Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-05-28 - Minutes• • • MINUTES OF THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE A meeting of the Fayetteville Subdivision Committee vas held on Tuesday, May 28, 1985 at 4:00 p.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Ernest Jacks, Sue Madison, and Joe Tarvin Stan Green Wade Bishop, Mel Milholland, John Ragland, Phillip Moon representing Mrs. Powell (who was also present), Bobbie Jones and Terry Taylor QUAIL CREEK ADDITION, WADE BISHOP/M. MILHOLLAND SOUTH SIDE OF APPLEBY ROAD 800 FEET EAST OF GREGG AVENUE The only item of consideration was a proposed subdivision to be located on the south side of Appleby Road approximately 800' east of Gregg kvenue submitted by Wade Bishop and Mel Milholland. Jacks reviewed the minutes of the Plat Review Committee asking questions and clarifying comments made at that meeting. Jacks asked Milholland if it was clear to him thatno drives could be brought out on the future Drake 'Street. Milholland had shown on the plat in writing that those lots which touched Drake would not have access from that new street. Jacks also stated that a written request for waiver of maximum length of a dead end street would be needed. Milholland had shown that waiver request as Item 2 on the plat. Jacks also stated that Milholland would need a temporary waiver for Quail Creek until Drake Street is opened up. Jacks inquired as to what the maximum spacing of street lights is. Jones informed him that the maximum spacing is 300'. Jacks pointed out that Bishop would need a waiver request for street lights also since he was showing 400 - 450' between some of his streetlights. Milholland stated that he had one at each intersection and one at the beginning of each cul-de-sac. Jacks asked if there was any more Comments. Jones asked Milholland on the requirements. Milholland problems and that Milholland is from the Plat Review Comments. discussion regarding the Plat Review if he and Clayton were able to agree stated that he and Clayton had no going to build his drainage system Jacks asked if there were any questions on any of the plat review • 136 Subdivision Committee May 28, 1985 Page 2 comments from the developers. They stated that they were clear. Milholland did bring up that they wanted to request a waiver on sidewalk on the east side of Lot 10 due to the fact that that is where the drainage ditch will be. lacks asked for comments regarding a letter that was passed out to the members of the Subdivision Committee. Phillip Moon was at the meeting as a representative stating: From an earlier survey which was attached to the letter, Appleby Road is within Mrs. Powell's boundaries. (Mrs. Powell was also present at the meeting and is the property owner to the north of the proposed subdivision). It stated in the letter that Bishop is to dedicate 25' of that road Moon stated that the property shown as Bishop's dedication is not actually Bishop's land according to Mrs. Powell's survey. Jack's noted that on the survey that Moon had, Mrs. Powell's survey includes the entire road. Zcks asked if the developers were familiar with this survey. Milholland Stated that he had not seen the survey. Milholland stated that there 15 a discrepancy but that it can be easily corrected due to a monument in the property. Tack's stated that the 25' off the north of the property cannot really be resolved until the property line dispute is taken care of. Milholland stated that what Mr. Bishop is saying is that wherever his legal line falls, he will, from that point, dedicate 25' off the north of his property. Madison asked how many lots are included in Phase I. Milholland stated there were 29 lots in block 1. Tarvin questioned the fact that Quail Creek is the only access point at this time. Jacks felt that the property line dispute would have dp be resolved. He then turned the floor to Madison who had stated he had something she wanted to discuss. A4sdison stated that at the last City Board meeting there were several members of the board who made comments which she felt were important. She quoted Marilyn Johnson's comment: "I wish that Planning Commission would be aware of all these cul-de-sacs that developments are putting in and try when a development goes in to connect those to something where It just doesn't dead end I think that the Planning Commission needs to take a very close look at that when they are looking at their subdivision approval and working around those and working with those problems before they develop rather than us having to address those afterwards." Madison stated that she had also talked to Jeremy Hess and that Hess had stated that by their discussing the problem and the Board meeting and it being documented in their minutes that the strength of their feelings regarding this should be brought to the attention of the 137 • • Subdivision Committee May 28, 1985 Page 3 Planning Commission. Madison then stated that this development has seven (7) cul-de-sacs. Madison stated that the only way she could even see cointemplating to approve this plat was if the developers would plat those cul-de-sacs to the property line so that someday they could connect with other streets. Bishop asked Madison what she thought the solution to this problem was. She stated that some of the cul-de-sacs need to have the option to connect to another street someday. Instead of dead -ending the street, leave right-of-way open to other property, like the property on the east. Madison commented that the Martin's had a driveway that ran along the west property line of the proposed subdivision. She stated that some provision has to be made for the cul-de-sacs to connect and expressed how unfortunate it was that there was nothing there now for the streets to connect to. Milholland stated that the majority of property to the. west is in the Flood Plain and that the new ordinance that will be going into effect states that the natural habitat of a flood plain cannot be changed. Jones felt that Madison raised a good point regarding Martin's house to the west. Madison stated that some other plan must be worked out for the street design because the City Board's feeling was very clear. She stated that Quail Creek Drive is going to end up having all the traffic from the neighborhood on it and when it ends up connecting to Drake Street, the City Board is going to have a group of outraged citizens at the meetings all over again. Tacks stated that he didn't feel like the problem was with Drake Street. He did state that there were a lot of cul-de-sacs in this addition. Jones stated that if Drake Street is constructed before Appleby is brought up to standards, that there would be a problem. Jacks stated that he was looking at the cul-de-sac problem. He stated that in this case, they weren't stopping cul-de-sacs short of streets, the developers are actually stopping them short of a ditch. He also stated that the Planning Commission had set up the cul-de-sacs to connect to Township, that they had been set up with that in mind -- to connect with Township. Madison stated that it is important to dissipate more traffic. She explained that if Quail Creek is a local street, and Ripple Creek and John Wayne are local streets, the amount of traffic that these streets bear should be more equal. • 13f • Subdivision Committee May 28, 1985 Page 4 Jacks questioned if Madison wanted a whole new layout to which Madison replied that she would like to see a new layout of streets. Madison went on to compliment Mr. Bishop on his past developments and stated that the developments are always extremely desirable neighborhoods and that the people probably wouldn't want to live on a raceway which Ls what Quail Creek could easily become being the only open street in the development. Madison stated that a loop street or two would help but would not solve the problem. Tarvin stated that the only alternative he saw was to have another street parallel to Quail Creek. Madison stated as example that Mr. Bishop had tried to do a development on Stubblefield but could not because Summerhill had never dedicated Masonic all the way to their property line. She stated that had Masonic been dedicated all the way to the east, Bishop could have tied in at that point and been able to proceed with his development plans. Madison used this illustation of what had happened in the past to point out how imporant dedicating right-of-way all the way to the property line is so that future streets can be tied in. She stated that it was important to plan for future developments even though at this time there is nothing to tie on to. Jones asked how much distance is between the bridge and Mr. Bishop's property. Milholland stated that he wasn't sure. Bishop stated that it was approximately 450'. Jacks stated that Madison's strong ,objections should be considered before the entire Planning Commission. Tarvin asked the outcome of the City Board decision -- if there was S resolution passed or not. Madison stated that there was no resolution passed but that the Board felt very strongly about this issue. Milholland 4elt it unfair to use what the Board stated because this plat was -turned in prior to that Board meeting. Madison assured him that she vpuld have opposed the plat regardless of what the Board had said. Mr. Bishop spoke up saying that he felt each tract of land should be looked at individually and that because of the topography of the land with the creek drop and the flood plain that it would be almost impossible to improve upon the layout to connect streets. Tarvin felt that since Bishop 'only had 33 acres that the amount of traffic would not be a problem. He felt that the small size of the development would keep problems from generating. He also stated that the people who bought lots on Quail Creek Drive would probably pay less for their lots than the people on the cul-de-sacs because Quail Creek would be a through street. Jacks stated that he wanted to make certain that the Planning Commission didn't over -react to the Board meeting comments. He also stated that • )39 Subdivision Committee May 28, 1985 Page 5 the commission had always intended for those cul-de-sacs on Township to intersect. Madison also stated that she did not want to waive the maximum lengths of dead end streets or maximum spacing between street lights. Jacks then stated that he felt that the Subdivision Committee should just take the entire plat into the Planning Commission meeting and discuss it with all the members. Jacks stated that plat review comments were all okay. There are three waivers to be considered. (1) length of John Wayne Drive (2) temporary length of Quail Creek Drive. (3) maximum distance between street lights. Also there is a property line dispute at north property line which will affect Bishop's dedication from the north property line. The last item to discuss would be the question of cul-de-sacs. Madison brought up that some street names were supposed to be changed according to the Fire Inspector. Jacks stated that it was advised; however, the name change was up to Bishop's discretion. There was Some discussion as to the names of streets that were similar to those {hat Bishop wanted to use. Bishop decided that perhaps Quailcreek and Oakbrook could both be used as one word streets instead of Quail Creek and Oak Brook. • At 4:40 p.m., the Subdivision Committee meeting was adjourned and the plat taken to the Planning Commission. /yo