Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-07-06 - Minutes• • • MINUTES OF THE SUBDIVISION COMMIEITEE OF THE FAYETTEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION A meeting of the Subdivision Committee of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on Friday, July 6, 1984 at 1:30 P.M. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 Heat Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Barbara Crook, Stan Green and Sue Madison MEMBERS ABSENT: Melanie Stockdell OTHERS PRESENT: Bob Welty, David Jorgensen, Everett Balk, Bobbie Jones and Paula Brandeis The meeting was called to order by Ms. Crook. MINUTES The first item on the agenda was the approval of the minutes of the May 11, 1984 Subdivision meeting. They were approved as distributed. WOODLAND HILLS NORTH OF WEDINGTON DRIVE BETWEEN GARLAND & STEPHENS RALPH CRAY - DEVELOPER The second item on the agenda was the approval of Woodland Hills, a Large Scale Development of 100 units on 7.33 acres located on the north side of Wedington Drive between Garland and Stephens Avenue. Property zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential, developer: Ralph Gray. Crook asked whether the right-of-way has been dedicated on Wedington Drive and Jones replied that the last drawing that came in shows only a 60 foot right-of-way and 80 feet are what is required. Jones said she needs confirmation that 80 feet has been dedicated. Crook suggested that it may be obtained from the State Highway Department and Jones replied that it may be in the abstract. Jones advised that Gray has requested a waiver of the sidewalk requirement along Wedington Drive. The Board of Directors has referred this waiver back to the Planning Commission for a recommendation. Madison expressed her concern about sidewalks along the access road to this property. Jones explained that the Planning Commission at one time had requested a centrally located driveway access which the Highway Department denied. Currently, a request for a waiver of the driveway safety zone has 48' • • • • Subdivision Committee July 6, 1984 Page 2 been submitted by Gray for the driveway access at the east side of the property (currently placed right on the property line). She added that there is a piece of property existing between the proposed devel— opment and the Mcllroy Bank. Jones also said there is a Bill of Assurrance on that property against having an access onto Wedington Drive. Crook asked what the minimum off—set requirement for an intersection was. Jones said that it is 150 feet for a minor street on level terrain and what is shown on this plat is about 80 feet. Crook asked Welty (Architect, Rawls—Welty, Inc. Dallas, Texas) if he had considered placing the access drive in line with Hall Street. Welty replied that he wanted the access off -set so as not to generate through traffic in his subdivision. Jones read minutes of a previous Plat Review meeting regarding this development explaining the Arkansas Highway Department's feelings about the driveway access. She said they felt that a central drive would be on the most level (and safest) portion of Wedington Drive. Green asked if a sidewalk currently exists on Wedington Drive and Jones said that it is on the Master Sidewalk plan and that she would be willing to take a Bill of Assurrance for this development. Crook said the slope on the north side of Wedington will make construction of sidewalk here very difficult. She added that if sidewalks were constructed within the development it might be helpful in the Committee's recommendation on Wedington Drive sidewalk. Green said he would like to ask the City if it is practical to build sidewalks on Wedington's north side. Madison asked if the Committee could ask the City to participate in the building of sidewalks in this area because of the great expense and difficulty involved. Crook replied that the Committee could so recommend if they chose to. Madison said she wished to do that. Crook advised that the next item of consideration for this project was the improvements on James Street. She said that there is a possibility (on a rational nexus basis) for this developer to participate in up to 40% of the cost of improving 360 feet of James Street to bring it up to City standards. Green asked how the City will handle the remaining 60% of the cost of improvements. Jones replied that they might determine how far 40% of the cost would take the improvements and go only that far for now. yq • • Subdivision Committee July 6, 1984 Page 3 Crook stated that, in Fayetteville, an inverted crown is not acceptable because of the freezing and thawing conditions present in the winter. She said that splitting the drainage down the middle of the project (from east to west) would be important. She suggested a dedicated easement (and a concreted swale) to handle the drainage and she said the City Engineer would request a specific width for the easement. Crook said that the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board had decided at their meeting of June 12 this year that they would accept cash in lieu of land for this project because it falls within the Asbell service area; funds will amount to $85 per multi -family unit. She said the Committee would go along with the Park's Board recommendation. Jones reminded Welty that she needs proof that property owners within 100 feet have been notified before the Planning Commission meeting, Monday, July 9. Madison asked about the proposed temporary driveway cut on Wedington drive that is intended to serve while construction takes place. Welty replied that a cul-de-sac could be installed instead. Madison requested to have a time limit placed on the temporary cul-de-sac. Crook suggested this be limited to 40 units or one year, whichever occured first. Madison asked where the streetlights were. Welty said that they are not shown but he is planning street lights where they are necessary. Jones advised that because these will be private streets, the street lights will have to be maintained by a Property Owners Association. Madison asked whether there would be a Property Owners Association to maintain streets and exterior maintainance of the buildings as well as pool and clubhouse upkeep. Welty said this would addressed in the Subdivision Covenants. Crook asked Welty if he had any objections to the comments of the utility companies at the Plat Review meeting and Welty he did not. MOTION Madison made a motion to recommend approval of this plat subject to: 1. Plat Review comments; 2. that the developer acquire official dedication necessary for right-of-way along Wedington Drive from the State Highway Department; 3. that the entrance be moved west to align with Hall Street; 4. that the developer bear 40% of the cost of 360 feet of improvements to bring James Street up to City standards; 5. that the drainage be split between east and west sides; 6. that a concrete -lined drainage easement be procured on the northwest corner; 7. that the Planning Office receive proof of notification of adjacent property owner; 8. that a temporary single exit with a cul-de-sac be constructed • • • Subdivision Committee July 6, 1984 Page 4 for use with up to 40 units or a period of no longer than one year after construction commences and at that time an exit onto James Street will be required; 9. the developer agrees to install streetlights every 300 feet along the private streets. Green seconded and the motion passed 3-0. MOTION Crook moved to deny the request for a waiver of the parks fee. This motion died for lack of a second. MOTION Green moved to recommend approval of a partial waiver (total due will equal $6000) of the parks fee. Madison seconded; motion passed 2-1, Crook voted "nay". The full amount of the Park fee was $8,500. NOTION Green moved to recommend that the City review the Master Sidewalk Plan to decide whether or not sidewalk is necessary and/or practical on the north side of Wedington Drive and if the City decides that it is necessary that the City will bear part of the expense of building that sidewalk and if the City decides it is not practical then this developer will bear part of the expense of building sidewalk on the south side of Wedington Drive (or sign a Bill of Assurance for future construction of same); if the City, after reviewing the Master Sidewalk Plan, decides that a sidewalk is necessary on James Street that it will be considered as part of the 40% of bringing James Street up to City standards.; that the developer install sidewalks along the access drive to connect with the internal sidewalks. Crook seconded the motion and it passed 3-0 with Madison expressing hesitation on accepting a Bill of Assurance for sidewalk construction. MOTION Madison moved to recommend that a Property Owners Association be formed to bear the responsibility of maintaining streets, lights, etc. and that if street maintenance falls to level that is unacceptable to the street engineer, then the City, at their option, may assume the maintenance of the streets within the project: Motion died for lack of a second. 5' • • • Subdivision Committee July 6, 1984 Page 5 ZION ESTATES NORTH OF ZION RD — EAST OF HWY. 265 OWNER: ZAMBERLEITI — DEVELOPER: LINDSEY The third item on the agenda was the approval of the preliminay plat of Zion Estates to plot 33.42 acres into 7 lots in the Growth Area, North of Zion Rd., East of Hwy. 265; Lindsey & Associates. This project abuts the City limits and all Subdivison requirements pertain. Crook said that because this development is located on a knoll that she didn't see any problem with the drainage situation as storm water run-off will drain to a natural drainage ditch; a curb inlet will be needed. Crook added that several city representatives were concerned with the intersection as shown. Jorgensen, architect with Albright & Assoc., stated that he has spoken with Traffic Superintendant, Perry Franklin, and Franklin has said that he doesn't have a great concern about the access because there are only six single-family lots in this project with a cul-de-sac to serve it as opposed to a through street. Jorgensen said the cul-de-sac will be brought to full City standards. Crook said she would like to see a dedicated right-of-way go all the way through the property to the north end so that the property behind this one will not be landlocked. Jones said that the way this has been done in the past is to set the land aside as an easement with a note on the plat that anyone may build it as a public street but it would need to be built to City standards. She added that the land, when brought into the City, will be A-1 and the lots need to be 200 ft. wide. Jones said that this developer has been requested to extend a minimum 6" water line and to sign a fire protection contract. She also said that percolation data need to be sent to the State Board of Health. Jones advised that they will not need to connect to a City sewer system. Crook said that if this street is constructed to City standards, a storm inlet to Clayton Powell's satisfaction would be required to direct water to a drainage ditch. Jones said the developer needs to provide proof of notification of surrounding property owners by Monday, July 9. MOTION Crook moved to recommend approval subject to: 1. Plat Review comments; 2. dedication of street right-of-way of the cul-de-sac through to the north end of the property; 3. a storm inlet that meets the requirements of the Street Engineer on the south end of the street. Madison seconded the motion. Sd • • • Subdivision Committee July 6, 1984 Page 6 Jones said she wished to advise everyone that this property abuts City limits and she felt that the cost of fire hydrants was a better proposition than signing a fire protection contract plus paying the cost of insurance and monthly meter bills. The motion passed 3-0. MOTION Madison moved to recommend denial of the request for a waiver of the Parks and Recreation donation. Green seconded; motion passed 3-0. UNION SPECIAL LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT EAST OF GARIAND — NORTH OF AN UNNAMED ARTERIAL STREET OWNER—HOUSING DEVELOPMENT SOUTH, INC. The fourth item on the agenda Large Scale Development located of an unnamed arterial street. Residential and contains 7.97 Housing Development South, Inc. was the approval of Union Special, a on the East side of Garland just north Property is zoned R-2, Medium Density plus or minus acres and is owned by Crook determined that a 5 ft. sidewalk was 4 ft. sidewalk on the unnamed street. Everett Balk, of Crafton, Span, Tull and Yoe present to represent this development. shown on Garland and a in Rogers, Arkansas was Crook said she was concerned about the right-of-way dedication along the north edge not being resolved. She said that within the last year there have been two apartments developed to the east of this project and each of the developers of these projects have been required to dedicate an 80 foot right-of-way along the same northern property line. She said there needs to be consistency along this street. Jones said Mr. Mayes owns property that is 109 X 660 ft. adjacent on the north side. She said in December of 1979 the City Board agreed not to take any more right-of-way from Mayes until such time as his property is split or if the property is condemned. Jones said that the easements on the south side are being referred to as alleys. In 1979 she said the Planning Commission decided that the south side would be alley -ways and not streets. She added that the unnamed street needs to be named at this time and that it has been referred to as Ernie Jacks Blvd. 53 • • • Subdivision Committee July 6, 1984 Page 7 Crook said it appears that drainage may be a problem here. Balk replied that he had originally proposed some internal drainage but since that time he has discovered that the internal drainage is overdesigned and he is changing it. Crook said that she would like to have Clayton Powell's approval of this. Balk said there is no water coming into the property to deal with. Jones said they must dedicate the easement on Garland measured as 40 feet from the existing right-of-way on Garland. She said the existing duplex is under the same ownership and the Planning Commission (at the preliminary plat review) had asked for sidewalk to be constructed along Garland the entire length of the development but Powell has asked for even further extension because sidewalks have already been installed further south and will continue on up to meet this project. Madison asked Balk to extend the sidewalks along the both entrances out to the boundary sidewalks on Garland and "Ernie Jacks Blvd.". Balk requested consideration of a waiver for the driveway width. He also requested a waiver of the Parks and Recreation fee based on the construction of a pool and community building within the subdivision. He said the full fee owed for Parks and Rec. is $10,200. Crook asked if Balk had any problems meeting the utility companies Plat Review Committee comments and Balk replied that he didn't and that all revisions had been made. MOTION Green moved to recommend approval of this plat subject to: 1. Plat Review comments; 2. approval of waiver for driveway width for both drives; 3. extension of the sidewalks within the development to connect with boundary sidewalks. Madison seconded and motion passed 3-0. Balk inquired as to the Parks and Rec. fee waiver and Jones said that the waiver would have to be in writing and presented to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. SUNNY LANE OLD MISSOURI RD NORTH OF OLD WIRE RD. DEVELOPER- JIM HATFIELD The fifth item on the agenda was the approval of the preliminary plat of Sunny Lane Addition located west of the intersection of Old Wire Road and Old Missouri Rd., zoned R-1, Low Density Residential. Thirteen lots are proposed on 4.72 acres. Owner/developer: Jim Hatfield. 59 • • Subdivision Committee July 6, 1984 Page 8 David Jorgensen was present to represent this preliminary plat. He said that he didn't have any problem with the revision comments from the Plat Review Committee meeting. Crook commented that the name of the street is an issue. Jorgensen said that the developer wants to retain Sunny Place but he, himself, could see the value of having a name other than one that is similar to names having been used before. Jorgensen said he would like Clayton Powell to review the drainage proposal for this project. Crook said that improving the drainage could create a larger problem in this area. She said she felt there needs to be a way of controlling the drainage without blocking it. She inquired if the utility easement would be separate from the drainage easement. Jorgensen said that the purpose of the 10 ft. separate utility line was to allow the church to connect with (sewer) in the future. Jones explained that there is a drainage ditch on the west side of the property. She said about five years ago the street department was called to clean out the ditch and, as all of the utilities were in the same ditch, most of the residents lost all of their utilities. Since then, Jones said, it has been a requirement to install improved drainage lines in an easement separate from utilities. Crook suggested that a drainage easement be provided by the owners in such a way as to control drainage without blocking the runoff or perhaps request the drainage ditch to be paved. Jorgensen said that Powell wants 25 ft. for drainage easement (including access) and that Jorgensen would like to use the alternative of a 20 ft. drainage easement with a 10 ft. adjacent sanitary sewer line. Jones asked if Don Bunn, City Engineer, had approved a 10 ft. easement for sewer. Jorgensen said he hadn't and that the first plat had shown the drainage culvert betwen Lot 7 & 8 with the sewer on the other side and he has now changed it to the above described configuration. Jones said to check with Bunn on this as she thought the minimum approved easement may be 15 ft. Jones said that Powell has encountered problems with residents leveling off drainage ditches so as to not have to maintain them which creates a drainage problem. Jorgensen said Powell has recommended being very careful with the drainage in this project and to be sure and check with him for approval but that paving the entire channel was not necessarily the best plan. • Crook suggested recommending that a drainage easement be provided, the width being approved by the City Engineer, with provisions in 55 • • • Subdivision Committee July 6, 1984 Page 9 the deed that it will be maintained in such a way so as not to block drainage. Jones advised that this would need to be a provision of the subdivision covenants. Madison inquired as to why Jorgensen has shown sidewalk on the north side of the property instead of the south and he replied that he wants to continue the monolithic sidewalk from the church into the development. Madison commented that building the sidewalk on the south side, where the duplexes are proposed, would serve a larger number of people. Jones advised that the building of duplexes here was subject to gaining a "conditional use" from the Planning Commission and that any motion made should bear this in mind. Jorgensen said streetlights are being installed every 300 ft. NOTION Crook moved to recommend approval of this plat subject to: 1. Plat Review comments; 2. Conditional Use being granted for Lots 1-5; 3. an easement between Lots 8 & 9 being approved by the City; 4. a drainage easement along the west property line, the width as required by the City Engineer; 5. provision in the subdivision covenanEs that the drainage easement will be maintained by the owners in such a way as to not block the flow of water; 6. the street name being acceptable to the City. Madison seconded the motion and it passed 3-0. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 4:10. 56