Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-05-12 - Minutes• • • MINUTES OF A SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE MEETING A meeting of the Fayetteville Subdivision Committee was held on Thursday, May 12, 1994 at 10:30 a.m., in Room 326 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ' MEMBERS PRESENT: Kenneth Pummill, Chuck Nickle, and Tom Suchecki OTHERS PRESENT: Don Bunn, Mel Milholland, Mark Marquess, Tom Hopper, and Sharon Langley PRELIMINARY PLAT - HENDERSON SUBDIVISION BMP DEVELOPMENT - W OF OLD MISSOURI, S OF JOYCE The first item on the agenda was a preliminary plat for Henderson Subdivision presented by Mel Milholland on behalf of BMP Development for property located west of Old Missouri Road, south of Joyce Street. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential, contains 32.72 acres with 57 proposed lots. Mr. Bunn reviewed the requests made at plat review. He advised the developer had agreed to those requests. He pointed out the various tie ins to adjoining properties. He noted they were planning to provide street right-of-way at the northwest corner of the subdivision with a stub out. He explained that, because of the terrain, the staff had requested the street be built part of the way and then blocked off, and then pay into escrow the money necessary to complete the street. He further stated staff was asking for a $10,000 cost share to Stubblefield Road. He noted staff was not asking for any off-site improvements to Old Missouri Road. Mr. Nickle asked if additional right-of-way would be required from Old Missouri Road. Mr. Milholland advised the developer did not own any property adjacent to Old Missouri Road. Mr. Bunn explained the city was requiring a lot split of the adjacent property to the east (the Henderson property) and might ask for additional right-of-way at that time. He also pointed out there was a flood plan to the north which went across the north side of the subdivision. Mr. Marquess stated that, instead of sidewalks, they were looking at a six-foot wide jogging trail on the streets which would also lead into Summerhill. Mr. Pummill asked if the development had been reviewed by the Parks Board. Mr. Marquess stated he had visited with Parks Department staff and found this was not a high priority area. He advised they had hired a land planner for the entry to the subdivision and planned a large green area. He advised he believed the entryway would make a major impact to the area. In response to a question from Mr. Nickle, Mr. Bunn explained lot 43 was a tandem lot and the subdivision ordinance did allow automatic approval for tandem lots within a subdivision. Mr. Milholland also pointed out the one-way street, advising it would be 18 feet in width with a standard radius. He noted they would prefer to not have curb and gutter on the one-way street. Mr. Nickle asked if the pond shown on the plat would be a retention pond. Mr. Milholland stated he was not sure if the pond held water. He advised the pond would not be used for drainage control put for aesthetics. • Subdivision Committee May 12, 1994 Page 2 In response to a question from Mr. Bunn, Mr. Marquess advised the covenants would not allow parking on the one-way street. Mr. Milholland reviewed the placement of the water and sewer lines. NOTION Mr. Suchecki moved to forward the plat to the full Planning Commission. • Mr. Sickle seconded the motion. • • • • • Subdivision Committee May 12, 1994 Page 3 PRELIMINARY PLAT - MADISON AVENUE S & S DEVELOPMENT - S OF HWY 45, E OF STARR RD. the next plat to be reviewed was Madison Avenue, submitted by Mel Milholland on behalf of S & S Development, located ont he south side of Highway 45, east of Starr Road. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential, and contains 10.18 acres with 23 proposed lots. In response to a question from Mr. Nickle, Mr. Bunn advised the pond shown on the plat had been drained. He further noted the land drained to the south on the east side. Mr. Nickle asked if there would be any connection to the east. Mr. Bunn explained that, when reviewing city property had been discussed. He Barrington Park, Phase II, is brought needed to be made. Barrington Park, Phase I, access to the advised staff agreed that, at the time before the Commission, the connection There was also discussion regarding a turn lane from the Highway and restricted access from lots 14 and 15. MOTION Mr. Nickle moved to forward the plat to the full Planning Commission. Mr. Suchecki seconded the motion. • • • Subdivision Committee May 12, 1994 Page 4 LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT - NATIONAL HOME CENTER NATIONAL HOME CENTER - N OF OLD FARMINGTON, E OF FUTRALL The last item was a large scale development for National Home Center submitted by Tom Hopper, Crafton & Tull, on behalf of National Home Center for property located north of Old Farmington Road, east of Futrall. The property is zoned C- 2, Thoroughfare Commercial, and contains 28.24 acres. Mr. Hopper advised the conditional use application would be reviewed at the same time the Planning Commission reviewed the Large Scale Development. Mr. Bunn stated there had been several issues discussed at the Plat Review meeting including changing the entryways, particularly the one to the south. He advised the developer had made the requested changes to the entryways. He further stated staff had the construction of a street off-site from Old Farmington Road to accommodate two more entrances. He advised that street would be constructed if the school would give the city the right-of-way so the street could be constructed. He noted another item was location of the water line, explaining the plan had been for the 24 -inch line to go across the subject property but the developer had agreed to relocate the line and pay for whatever costs were involved in the relocation. He added that, since there were no large water lines in the area and due to the fire flow demands created by the development, the developer had proposed to run the water line from Sang Street to be reimbursed when the city had funds available. Mr. Bunn further advised the staff had requested the developer to do a traffic study. He stated the traffic study had made several recommendations, including turn lanes along Futrall Drive and signalization at the intersection of Old Farmington and Futrall. He stated there were two issues which had not been resolved: turning lanes at the intersection of Highway 62 and Futrall (the traffic study showed southbound traffic would be impacted) and extension of Stone Street. He explained the overall plan showed Stone Street to go straight through the subject development. He stated staff had considered, in the future, bringing a street to the north of the development through to Futrall. He further stated staff had also considered turning Stone to the south at this development's east property line. In response to a question from Mr. Nickle, Mr. Bunn explained the way the site was being developed precluded the developer from giving any easement off of the north part of the property. Mr. Nickle asked if Stone Street was shown on the Master Street Plan as a through street. Mr. Bunn stated it was not. Mr. Suchecki pointed out the terrain at the north end of the subject property would be too steep to construct a street. Mr. Bunn stated the unresolved issue was the road from where to Stone Street would come through to the south. He advised the cost would be approximately $70,000. He further stated the other unresolved issue was off-site improvements at Highway 62 and Futrall. Mr. Hopper contended the intersection of Highway 62 and Futrall was too far off site. He advised he had worked with the city staff and Planning Commission in • • • Subdivision Committee May 12, 1994 Page 5 the past and had always come to a common sense solution. He stated that was what the developer was asking for in this instance. Mr. Nickle asked if that intersection would not be controlled by the State Highway Department. Mr. Bunn agreed that it might be. He advised it might be difficult to require that improvement. Mr. Suchecki advised if an agreement were made on the Stone Street issue, that would allow another ingress/egress. Mr. Hopper pointed out a home center did not generate the amount of traffic a K - Mart or Wal-Mart would generate. He stated the numbers used were similar to a Wal-Mart or K -Mart. Mr. Bunn asked the developer show, from an existing store or similar stores, traffic counts. He advised that, if the developer could justify, by actual traffic counts, lower traffic figures, the staff would take those figures into consideration. There was also discussion regarding parking and the amount needed. Mr. Hopper stated that, as far as the Stone Street extension, they needed staff support 100%. Mr. Pummill advised he did not know if the Stone Street extension was necessary. Mr. Nickle stated he would need to hear from the staff regarding the extension before he could make a decision. After discussion, the Subdivision Committee decided to let staff work with the developer regarding the extension. MOTION Mr. Nickle moved to forward the large scale development to the full Planning Commission subject to the developer working with staff regarding the extension of Stone Street Mr. Suchecki seconded the motion. The meeting adjourned at 11:40 a.m.