Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-01-30 - MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE A regular meeting of the Fayetteville Subdivision Committee was held on January 30, 1997, at 9:00 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building located at 113 W. Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Jerry Allred, Bob Reynolds, Conrad Odom and Lorel Hoffman. STAFF PRESENT: Rich Lane, Jim Beavers, Dawn Warrick, Chuck Rutherford, Beth Sandeen and Heather Woodruff. PP96-6.40: CHARLESTON PLACE PUD (pp 370) The item was submitted by Tom Henley, Jorgensen and Associates, on behalf of Greg House for property located east of Old Wire Rd. and south of Elmwood. The property is zoned R-1 and contains approximately 12.84 acres with 51 lots proposed. Recommendation: Consideration of this project based on staff findings and recommended conditions of approval Findings: This the third time this project has been resubmitted. The street configuration has changed to include a one-way loop street on the north side of the property. Density remains at 51 lots. All streets and drainage areas (including detention ponds) are proposed as public facilities. Conditions of Approval 1. Proof of public notification of Subdivision Committee and Planning Commission meetings. Plat which has been colored to indicate all areas which are being calculated as green space and the square footage or acreage of each area. Overall green space calculations which have been revised to reflect changes in easements and detention pond sizes. 3. Plat Review and Subdivision comments. 4. All improvements shall comply with City's current requirements. 5. Staff approval of final detailed plans, specifications and calculations (where applicable) for grading, drainage, water, sewer, fire protection, streets (public and private), sidewalks, parking lot(s) and tree preservation. The information submitted for the plat review process was reviewed for general concept only. All public improvements are subject to additional review and approval n • Subdivision Meeting January 30,1997 Page 2 6. Payment of parks fees of $15,300.00 (51 lots @ $300.00 each), payable within 30 days after Final Plat approval 7. Additional drainage design, including drainage basins, inlet locations, flows and final detention pond design is required prior to a recommendation to Planning Commission. 8. Sidewalk construction in accordance with current standards to include a 4' sidewalk with 6' green space on both sides of Amber Dr., and a 4' sidewalk with 5' green space on one side of Cypress Lane. Ms. Warrick asked Mr. House to fax her proof of notification. Mr. Beavers stated he had enough concerns about the drainage that he could not give a recommendation on this subdivision at this time. Mr. Allred asked if the concerns could be worked out with the engineers prior to the next meeting. • Mr. Beavers thought it might be possible. Mr. Reynolds suggested that, if the problems were not worked out by the next Planning Commission Meeting, to let them know so they could table the item. Mr. House asked to hear the engineer's comments. He advised he knew they would be asked to provide a complete and final drainage plan, which until the Marvin Gardens project had not been a requirement. He thought the request had been unprecedented and noted it was difficult to provide the information until they knew with which plat they would be working. Mr. Beavers stated the request was not unprecedented; it had been required of Milholland Engineering when they designed Hidden Lakes. The City's ordinances gave the staff the ability to require whatever they felt was necessary. Mr. Allred suggested approving the plat subject to the drainage since the City needed a plat to work with and the developer needed to know the plat would not change. Mr. Beavers stated any development was always subject to the drainage. He commented the engineer had included 50% of the detention ponds in the green space calculations. He asked if they included the drainage easements over all the swales in the green space calculations. • Mr. Henley, Jorgensen & Associate, stated they had removed all the utility easements from the green space calculations; however, he did not realize it included half of the ponds because they • Subdivision Meeting January 30,1997 Page 3 • were now contained in an easements. Mr. Beavers asked how that would changed the green space. Mr. House responded it would not change the plat significantly. The lots were deep and they could take some the space off the lots. Mr. Henley explained they were not looking at the exact same plat. When he had discovered the miscalculated green space he had adjusted the plat by shortening some of the lots on the south boundary and the northeast and the lots under the pond to accommodate for the easements. Ms. Warrick stated they would have to work more on the green space calculation taking into account the ponds were complete drainage easements and could not be counted. Mr. Beavers asked for a revised drainage report and plan, including street grades and probable inlet locations and sizes. He asked which areas flowed into pond #1 since he did not see that information summarized in the report. He questioned if the water would ever reach pond #1 because of the swale trying to collect the water and the inlet flowing into the pond would be three feet below the water surface elevation of the pond. He contended did not believe the pond would ever fill but would spill off onto the Scott's property. He dtd not know if the pond would be there until it was laid out. Mr. House believed those things could be worked out by moving a lot or putting a swale between the two. Mr. Beavers stated it would change the plat configuration. Mr. Allred stated they would have approve the plat subject to the drainage and allow a small percentage of adjustment. Mr. Beavers stated every time they changed the street layout they would change the drainage basin. He was recommending the drainage be worked out before the plat was approved. Mr. Reynolds stated he wanted make sure the plat was ready for the Planning Commission before they reviewed it. He wanted the developers to satisfy the city's engineer before they could satisfy the Planning Commission. They had to make sure everything was complete before they sent it to the Planning Commission or it would not be approved. He thought there were too many problem to be worked out before it was moved forward. He suggested working the problems out in the next two weeks before the next Subdivision Meeting. Mr. Odom thought it would be a waste of everyone's time to send the plat to the Planning Subdivision Meeting January 30,1997 Page 4 Commission. He asked to hear all of the staff's comments. Mr. Beavers asked Mr. House to check the sight distance at the intersections. He commented the 12.5 feet setback and utility easement would not work with the water line; it needed to be increased to a 20-25 feet easement and setback. Mr. House thought they had decided to place the water line on the other side of the street. Mr Beavers stated he was referring to the portion running along the edge of the easement. He pointed out there was no way for the City to excavate it and he suggested moving the water line. Mr. Reynolds stated they needed to see the finished product, so they would know what to expect when the project was finished. Mr. Beavers stated the sewer line was subject to further review. He advised the developers needed to preserve as much canopy around pond #3 as possible. Mr. Henley stated the pond would be located in the middle of the canopy and would take up as much canopy as required to detain the volume of runoff. Mr. Beavers stated they needed to keep the large trees on the top of the bank. They did not want to see any grading on the bank. Ms. Sandeen asked if they had checked for landmark trees. Mr. Henley stated they would check to make sure they were located. Ms. Sandeen stated they needed to submit another tree preservation plan when they received the grading permit. Mr. Rutherford stated they were showing the sidewalks correctly. Ms Jane Galbraith, an area resident, expressed concern regarding the drainage and suggested they change the PUD ordinance before the project was approved. Mr. Allred explained it was illegal to change an ordinance during the approval process. Mr. House stated he had a letter from his engineer stating the development would help reduce the subsurface water because of the control of the runoff. Mr. Pevehouse, an area resident, expressed concern about drainage. to Subdivision Meeting January 30,1997 Page 5 Ms. Hoffman replied there would be a final grading plan before the plat went to Planning Commission. • Ms. Alice Terrel, a neighbor, expressed concern about the traffic speed and increase in traffic volume. Mr Allred suggested she contact the police and ask them to set up radar control for a while. Carol Jones, a neighbor, stated this development would probably decrease the traffic in her neighborhood. Mr. Allred agreed the more they could disperse the traffic, the less a residential street would be abused. Ms. Jones stated they needed to be consistent in their requirements for connectivity. Mr. Reynolds asked if the ponds would be permanent. Mr. House stated Pond #2 would be permanent but the other two ponds would be grass He added he thought he would be able to leave the trees. Mr. Beavers stated, if the City was going to maintain the ponds, they would not be allowed to keep the trees because of the litter clogging the ponds, and the street department ability to get heavy equipment into the area. Ms. Jones expressed concern about the connection between Winwood and Hackberry pointing out there was a dangerous curve in the area She thought the increase in traffic would make the intersection more dangerous Mr Allred suggested the Traffic Division look into it and to make a recommendation. They might need to install a stop sign. Mr. Reynolds asked residents to contact the Police Department and ask them to control the speeding. MOTION Mr. Reynolds moved to table the item until the next Subdivision meeting. Mr. Allred seconded the motion.