Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-09-11 - MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE A regular meeting of the Fayetteville Subdivision Committee was held on September 11, 1997, at 9:00 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building located at 113 W. Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS REVIEWED: ACTION TAKEN 1. LS 97-26.00: Tanya & Gary Mars Approved 2. LS 97-28.00: Sam E. & Maxine Witt Approved 3. FP 97-4.00: David Lyle Village Approved 4. LSD 97-20.00: Summit Development Tabled 5. LSD 97-19.00: Lots 4R &7, Spring Park Subdivision Tabled 6. PP 97-7.00: Serenity Place Fwd to Planning Commission 7. PP 97-8.00: Meadowlands Phase III Tabled MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob Reynolds, Phyllis Johnson, and John Forney. STAFF PRESENT: Alett Little, Jim Beavers, Dawn Warrick, Beth Sandeen, Nancy Dugwyler, Chuck Rutherford, and Heather Woodruff. LS 97-26.00: LOT SPLIT (TANYA & GARY MARS) TANYA AND GARY MARS- 6228 WEST WHEELER RD The lot split was submitted by Tonya and Gary Mars for property located at 6228 West Wheeler Road. The property is within the City's Planning Area and contains approximately 10 acres. The request is to split one acre from the parent tract. This is the first lot split request for this parent tract. Findings: This property is within the Planning Area. County Planning has approved the proposed split. Perc. information has been provided showing that the new tract will support a septic system. Discussion at the Technical Plat Review meeting centered on requested revisions to the plat of survey. All requested revisions have been shown on the revised plat. Staff has no outstanding issues in regard to this request. Recommendation: Consideration of this project based on staff findings. If the Subdivision Committee chooses to approve this project, staff recommends the following conditions of approval: Conditions of Approval 1,33 • Subdivision Meeting September 11, 1997 Page 2 • • 1. Plat Review and Subdivision comments (to include written staff comments mailed to the applicant or his representative, and all comments from utility representatives - AR Western Gas, SWBT, Ozarks, SWEPCO, TCA Cable) Mr. Gary Mars and Betty Dunn represented the item. Ms. Little stated all required easements had been dedicated. The staff had no outstanding issues. In response to questions from Ms. Johnson, Ms. Dunn explained she had retained a 75' right-of- way for future access to the remaining property. Ms. Warrick stated the county had approved the lot size. The applicant had provided information on perc rates for the septic system. In response to questions from Ms. Johnson, Ms. Little stated the city reviewed lots splits in the county for Master Street Plan issues and overall subdivision layout. In response to questions from Mr. Reynolds, Ms. Warrick explained the County allowed lots smaller than two acres if a perc test proved the soils would drain adequately. The county required 75' of frontage with 10,000 square feet for a lot. As a general rule, the perc test would determine the size of the lot. Ms. Little added all of the septic field lines were to be located on this property. MOTION Ms. Johnson moved to approve the lot split. Mr. Forney seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 3-0-0. v3� • Subdivision Meeting September 11, 1997 Page 3 • • LS 97-28.00: LOT SPLIT (SAME E & MAXINE WITT) SAM AND MAXINE WITT- W. OF ELEVENTH ST. AND S. OF DUNCAN AVE. The lot split request was submitted by the applicants for property located west of 1 lth Street and south of Duncan Ave. The property is zoned R-2 and contains approximately 11 76 acres. The request is to split 0.48 acres from the parent tract. Findings: The parent tract is a mobile home park; the owner wishes to split off a single family home on a lot which is attached to the mobile home park in order to sell both pieces of property separately. Staff has no outstanding issues in regard to this request. Recommendation: Consideration of this project based on staff findings. If the Subdivision Committee chooses to approve this project, staff recommends the following conditions of approval: Conditions of Approval 1. Plat Review and Subdivision comments (to include written staff comments mailed to the applicant or his representative, and all comments from utility representatives - AR Western Gas, SWBT, Ozarks, SWEPCO, TCA Cable) Payment of parks fees in the amount of $300.00 for the newly created residential lot. 3. Sidewalk construction in accordance with current standards to include a 4' sidewalk on tract A at the time of development. 4. At the time of development, extension of water and sewer lines may be required to service Tract A, at the developers expense. There was no representative present. Ms. Little stated the applicant would not be present due to illness. The staff had approved a property line adjustment for this lot approximately three months ago to facility the sale of the house to the south. Ms. Witt was now wanting to split the vacant lot off from the trailer park to sale the property. Ms. Witt had dedicated right-of-way in the past to make the lot legal. She added a $300 parks fee would be required. A 4' sidewalk would be required at the time of construction. Mr. Beavers stated the applicant may need to extend water and sewer to service tract A. The city • Subdivision Meeting September 11, 1997 Page 4 • • had no records showing the services running into the trailer park. If the lines did not satisfy the water superintendent the applicant would have to extend water and sewer from the south to tract A. He added it could be added as a condition of approval. Mr. Forney asked if the streets in trailer park were private or public. Ms. Little replied the streets were private with the exception of the street leading into the park, which had been dedicated to the city up to the turn. She noted the streets would not be accepted by the city unless they were reconstructed to city standard. In response to concerns voiced by Mr. Forney, Ms. Little stated the staff had received a right-of- way dedication as part of the property line adjustment. In response to questions regarding right-of-ways, Ms. Little explained there were existing private streets to the south of tract B. She was not concerned about obtaining right-of-way because the city did not want the streets because they were not up to city standards. If the city needed the streets in the future she felt the owners would be willing the dedicate the streets. MOTION Mr. Forney moved to approve the lot split contingent upon the conditions of approval. Ms. Johnson seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 3-0-0. • Subdivision Meeting September 11, 1997 Page 5 • FP 97-4.00: FINAL PLAT (DAVID LYLE VILLAGE) BAYYARI- N. OF HUNTSVILLE ROAD AND W. OF PARADISE DR. The final plat was submitted by Milholland Engineering on behalf of Bayyari Properties for property located north of Huntsville Road and west of Paradise Drive. The property is zoned R- S, Residential Small Lot and contains approximately 23.08 acres with 89 lots proposed. Findings: This is the second phase of David Lyle Village which was approved as a preliminary plat 8/14/95. Recommendation: Consideration of this project based on staff findings. If the Subdivision Committee chooses to approve this project, staff recommends the following conditions of approval: Conditions of Approval 1. Plat Review and Subdivision comments (to include written staff comments mailed to the applicant or his representative, and all comments from utility representatives - AR Western Gas, SWBT, Ozarks, SWEPCO, TCA Cable) 2. All improvements shall comply with City's current requirements. 3. 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 4. Sidewalk construction as shown on the final mylar for all lots. Lots zoned R -O will be required to install 6' sidewalks in accordance with current City standards at the time of development. 5. Prior to recording the final mylar, the following is required: a. Completion of all required improvements or the placement of a surety with the City (letter of credit, bond, escrow) as required by § 159.34 "Guarantees in Lieu of Installed Improvements" to guarantee all incomplete improvements. Only the final layer of pavement and sidewalks may be guaranteed for a final plat. b. All final punch list items must be complete and approved by Engineering. Mr. Ron Petrie and Faydel Bayyari represented the item. 7.34 Subdivision Meeting September 11, 1997 Page 6 Ms. Little explained the preliminary plat had shown sidewalks through the R -O lots to Hwy 16. The final plat did not show these sidewalks. The developer had the option to construct a 4' sidewalk now (old ordinance) or he could construct 6' sidewalks when the R -O lots developed. Mr. Beavers complemented Mr. Bayyari on the good job his contractors had done. Mr. Rutherford also complemented Mr. Bayyari a Job well done. There was no public comment. Ms. Little stated there were five items on the conditions of approval. They were all standard comments with the exception of the sidewalk construction on the R -O Tots. Ms. Johnson questioned why there were no other stub outs to the north. Ms. Little explained it was a conservation easement. MOTION Mr. Forney moved to approve the final plat. Ms. Johnson seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 3-0-0. 5 • Subdivision Meeting September 11, 1997 Page 7 • LSD 97-20.00: LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT (SUMMIT DEVELOPMENT) CLARY DEVELOPMENT -N. OF WEDINGTON DR. & W OF SHILOH DR. The large scale development was submitted by Brian Ray of Development Consultants, Inc. on behalf of Clary Development for property located north of Wedington Drive and west of Shiloh Drive. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential and contains approximately 8.54 acres. Findings: This project is planned for the newly created lot 4 of Wedington Place subdivision (contingent upon approval of the replat of that subdivision and City Council approval of the requested rezoning). The proposed development is an elderly housing complex consisting of 8 buildings, with 203 units. A part of the property is currently in the process of being rezoned so that the entire tract is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential. Any approval of this LSD must be contingent upon City Council approving the requested rezoning. A parking waiver is being sought. The developer is requesting to reduce the number of parking spaces below the number required by ordinance. Staff supports this waiver request due to the nature of the project. The area in which parking is to be removed will be landscaped and will remain available if in the future it is again needed for the creation of additional parking. Recommendation: Consideration of this project based on staff findings. If the Subdivision Committee chooses to approve this project, staff recommends the following conditions of approval: Conditions of Approval 1. Plat Review and Subdivision comments (to include written staff comments mailed to the applicant or his representative, and all comments from utility representatives - AR Western Gas, SWBT, Ozarks, SWEPCO, TCA Cable) 2. All improvements shall comply with City's current requirements. 3. 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. Payment of parks fees in the amount of $48,720.00 (203 units @$200.00) 23' • Subdivision Meeting September 11, 1997 Page 8 5. Sidewalk construction in accordance with current standards to include a 6' sidewalk with 6' greenspace along the new street providing access to this lot. 6. Large Scale Development approval to be valid for one calendar year. 7. A fee of $67.00 per unit will be assessed to go toward improvements to the Hamstring basin (a total of $13,601.00). 8. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the following is required: a. Grading and drainage permits b. Separate easement plat for this project c. Completion of all required improvements or the placement of a surety with the City (letter of credit, bond, escrow) as required by § 159.34 "Guarantees in Lieu of Installed Improvements" to guarantee all incomplete improvements. Further, all improvements necessary to serve the site and protect public safety must be completed, not just guaranteed, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 9. 8" water line must be looped - cannot dead end (see attached Fire Chief comments). Mr. Brain Ray, Development Consultants, and Bruce Adams, Summit Development, represented the item. Ms. Little stated Summit Development had been to Parks Board. The Board had approved a waiver for the dedication of park land (which had been approved by the City Council). This development would pay parks fees in the amount of $48,720. She noted the plat did not reflect enough right-of-way for sidewalks, and additional 2' of right-of-way would be required. Mr. Ray stated the street standard showed a 4' sidewalk with a 6' greenspace. Mr. Rutherford explained the street would be considered commercial up to the residential development, then a 4' sidewalk would be required in the residential area. Ms. Little explained the replat of Wedington Place Addition showed dedication of 60' of right-of- way which narrowed to 50' of right-of-way. The staff was requesting an additional dedication of 2' of right-of-way so the 6' sidewalk could be continuous on both sides of the street up to Timberline. Mr. Beavers stated he had requested the applicant to look at the sight distance at the intersection and to investigate the need for a left tum lane, which would required the right-of-way to be widened even more. He stated he could not make a recommendation on the project because the applicant had not provided the requested information from Plat Review. • Subdivision Meeting September 11, 1997 Page 9 In response to comments from committee members about not hearing the item because of the lack of information, Mr. Adams requested the committee to review the large scale, because it would not be affected by the replat. Mr. Reynolds suggested to the applicant, to consult with the staff and to provide the required information. Mr. Ray understood it would be a difficult intersection because of the curve, but stated it was the only place they could connect with the other street. He added additional right-of-way would not help them because the street would run onto the adjacent property. He did not have the power to condemn the land for a road. Mr. Reynolds stated Mr. Ray would need to consult with Mr. Beavers before he submitted the plat to the Subdivision committee again. Mr. Forney asked if Timberline could be made into a more north -south street to increase safety. Mr. Ray asked who would be responsible for acquiring right-of-way if the City required the • developer to straighten the road. Ms. Little replied the developer would be responsible for acquiring the right-of-way. If the property had to be condemned, then the developer would pay all cost associated with the condemnation. Mr. Ray felt an adequate connection could be made. Mr. Beavers stated Mr. Ray needed to show him the calculations. Ms. Johnson noted the Planning Commission had required the connection since the being of this development. She noted the site had problems with Hamstring Creek, the bypass, and Wedington Drive. MOTION Ms. Johnson moved to table the item until the developer furnished to staff all the requested information. She added because the large scale was a development for the elderly, the street connection needed to be safer than usual. Mr. Adams stated he would like to direct the traffic coming in and out of the project to a • controlled intersection. He wanted a connection to Salem Road L3$ • Subdivision Meeting September 11, 1997 Page 10 Mr. Forney asked if there was a potential access to the east Mr. Ray stated there was an apartment complex to the east. He added he was uncomfortable directing traffic through the apartment complex's parking lot. Ms. Little added there was a way to access the apartment complex. Mr. Clary, the owner, had indicated he was not opposed to the connection. She noted the owner of Wilson Inn was not willing to allow a connection. Mr. Forney stated the applicant needed to provide a better network of streets if they wanted to develop this property. Ms. Johnson reiterated the property needed better circulation. Mr. Adams stated he would be supportive of an eastern connection, however, he wanted to keep circulation through the project to minimum for safety. Ms. Johnson stated the Planning Commission had been clear from the beginning that Timberline would be a significant road. She added a private street would not be appropriate for this location. The developer needed to design a better street layout. Mr. Ray replied the only private street would be Tahoe Place, which would only serve part of the property. Timberline would serve as circulation for the entire project. Ms. Johnson stated there needed to be circulation through the property to Hwy 16. She reiterated her motion to postpone. Mr. Forney seconded the motion. He added this was a good location for the elderly development, but they needed to provide a better network of public ways to help eliminate some of the traffic problems they would be creating. The item was tabled • Subdivision Meeting September 11, 1997 Page 11 LSD 97-19.00: LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT (LOTS 4R & 7, SPRING PARK PHASE III) CLARY DEVELOPMENT- S. OF JOYCE BLVD. & S. END OF MALL AVE. The large scale development was submitted by Brian Ray of Development Consultants, Inc. on behalf of Clary Development for property located south of Joyce Blvd. and at the south end of Mall Ave. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 9.51 acres. Findings: This project is adjacent to National Home Center and is directly south of the Wal- Mart supercenter which is currently under construction. The development is subject to Commercial Design Standards. Recommendation: Consideration of this project based on staff findings. If the Subdivision Committee chooses to approve this project, staff recommends the following conditions of approval: Conditions of Approval Plat Review and Subdivision comments (to include written staff comments mailed to the applicant or his representative, and all comments from utility representatives - AR Western Gas, SWBT, Ozarks, SWEPCO, TCA Cable) 2. All improvements shall comply with City's current requirements. 3. 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. 4. Sidewalk construction in accordance with current standards to include a minimum 6' sidewalk with a minimum 10' greenspace along Mall Ave. 5. The entrance to this project must be reconfigured in order to reflect the existing Wal-Mart entrance. The revised plat does not reflect how this development will be constructed. 6. Large Scale Development approval to be valid for one calendar year. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the following is required: t40 • Subdivision Meeting September 11, 1997 Page 12 a. Grading and drainage permits b. Separate easement plat for this project c. Completion of all required improvements or the placement of a surety with the City (letter of credit, bond, escrow) as required by §159.34 "Guarantees in Lieu of Installed Improvements" to guarantee all incomplete improvements. Further, all improvements necessary to serve the site and protect public safety must be completed, not just guaranteed, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Ms. Little stated this development would provide direct access to the Nachar property to the west. Mr. Jeff Maxfield, Clary Development, was opposed to the connection. Ms. Johnson asked for a map of the region to help in the discussion of future connections. Mr. Forney asked if the Master Street Plan had been amended deleting the creek crossing on Frontage Road. • In response to questions concerning the bridge, Ms. Little stated there had been conversations about the expense of the bridge, but the Master Street Plan had not been amended. Mr. Ray stated this property did not touch Frontage Road. Ms. Johnson felt the committee needed to deal with the Master Street Plan issues before they discussed any more development. She added more back ground information was needed. She added the Master Street Plan would be important to this area for good long range planning. Mr. Beavers stated he had requested Mr. Ray to show the existing sewer line Wal-Mart had constructed. He added the proposed trees would need to be relocated and the water line needed to be moved. Ms. Beth Sandeen stated she needed a landscape plan for this project. The plan must reflect exactly what will be constructed on site. She would expect to see what had been approved by the Planning Commission. She would also need a bond for a guarantee for the tree installation, before the building permit was issued. She noted some of the information presented on rendering was different than what was presented on the plans. She added if the applicant was going to show it, it needed to be installed. Ms. Johnson suggested postponing the item until the staff and the committee had more back • ground information and the requested information from the applicant. t\\ • Subdivision Meeting September 11, 1997 Page 13 Ms. Little suggested a representative from Nachar attend the next subdivision meeting since the discussion would involve their future development. The item was tabled. • v�Z • Subdivision Meeting September 11, 1997 Page 14 PP 97-7.00: PRELIMINARY PLAT (SERENITY PLACE) PRESTIGE PROPERTIES- W. OF SALEM RD AND N. OF MT. COMFORT RD. The large scale development was submitted by Brian Ray of Development Consultants, Inc. on behalf of Clary Development for property located south of Joyce Blvd. and at the south end of Mall Ave. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 9 51 acres. Findings: This project is adjacent to National Home Center and is directly south of the Wal- Mart supercenter which is currently under construction. The development is subject to Commercial Design Standards. Recommendation: Consideration of this project based on staff findings. If the Subdivision Committee chooses to approve this project, staff recommends the following conditions of approval: Conditions of Approval 1. Plat Review and Subdivision comments (to include written staff comments mailed to the applicant or his representative, and all comments from utility representatives - AR Western Gas, SWBT, Ozarks, SWEPCO, TCA Cable) 2. All improvements shall comply with City's current requirements. 3. 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 4. Sidewalk construction in accordance with current standards to include a minimum 6' sidewalk with a minimum 10' greenspace along Mall Ave. 5. The entrance to this project must be reconfigured in order to reflect the existing Wal-Mart entrance. The revised plat does not reflect how this development will be constructed. 6. Large Scale Development approval to be valid for one calendar year. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the following is required: Subdivision Meeting September 11, 1997 Page 15 a. Grading and drainage permits b. Separate easement plat for this project c. Completion of all required improvements or the placement of a surety with the City (letter of credit, bond, escrow) as required by § 159.34 "Guarantees in Lieu of Installed Improvements" to guarantee all incomplete improvements. Further, all improvements necessary to serve the site and protect public safety must be completed, not just guaranteed, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Mr. Brian Moore and Tim Reynolds represented the item. Ms. Little stated the revised plat provided for connections to the east and west in accordance with the Master Street Plan. The staff had recommended two entrances ordinally. The second entry had been lost in the revised plat. She added one acre lots would be required for areas 100% in the flood plain or a minimum of 6,000 square feet of build able area if it was partially in the flood plain. She noted lots 41 and 42 were 100% in the flood plain. She added the developer was allowed to fill the lot, a letter of map of amendment from FEMA would be required to remove it from the flood plain. Mr. Conklin stated FEMA had studied this stream and new data would be coming in a month. He was expecting the floodplain area to increase. Ms. Little cautioned, building permits would be issued using the new FEMA map. The developer was providing the 30% open space and had agreed to pay parks fees in the amount of $29,700. The developer had also agreed, with the parks board, to make the open space available to the public. The green space in the center would not be accessible to the public. She noted there were sewer connection fees and a charge for the Master Street Planned street to the west, Rupple Road. Ms. Little read the fire chief's comments to move the hydrants from lot 4 to lot 1 and to move the hydrant from lot 17 to between lots 11 and 12. No gravel would be allowed adjacent to Serenity Street. Mr. Beavers asked if this was an option or revised plat. He added the water and sewer could work. Mr. Rutherford stated Serenity Way was a collector street. The sidewalk needed to be 6' wide with a 10' greenspace. Sidewalks needed to be shown in the legend. He cautioned against the one entry. PUBLIC Mr. Kimbrough expressed concern about the 100' cul-de-sac. He did not believe one entry for a hundred lot development would be adequate. • Subdivision Meeting September 11, 1997 Page 16 • Ms. Little stated the commission's concern at the last subdivision meeting had been conformance with the Master Street Plan. She felt the staff and the adjacent property owner would be satisfied if there were a connection at Reflective Way to Salem. Mr. Tim Reynolds added there would be two openings once Rupple Road was constructed. Ms. Johnson commented she could see the logic in a cul-de-sac, because it would be converted into a collector street later. Ms. Little added the staff liked the revised plan because all of the lots had drives off of local streets and not the collector street. Ms. Johnson asked if the developer needed to wait until the latest FEMA map was out. She asked how different the new FEMA map would be from the existing one. Mr. Beavers felt the flood plain would be significantly higher. Mr. Conklin believed the flood heights would increase because of all the development in the area. In response to questions from Mr. Tim Reynolds, Mr. Conklin stated the new FEMA maps were using two foot contours. The flood areas would match the contours. Ms. Little added the new information would take a lot of the guest work out of flood plain determination. Ms. Johnson asked the potential for changes to this development. Ms. Little replied the number of lots, lot configuration, and street layout could be affected. In response to questions from Mr. Conklin, Mr. Reynolds stated they had plan to fill the lots in the flood plain. Mr. Conklin stated they would have to apply for a letter of amendment for those lots. Ms. Johnson stated the commission had several concerns about the master street plan and the flood plain, she suggested postponing the development to the developer. Mr. Moore felt the new map would not change the flood way, but would affect the height of the flood plain. They would just need more fill. • Mr. Beavers stated the City would start using the new information as soon as they received it from the Corps. Subdivision Meeting September 11, 1997 Page 17 Mr. Tim Reynolds asked what would happen to the developments already constructed. Ms. Little replied the city was required to enforce the FEMA standards. The city could not require the existing lots to be increased to one acre, but the lots would need to be filled, before a building permit was issued. In response to concerns about continuing with the development, Ms. Little suggested phasing the development. Mr. Reynolds replied he would not be able to because of the financing. Mr. Bob Reynolds expressed concern about having park land on both sides of the through street. He thought it might be dangerous for kids. In response to questions from Ms. Jolmson concerning the construction of Rupple Road, Ms. Little stated the road was not currently on the five year plan, however they were preparing documents to place the road construction on the five year plan. She thought there would $450,000 collected from developers for the construction of the road Estimates for the construction of the road were 4 million, for four -lane and 11/2 million for two-lane. She felt they would construct a two lane. She added council had asked about this road with every rezoning and annexation. She felt there was a lot of interest in the construction of this road. She felt it would be 10 years before the road was construction. Mr. Forney expressed concern that there was only a single lot between two streets. Ms. Little replied the purpose of the collector street and minor atrial was to collect traffic from other area and move it to another location. Mr. Forney did not believe the item was ready to forward to Planning Commission. Ms. Johnson was not comfortable with the cul-de-sac. Mr. Bob Reynolds stated there needed to be another entry because of the number of lots. In response to concerns voiced by Ms. Johnson, Ms. Little explained the connection to the north split the distance between Mt. Comfort and Gympson. The location was also agreeable to the adjacent property owners. Mr. Forney felt there needed to be another street connection. Ms. Little stated the commission could not approve this layout, because there could not be lots • Subdivision Meeting September 11, 1997 Page 18 • 100% in the floodplain unless they were an acre in size. She added commission could approve this layout subject to a letter of map amendment. The letter of map amendment would remove the lots from the floodplain with the placement of fill. Mr. Reynolds asked how all the fill would affect the property to the west. Mr. Conklin explained if all the property in the flood plain was filled in the water surface elevation would be raised by one foot. The city would require the structures to be raised two feet above that elevation. Mr. Kimbrough expressed concern about all the development in the area, the density and the circulation. He noted there had been numerous accidents. He felt the Planning Commission need to consider all aspects of the development in the area. Ms. Little added the street configuration on this development would affect Mr. Kimbrough's property. Mr. Kimbrough's stated the Master Street Plan street was inappropriate as it was drawn. He thought it could have been accommodated better by using the northern most street. He was willing to place a deed restriction on his property to accommodate the Master Street Plan. Ms. Kimbrough expressed concern about the development having only one entry onto Salem Road. Ms. Johnson stated she had problems adjusting Master Street Planned streets for developments that were not before them. Mr. Beavers stated the Kimbroughs were developing their property with two lot splits for single family homes. In response to questions from Mr. Forney regarding right-of-way for the master street plan, Ms. Little stated the Kimbrough's were willing to give a deed restriction 70' wide along their property. In response to questions from Mr. Forney, Ms Warrick stated developer had met their greenspace requirements. The size of the lots were not an issue. The developer had also been informed that any improvements shown on the plat would need to be constructed prior to the eighth building permit being issued. She noted typically the green space in a PUD was private. • Mr. Forney moved to forward the item to the Planning Commission subject to: a letter of map amendment removing all lots which were in the flood plain, an additional stubout to Salem at • • Subdivision Meeting September 11, 1997 Page 19 • • Reflective Way and an amendment to the covenants reflecting that the private park would not be fenced off at any point on the public way. Ms. Johnson seconded the motion. The item was forwarded the Planning Commission. L'l • Subdivision Meeting September 11, 1997 Page 20 • • PP 97-8.00: PRELIMINARY PLAT (MEADOWLANDS PHASE III) BMP DEVELOPMENTS- W. OF RUPPLE RD AND S. OF MEADOWLANDS DRIVE. The preliminary plat was submitted by Brian Moore of Engineering Services on behalf of BMP Development and Butch Robertson for property located west of Rupple Road and south of Meadowlands Drive. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 24.48 acres with 92 lots proposed. Findings: This is the third phase of the Meadowlands subdivision. Major issues include Master Street Plan streets on the south edge of this tract as well as the continuation of Rupple Road to the south, just west of this property. Right of way dedication as well as contribution for improvements of $145,635.00 for Rupple Road and of $112,860.00 for Persimmon Street will be required of this project. The developer has dedicated park land for this overall subdivision. This continues to be an issue since no developed areas of the subdivision are adjacent to this park land and there is currently no access to that City property. An updated master concept plan for the entire Meadowlands subdivision was requested by the utility representatives during the Technical Plat Review meeting. Recommendation: Consideration of this project based on staff findings. If the Subdivision Committee chooses to approve this project, staff recommends the following conditions of approval: Conditions of Approval 1. Plat Review and Subdivision comments (to include written staff comments mailed to the applicant or his representative, and all comments from utility representatives - AR Western Gas, SWBT, Ozarks, SWEPCO, TCA Cable) 2. All improvements shall comply with City's current requirements. 3. 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. Subdivision Meeting September 11, 1997 Page 21 4. Sidewalk construction in accordance with current standards to include a min. 4' sidewalk with a min. 6' greenspace on both sides of the streets. 5. Waivers of cul-de-sac length are required of every street within this development. Staff would support the extension of one or more of the internal streets to connect to Meadowlands Drive to provide more than one means of ingress / egress for this project. 6. An updated drawing showing all park land dedicated for this subdivision in addition to the dedication of land for a new elementary school needs to be provided. This drawing must show access to the City property as well as the related Master Street Plan streets. Planning Commission is requested to discuss methods of access to the park land. Mr. Brian Moore represented the item. Ms. Nancy Dugwyler, Parks Department, stated she had not been provided a plan illustrating the dedicated park land. The plat would need to show existing and future park land dedications and their relationship to the entire development (all phases). Ms. Warrick stated the plat a had been submitted, but did not show the surrounding streets. Ms. Dugwyler stated she needed to know where the park lands would be located for the future two phases. Ms. Warrick added the applicant needed to show access to the park land and the land dedicated for the school. Ms. Dugwyler added neither the city nor the current residents had access to the park land for phase I and II. She added she had not received a deed for the park land. In response to questions from Mr. Reynolds regarding the school, Ms. Little stated there had been discussion on the dedication of 10 acres for a school, however, the dedication was contingent upon the city building Rupple Road. Mr. Beavers stated the City design and build Rupple Road in 1998, south of Wedington. Ms. Little stated the staff would need a map showing Rupple Road, the dedicated park area, and future park area, the 10 acres proposed for the new school and the continuation of the Persimmon across the south side (It did not have to be dedicated, but it needed to be shown.) Ms. Johnson asked that the vanity map show all the surrounding streets and possible connections. • Subdivision Meeting September 11, 1997 Page 22 • Ms. Little stated the staff felt the one entrance to Meadowlands was inadequate. There were 145 units being serviced by one street. The developer was going to add 103 units with this proposal. She added the staff had started using a different method for calculating contributions. Meadowlands portion would be $145,653.00 (3.5% of the cost of the total road.) PUBLIC Mr. Vernon McBride, an adjacent neighbor, stated his property was to the south of this property. He had created South Rupple and dedicated it to the city when he purchased the property. He was concerned about water. He explained the water on the north side had been a problem, in order for the property on the north side of Hwy 16 to develop the water had been piped under Hwy 16 to the south side. A ditch had been dug across his property to Owl Creek. His property was the beginning of Owl Creek. He had consulted with Don Bunn in 1984-85, when the ditch was being created. Meadowlands had dug another ditch to South Rupple and added their run off the existing ditch. All this runoff was running onto his property illegally. Phase III had planned a holding pond, which was dumping the water onto his property where he had planned to build his house. He was not anti -development, but the water needed to be managed to not destroy his property or the property owners down stream. Ms. Little asked if the ditch had been installed in by the city. Mr. McBride stated the city had put in the ditch for Mr. Greenwood, the owner of the Speed Mart across the street. He reiterated it was time to work on the runoff. Ms. Johnson felt they needed to postpone the item to conduct additional drainage studies. Mr. Beavers stated the developer was required to provide proof that their drainage plans would work before the item went to Planning Commission. He added there would be a $200 per lot sewer fee due at the final plat. MOTION Ms. Johnson moved to postpone the item Mr. Forney seconded the motion.