statement made by Mr. Vizzier. She said that on subdivisions, other than PUDs, the subdivider pays for the installation of street lights and the City then pays the monthly electrical charges. Subdivision._Conmittee Meeting December 8, 1980 Page 4 Bobbie asked what would happen to the private citizens that presently use the extension off Finger Road for access at this time. Mr. Vizzier said that it would be written into the covenants that those persons needing access would be permitted.to use the. roads. Jim Vizzier said it appears to him that the -City is requiring streets to City Standards and not wanting to participate financially. Beth Crocker said she felt that if the Developers were going to put that many people in the area, street lights should be required as a matter of safety. Vizzier said that a light on each lot, every 150 - 160 ft. would be just as effective as a light every 300 ft. McWethy said the problem arises in that persons who purchase property and build houses often come back and ask the City to install street lights. Also, if the Developer did have yard lights installed on each home, that does not mean 'they will turn them on. Keith Newhouse said that lights are a deterent for some activities that have developed in our society. Don Hunnicutt made a motion to table the approval of the preliminary plat for Washington Mountain PUD until the following items are clarified: • 1. Easements required by the utility companies. 2. Street names. 3. Private versus public streets. 4. Street light requirements. 5. Location of Phase I of the Development (being up to 35 acres) show how many acres and how many accesses. 6. Drainage. Beth Crocker seconded Don Hunnicutt's motion to table. The motion passed (3-0-1) with Crocker, Hunnicutt and Newhouse voting "Aye", and Newton Hailey abstaining. Mr. Hunnicutt clarified that it was his intent that the Developer would go back to the Plat Review Committee, get recommendations, then come back before the Subdivision Committee before,going to the Planning Commission. ,5 The meeting adjourned at 5:05, P.M.