Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-10-18 - Minutes• • • MINUTES OF THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE OF THE FAYETTEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION A meeting of the Subdivision Committee of the Fayetteville Planning Commission was held on Wednesday, October 18, 1989 at 1:30 p.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: J.E. Springborn, Jack Cleghorn and J. David Cement MEMBERS ABSENT: Julie Nash OTHERS PRESENT: Don Bunn, Elaine Cattaneo and Doug Hemingway FINAL PLAT OF GADDY ACRES SUBDIVISION BOB GADDY/ JIM LINDSEY - E OF CROSSOVER RD, S OF WHIPPOORWILL CT The only item to consider was the final plat of Gaddy Acres Subdivision submitted by Jim Lindsey on behalf of Bob Gaddy and represented by Doug Hemingway of Professional Land Surveyors for property located east of Crossover Road and south of Whippoorwill Court and zoned R-1, Low Density Residential. Property contains 40.32 acres with 21 proposed lots. Vice -Chairman Springborn noted that the portion that was formerly all lot 16 has been split into two lots (16 & 21) which leaves lot 16 as a tandem lot but lot 21 is not a tandem lot. Therefore, there is no change in the number of tandem lots. Another more significant change is the access road that can now be driven from Starr Drive all the way through to Lover's Lane. He added that he is having trouble understanding what the need for the road is. Doug Hemingway, representative, stated that the intent would be that this road be used as a utility road to access the fire hydrant, water meters, etc. since there is not going to be a city street there. Vice -Chairman Springborn stated that he is concerned because this was presented as a preliminary plat without any way to drive through the subdivision. Now, there is a utility access road of which he has walked and driven through which looks to become used as a public road. He advised that Don Bunn had commented when this preliminary went through that it would be extremely difficult if not impossible to provide City streets in this development without exceeding the grade limit for city streets. If this road is used for any period of time at all, it almost has to be as a through street by the public. Don Bunn, City Engineer, stated that it depends on how well the access is controlled on the road whether or not it will be considered a public street. If it is truly maintained strictly for utility access, then he doesn't see a problem with it. He agreed that there is a potential, if the access isn't controlled properly, for it to become at least a shortcut through the development that is used by the general public. He added that as far as the road being used as access for the utilities, the City likes that. However, l�� • • • Subdivision Committee October 18, 1989 Page 2 there is a potential for it becoming public access and after a number of years, it might fall to the City to maintain it. Vice -Chairman Springborn noted that he knows that it is already being used as a through street because two cars drove through while he was out there walking it. As far as utility streets, there are very few places where there is the convenience of a utility street. Commissioner Cleghorn asked how access could be controlled to something like that. Mr. Bunn stated that a gate could be put up. Mr. Hemingway stated that they could have an unlocked gate as a deterrent for through traffic. Vice -Chairman Springborn stated that they could have an earthen barricade like was provided in the Foster Addition. He added that the Fire Chief approval of this in the preliminary stages was not contingent on the access being there. Mr. Hemingway stated that the access was not required, but they thought it would be an easy place for all the utilities to be placed. He added that the preliminary plat didn't show the common drive like it is shown on this plat. Vice -Chairman Springborn asked if the common drive would belong to one lot owner and the other lot owner would have a permanent right to the easement. Mr. Hemingway answered, yes, and there is a note (11) on the plat. Vice -Chairman Springborn asked if they had noted that .the .whole area is wooded on this plat. Mr. Hemingway stated that he doesn't think it is a requirement to note that all on the final plat. He added that he did draw the woods line on the preliminary plat. In answer to a question from Commissioner Cleghorn, Mr. Bunn stated that all the drives are private drives and not city streets. Commissioner Cleghorn stated that he thought there was a city regulation that any time a street met two places that it couldn't be a private driveway and would have to meet city standards. Mr. Bunn stated that is right if it is a through street. Mr. Hemingway stated that they could put up a closed gate in two places just past where the driveways would go into the lots (just past the drives into lots 5 & 6 and just past the southeast corner of lot 16). Vice -Chairman Springborn stated that he has small regard for gates. He asked what the objection would be to putting in an earthen mound. Mr. Hemingway stated that they could maybe put one earthen mound in a central location at the northwest corner of lot 6 to prevent through traffic. He added that Mr. Lindsey would have to make the final decision on this. Mr. Bunn stated that he isn't arguing for or against a barrier, but a barricade that would prevent the public from going through would also prevent use of the road as a fire lane. He advised that the staff does not want the City to be in the position of controlling the access of that road and they don't want the City to have to accept the road as a City road by default He commented that the staff didn't make a recommendation on the access road. It is a judgment that has to be made by the Planning Commission as to whether they can control the access because the City does not want to be put in a position of having to 1�4 s Subdivision Committee October 18, 1989 Page 3 control the access to it. Commissioner Cleghorn noted that they could approve everything and give the developers time to figure out some blockages and send it to the Planning Commission at that time. Vice -Chairman Springborn stated that all they are doing is making a recommendation to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Ozment stated that there could be a good base put down and if they want it to look natural it would not have to be a paved road. Commissioner Ozment stated that he works for SWEPCO and his company sometimes uses a common lock on gates so that the other utility companies and the City could access it but not the public. NOTION Commissioner Cleghorn moved to recommend approval of the subdivision subject to the recommendations that the staff has made and adding a suitable barrier at that northwest corner to block through traffic, seconded by Ozment. The motion passed 3-0-0. Commissioner Ozment asked if there would be any covenants. that would address the issue of three-wheelers and motorcycles using that -road. Mr. Bunn stated that depending on the outcome of the Planning Commission's decision on that road, if it is allowed to stay open in any fashion, then the control of the access should be covered in the subdivision covenants. In that way, the property owners will have to take an active part in controlling the access to the road. \S�