Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-02-10 - Minutes• • MINUTES OF THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE A meeting of the Subdivision Committee of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on Friday, February 10, 1984 at 1:00 p.m. at the Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Barbara Crook & Melanie Stockdell. None. Gary Carnahan, Collier Pierce., George Faucette, Jr., Rudy Hatcher, Pat Damaree, Doh. Mitchell, Mel Milholland, Wade Bishop, Bobbie Jones, Jeanette Crumpler & Paul Tunstill The meeting was called to order by Chairman Barbara Crook. MINUTES The first item on the agenda was the minutes of the January 20, 1984 Subdivision Committee meeting. With no specific additions or corrections, t he minutes were approved as mailed. LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT TOWNSHIP AND GREGG L INDSEY AND SEXTON--OWNERS/DEVELOPERS The second item on the agenda was the approval of the Large Scale Development to be located on the southeast corner of Township and Gregg. Lindsey and Sexton, owners and developers. Property zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District. It was decided to hear this matter at a later time today due to the fact that no one was present to represent this Large Scale Development. LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT 590 WEST POPLAR SWEETSER CONSTRUCTION--OWNER/DEVELOPER The third item on the agenda was the Large Scale Development to be located at 590 West Poplar, Sweetser Construction, owner and developer. Property zoned I-1, Heavy Commercial and Light Industrial. Collier Pierce and Paul Tunstill were present to ✓ epresent this matter. Crook requested to know if the owners had seen the Plat Review comments with Mr. Pierce advising that they had. Stockdell asked if arrangements had been made to raise the floor area. Pierce advised t hat Mr. Sweetser did plan on raising this floor area anyway. Crook asked if there were any Plat Review Comments with which Sweetser Construction could not comply. Pierce advised they would be able to comply with all requests. Crook specifically addressed t he right-of-way dedication with Pierce advising that they would be able to comply with the 50' requirement. k2 SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE TWO February 10, 1984 Jones advised that Clayton Powell, City Street Superintendent had requested a 25' drainage easement, however, Pierce stated that this matter had been cleared with Powell and that Sweetser Construction is in agreement with the required easement. Crook stated this was of concern to her due to the fact that if this area was going to be ✓ eworked at this time or at a later time, the 25' easement may be n eeded. Paul Tunstill advised that the inlet box is going to be rebuilt when the curb and gutter is put in. Crook reiterated that Powell does wish to have a 25' drainage easement off of this property with Paul Tunstill advising that the pipe is currently 22' off of centerline.of the pavement. Jones advised that the lot sizeon the plat book has been reduced on the plat to allow for the street rights- of-way. Crook advised, however, that Powell was requesting the easement from the street right-of-way. Crook asked if Sweetser Construction had objection to granting 25' from the property line or street right-of-way (regular right-of-way plus the drainage easement)? Pierce advised there would be no problem in complying with the e asement requirements. (Jones confirmed on this date, 2/13/84, that 12.5' on either side of the existing drainage pipe is satisfactory t o Clayton Powell, City Street Superintendent). Crook stated that the drainage easement, right-of-way dedication, etc. would need to be shown on the plat. Stockdell advised that the topography in 5' increments needed to be shown on the plat, as well as the required Engineer's signature block. Crook requestedknowledge on the Bill of Assurance for the street improvements as well as the sidewalk. Pierce advised there would be no problem. Crook advised this would need to go before the City Board unless the Planning Commission were to feel this should be done immediately. Jones advised that Powell recommended the. street and sidewalk improvements not be undertaken until such a time as the remainder of Poplar is improved (i.e., anticipated bridge construction). Crook advised that the limits of the paving will need to be identified on the plat. The distance of the=driveway from the side property line to the turnout should be shown on the plat. The required distance is 12.5'. Stockdell asked about the landscaping and advised that the full Planning Commission will probably question the use of Poplars as opposed to something more permanent. Stockdell suggested that Pierce may wish to consider something other than Poplars. Crook again. reiterated that. all of these.changes'would need to be shown on the plat. MOTION Crook moved to recommend approval of the Large Scale Development subject to Plat Review Comments; that the drainage will be worked out to the satisfaction of The City Engineer, that a Bill of Assurance be submitted for construction of the sidewalk and street improvements 13 • • • SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE THREE February 10, 1984 along Poplar; that landscaping be accepted in lieu of screening. Motion seconded by Stockdell. Motion passed 2-0. LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT DEANEISTREET.'WEST OF LEWIS AVENUE REALTY INVESTORS, OWNER/DEVELOPERS The fourth item onthe agenda was the Large Scale Development to be located on Deane Street, west of Lewis Avenue, Realty Investors, owner and developers. Property zoned R-3, High Density Residential District. George Faucette, Jr. and Rudy Hatcher were present to represent this matter. Crook questioned the topography of this development. Hatcher advised that according to the minutes, a topography map would be needed only if the City was going to be responsible. Hatcher advised that t hey had made several changes since their first presentation. Crook asked if there was an existing drainage path on this property. Hatcher advised that they had placed a drainage path on this property some time ago. Faucette advised that the natural drainage flow is to t he southwest. Faucette advised that less than 1/3rd of the allowed density is being placed on this property. Jones advised that a topography will be required only where the developer proposes new streets or an alteration in the existing street plan. A topography map could also be required in the event that property is located in the flood plain. Stockdell requested to know if the numbering of the units had been worked out. Faucette advised that this matter had n ot been taken care of yet, and the existing units would have to be renumbered, but that they did have a tentative plan. Stockdell requested to know if the Sanitation turnaround area had been worked out to the satisfaction of the City Sanitation Super- intendent. Faucette advised that Mr. Wally Brt was satisfied with the turnaround area as it is currently presented. Faucette advised it would be paint -stripped as a "No Parking" area. Crook questioned the front setbacks with Hatcher advising that the setback requirements had been met. Jones advised there was no specific City Code to govern the front setback on this particular development. Uones advised that there had been a change in the utility routing since the Plat Review Committee Meeting. Crook asked if Realty Investors would be willing to grant utility easements as required. Faucette stated they would supply whatever is needed. Crook advised these easements would need to be shown on the plat. 14 • SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE FOUR February 10, 1984 Crook stated that the curbs and gutters, the radius on the drive, etc. would need to be shown on the plat. Crook asked if Realty Investors would be willing to grant a drainage easement on the back boundary (south) of this property if needed. Faucette advised he would provide the easement as long as there is not a financial commitment involved. Crook explained t hat the City has, in the past, required drainage easements with the provision that the drainage easement be maintained by the property owner. Faucette again stated he would be happy to provide the drainage easement as long as it did not encroach upon the improvements which have already been made to the property, (i.e., allowing 8' specifically). Jones again requested that Hatcher explain the re-routing of the utilities. Hatcher explained that Crownover had to examine the site before he could make a decision on the location of the electrical line. At the time of examination,"Cr.ownover found that he had t ransformers on either side of the property. Therefore, the electrical main power lines willgo through the existing 15' sewer easement, and Realty Investors will grant an additional 5'.easement. Therefore, t his will provide a 20' utility easement through the center instead of just a 15' sewer easement. Hatcher advised that the sewer line lies about 5' off the bottom border; thus, the electric line will be placed toward the north border. Hatcher advised that the telephone company line would follow the east border and cut across the 10' u tility easement used for the two existing duplexes, down the east and west border to service these two units. Hatcher stated this would allow the existing duplexes to be changed to underground, which was t he desire of the utility companies. Crook requested that these e asements be labeled on the plat. Crook requested that the paved drives and parking area be indicated on the plat, as well as indicating some direction of the drainage on the plat. Crook advised that if there is going to be a curb, the curb cut would need to be shown on the plat. Hatcher advised that the n orth/south pieces of the entire development would be curbed, and t he east/west pieces would be left flat for drainage purposes. MOTION Stockdell moved approval of the Large Scale Development subject t o Plat Review Comments; that the easement along the south boundary be worked out to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and property owner and will be handled administratively by the Planning Adminis- t rator. Motion seconded by Barbara Crook. Motion passed 2-0. i5 S UBDIVISION COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE FIVE February 10, 1984 REINSTATEMENT --PRELIMINARY PLAT SMOKE RISE SUBDIVISION Shiloh Drive, South of Highway 16 West P at Demaree, OWNER/DEVELOPER The fifth item on the agenda was the request for reinstatement of a Preliminary Plat for Smoke Rise Subdivison, located on Shiloh Drive, south of Highway 16 West. Pat Demaree, owner and developer. Property zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential District. Pat Demaree and Don Mitchell were present to represent this matter. Crook requested that Jones explain the issue. Jones advised that t his matter began in 1978. The present layout is the one .which was finally settled upon. Mitchell explained they were only trying to get the Subdivision okayed, i.e., the street and the 17 lots as well as the utilities. Jones explained that when they first obtained this property, they got approval for the preliminary plat and then discovered that the sewer in the area was very shallow and there was very little that could be done with it. In order to obtain sewer usage, there was a storm drain in the way with litigation being encountered with abutting property owners. This was resolved. Mitchell advised t hey would not enter the existing drainage which is draining Maple Terrace. Powell did. not approve this as there is currently a drainage problem in that area. With regard to the sanitary sewer, Mitchell stated they would tie into an existing Sanitary Sewer. Crook asked if this sanitary sewer would be adequate to serve the subdivision. Mitchell advised that he had spoken with Don Bunn and Clayton Powell in this regard, and they both had approved the subdivision. Jones stated she sent a note to Clayton Powell, City Street Superintendent requesting his comments, and he requested a copy of the plans for the subdivision. Powell advised that they appeared to be okay. Jones stated that all the lots meet the e xisting City Requirements. Jones stated that a sidewalk will be required along the new street as well as along the service road. Due to the fact that the service road is State maintained, it will be up to the Arkansas State Highway Department whether or not curb and gutter is required. MOTION Stockdell moved that recommendation be made to the Planning Commission to grant the reinstatement of the Preliminary Plat for Smoke Rise Subdivision. Motion seconded by Barbara Crook. Motion passed 2-0. P RELIMINARY PLAT YORKTOWN SUBDIVISION Stubblefield Road and East of Summerhill Drive WADE BISHOP/DEVELOPER 14 • • S UBDIVISION COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE SIX February 10, 1984 The sixth item on the agenda was the Approval of the Preliminary plat of Yorktown Subdivision, located north of Stubblefield Road and East of Summerhill Drive. Property zoned R-1, Low Density Residential,District. Mel Milholland and Wade Bishop were present t o represent this matter. Crook requested to know if there was a revised plat. Milholland advised that Bobbie Jones had the plats which were to be presented. Crook again questioned the offset which was again shown as 90'. Milholland stated they ran into many complications with utilities, e tc. Milholland stated that they had complied with removing the tandem lot which still left them with the offset. Milholland stated that with any other entry, two lots would be lost. Crook stated that she had been advised bytthe City Attorney that if the Subdivision Committee has any major issue that they are not in agreement with the subdivider on, such as this jog, that the Sub- division'Comittee's option is to not approve with contingency, as when approval is made with major contingency, such as in this subdivision, t hen this is in effect,a denial. This what allowed the plat to be presented to the City Board. Crook stated, therefore, if they do not agree with the plat, and the developer does not agree with making this a 150' offset, then the Subdivision Committee would have to recommend d enial. MOTION Stockdell made a motion to deny approval of this plat as presented, d ue to the fact that the 150' offset not being met. Motion seconded by Crook. Motion passed 2-0. Crook explained that if the developer were willing to change the offset to meet the 150' requirement, The Subdivision Committee would be willing to approve the subdivision. However, with this contingency n ot being met, they had no alternative but to deny this as presented. Crook stated it would be up to the Planning Commission if they would be willing to accept a revised plat. Jones confirmed that all of the Yorktown Square would check with the City Attorney letter not being received, coupled at the last meeting. Crook stated Subdivision had adjoining property owners to been notified. Jones stated with with that the she ✓ egard to Mr. Turner's t he fact that he did appear t o her, this would constitute n otification. Jones did confirm on this date, 2/13/84, through City Attorney McCord that Mr. Turner's appearance at the last meeting did constitute notification. Il 18 � • • SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE SEVEN February 10, 1984 Again, Item #2 on the agenda was addressed, that of the approval of the Large Scale Development to be located on the southeast corner of Township and Gregg. Lindsey and Sexton, owners and developers. Property zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District. Gary Carnahan was present to represent this matter. Crook requested to know if Mr. Carnahan has complied with the Plat Review Comments and requests. Carnahan stated that they had complied with all of the requests, except for the matter of the legal description. Carnahan stated he would continue to try to obtain this legal description.of property taken by the Highway Department. Carnahan stated he had met with the Arkansas Highway Department, and they advised that the distance of the proposed entrance from the intersection was okay with them. Carnahan stated that the sidewalk being placed on the highway side of the property would be okay with the:Arkansas Highway Department also. Carnahan advised that they had changed some of their utility locations. -:-The sewer line was:imoved to the back,of:.the property, and in doing so, have increased the rear setback to 30' rather than 25' to accommodate the utilities. Crook requested to know if there was 5' from the building with Carnahan advising that there was 5' from the building. Crook questioned the placement of sidewalks at the time of construction. Carnahan advised that this matter was not even discussed, but due .to the fact that Powell recommended placement of these sidewalks at the time of construction, Carnahan stated that they would go ahead and construct these sidewalks. Jones stated there was adequate parking for this Large Scale Development, requiring 99 parking spaces. Jones requested that Carnahan submit a letter requesting Waiver ofrthe maximum width of drives. Crook requested that the direction of the drainage be indicated on the plat. Jones stated that proof of notification from surrounding property owners had been received. Crook advised that the wheel stops will need to be shown on the plat. Carnahan stated that the entire area would be curbed. Jones advised that the Township Line has been corrected.on the plat. MOTION Stockdell moved that the Subdivision Committee recommend approval of the Large Scale Development subject to Plat Review Comments and receipt of request for waiver of maximum widths of driveway. Motion • SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE MEETING PAGE EIGHT February 10, 1984 seconded by Barbara Crook. Motion passed 2-0. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 2:45 p.m. i4