Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-02-17 - MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE A regular meeting of the Subdivision Committee was held on February 17, 2000 at 8:30 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS CONSIDERED ACTION TAKEN LSD00-1: Interface Computer Center, pp286 Forward with revisions LS00-1: Candlewood Development, pp294 Approved MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Don Bunch Bob Estes Don Marr Lorel Hoffman Conrad Odom Lee Ward STAFF PRESENT STAFF ABSENT Tim Conklin Sara Edwards Kim Hesse Janet Johns Ron Petrie Subdivision Committee Minutes February 17, 2000 Page 2 LSD00-1: LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT INTERFACE COMPUTER CENTER, PP286 This item was submitted by Kevin Hodges of Carter and Hodges, P.A. on behalf of Jeremy Webb of Interface Computer Center for property located on lot 1 of the Research and Technology Park. The property is zoned I-1, Heavy Commercial/Light Industrial and contains approximately 2.50 acres. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the large scale development subject to the following conditions: 1. A fire hydrant needs to be located in front of or near the entrance located off Shiloh Drive. 2. Compliance with the Design Overlay District and Commercial Design Standards. Elevations for the south and west sides need to be submitted prior to obtaining a building permit. Note on the plat that 25 regular and 2 handicap spaces are required. However, the plat actually shows 24 regular and 2 handicap spaces. The note needs to be revised to show the correct number as shown on the plat. 4. All Plat Review and Subdivision Committee comments. 5. Staff approval of final detailed plans, specifications, and calculations for grading, drainage, water, sewer, fire protection, streets, sidewalks, parking lots 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. All improvements shall comply with the City's current requirements. 6. Large scale development approval is valid for one calendar year. 7. 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 as required by §158.01. 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. • Subdivision Committee Minutes February 17, 2000 Page 3 8. West and south elevations are required prior to Planning Commission approval 9. Sidewalk slope must meet ADA requirements. Committee Discussion Estes: The first item of business on the agenda is LSD00-1, a large scale development for Interface Computer Center. Tim, what do you have to tell us about this? Conklin: This is the first development in the Research and Technology Park. It's located on lot 1. We did a lot split last year, creating this lot. It contains 2.5 acres and is zoned I-1, Heavy • Commercial/Light Industrial. They are proposing to build a 6,480 square foot building on this site. They have planned on 24 regular parking spaces and 2 ADA parking spaces. That meets our parking ordinance requirement for a total of 26 parking spaces. Under conditions to address and discuss, we need a fire hydrant shown on Shiloh Drive. We need to look at the proposed design of the building and review it with regard to compliance with the Design Overlay District and Commercial Design Standards. They will provide elevations for the south and west sides. • The south side will be able to be used from Shiloh Drive and Interstate 540. The west side will be accessed from Technology Blvd when it is constructed. We need the engineers to correct the plat to show the 24 regular parking spaces and 2 handicap parking spaces. Right now it states 25. Staff is recommending approval That is all Planning staff has at this time. • Estes: Other staff comments? Petrie: The only comment I have is a request of the applicant that their engineer get with the Engineer Department and Wayne Ledbetter and coordinate this construction with the Research and Technology construction. Estes: This is in the Design Overlay District and is subject to Commercial Design Standards regarding the elevations and compliance with the Commercial Design Standards. Conklin: With regard to the Overlay District, metal side walls are not allowed. They are not proposing any type of metal side walls. The bottom course is split face block. Then, we have a dark brick in the middle and then EFIS at the top. This is a light beige or warm gray color which they are proposing. It does meet the requirement that it is not a metal side wall. Staff does not have any problem with the design of the building. I believe that it meets the Commercial Design Standards and Overlay District requirements. Estes: We're looking at the first agenda item for Interface Computer Center. Are there other comments from City staff? • • • Subdivision Committee Minutes February 17, 2000 Page 4 Rutherford: On the slope for the sidewalk? Hodges: I've corrected that. Rutherford: That's the only problem I have. Bunch: When will we get the other elevations? I would like to see what the patio looks like and whether it will be visible from the highway. And also, for safety's sake, how many doors are there? I only see one ingress and egress. Hodges: I'll make a note here for Rob. Bunch: That should show up once we get the south and west elevations. Conklin: That is something you need to approve this. It will go to Planning Commission and we should have them prior to Planning Commission. If we can get those on February 23 for agenda session. Bunch: The landscape drawing predates the revised drawing of the site layout. There will be some inconsistencies in the parking spaces and the driveway. Conklin: Let me make a statement about this landscape plan. This landscape plan did show future expansion of the parking lot. They are not proposing that at this time. It has been removed. Also, Technology Boulevard does not currently exist. They will have to have a temporary drive off of Shiloh Drive and that will come in on the northeast part of that parking lot. That will be removed once Technology Boulevard is complete. Rutherford: Kim Hesse will not be here today. Conklin: I don't recall any comments from Kim. I think they are meeting the ordinance requirements. Bunch. In our notes, she had a comment about the future expansion and needed to know where they would be. Conklin: Kim Hesse, the Landscape Administrator, at Technical Plat Review brought up the fact that the site plan and the landscape are not consistent. She wanted a landscape plan that was consistent prior to building permit approval showing the tree protection fencing on the plat on the entire length of the sewer service trench as it transverses the wooded area and along the limits of grading in those wooded areas. Subdivision Committee Minutes February 17, 2000 Page 5 Bunch: What we have should be showing the revisions from Technical Plat Review, right? Conklin: Right. Estes: And does it? Conklin: Yes, it is showing the tree protection fencing on the plat. Prior to Kim Hesse signing off on the building permit, she will take a look at it to determine compliance. Estes: It is my thinking that we do not need to approve this large scale development. We need to move this on to agenda and at that meeting we will see the plat correctly showing the number of parking spaces, the correction to the sidewalk, and the corrected landscape. Conklin: And, the elevations on all sides of the building. Estes: Yes, we'll need elevations to the south and west. Sharp: I have the south elevation. There are two entrances for the building. One on the north and one on the south. Bunch: Do those function as fire exits? Sharp: Yes, sir. Conklin: Rob, I did explain the materials to the Subdivision Committee. It's my understanding the bottom is the split face block and then a dark brick and the light gray EFIS. Sharp: That's fiber cement board which is like a stucco product. Bunch: What is the eave height on the tallest part which is on the west elevation? Is it a single story building or a two story? Sharp: 24 feet. It's two story. Estes: The material on the west elevation, does that wrap around from the east and the north? Sharp: It is the same as the material on the top which is cement board. Estes: On the west elevation? • Subdivision Committee Minutes February 17, 2000 Page 6 Sharp: Yes, sir. Estes: And, I presume the same on the south elevation. This is an overhang awning? Sharp: Yes, sir. Estes: What is the material? Sharp: It's a standard seam, metal roof and it has a steel framework. You can see the side elevation. Marr. What about signage? Conklin: They are proposing a monument sign along Technology Boulevard and Shiloh. Estes: Technology is not there yet. Conklin: That is correct. The City of Fayetteville will be building that street and sidewalk • Estes: The material that is shown on the east elevation and the roof overhang, is that the same on both? Sharp: That is the steel structure. Estes: Does that comply with our Commercial Design Standards? • Conklin: On the Commercial Design Standards, the one area that we should look at closely and I think that with the different materials it helps break the building up, but we need to determine whether this is a boxlike structure. I think the covered patios helps this building from having that boxlike look. The Overlay District basically states no metal side walls. I wouldn't define this as a metal side wall. Estes: Is there any further discussion? MOTION Commissioner Marr made a motion to forward the project to the full Planning Commission. Commissioner Estes seconded the motion. Estes: Any other discussion? Let's vote. All in favor? Subdivision Committee Minutes February 17, 2000 Page 7 All: Aye. Estes: All opposed. This is moved forward to the agenda session. Conklin: We'll need the revisions to the plat by Tuesday, February 22 by 10 a.m. • Subdivision Committee Minutes February 17, 2000 Page 8 LS00-1: LOT SPLIT CANDLEWOOD DEVELOPMENT, PP294 This item was submitted by Dave Jorgensen of Jorgensen & Associates on behalf of Candlewood Development for property located at lot 45 of Candlewood Subdivision. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 1.96 acres and 1.23 acres. Dave Jorgensen was present on behalf of the request. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval subject to the following conditions: 1. A flood plain development permit will be required prior to issuance of building permits. 2. Resolution of street light issues. The street lights shown on the lot split plat do not match those shown on the Candlewood Final Plat. • 3. Driveway width needs to be reduced to 24 feet. It is currently shown as 30 feet on the plat. 4. Plat Review and Subdivision comments. 5. Staff approval of final detailed plans, specifications, and calculations for grading, drainage, water, sewer, fire protection, streets, sidewalks, parking lot, and tree preservation. 6. Parks fees will be determined at the date of Planning Commission determination of the requested conditional use. If duplexes are approved, $1,125 will be due. 7. Formal grading plan is required prior to obtaining a building permit. 8. The sidewalk symbol needs to be shown in the legend. Committee Discussion Estes: We have the lot split in Candlewood Subdivision submitted by Dave Jorgensen. This is for property located at lot 45 of Candlewood Subdivision. • Conklin: Candlewood Subdivision was recently approved as a final plat last year They are proposing to split lot 45 into two tracts with one containing 1.69 acres and one containing 1.23 • • Subdivision Committee Minutes February 17, 2000 Page 9 acres. The total area for lot 25 is 3.19 acres The final plat was approved on September 30, 1999. Also, on the next Planning Commission agenda, there is a conditional use to build duplexes on each lot. They are calling them townhouses on their plat. They are requesting a total of 4 units or 2 units on each lot. Under R-1 zoning, you are allowed to apply for a conditional use for duplex or 2 unit townhouses if the lot contains 80 feet of frontage and 1,200 square feet. These lots meet that requirement. I want to make the applicant aware that building on these lots will require a flood plain development permit prior to issuance of building permits. You need to resolve the street light issues. The street lights shown on the plat do not match those shown on the Candlewood Final Plat. They are proposing to share a driveway between lot 45A and 4513. Our maximum width for a driveway is 24 feet. They are currently showing 30 feet and you'll need to reduce that, Dave, down to 24 feet. Marr: • It's shown 24 foot access easement. Conklin: If you look at the pavement layer that they have on their plat, the easement line is a dashed line and the actual pavement layer is the solid line. If you scale that off, it's about 30 feet. Am I reading that right, Dave? Jorgensen: I don't know for sure. I see what you're talking about. I don't know what width it was intended to be but we'll go with 24 feet. I'll check that. Conklin: You're showing a concrete hatching for the driveway areas which is included in that driveway area. That's where I got the 30 feet. I just want to make sure we have a 24 foot driveway on Township. Recently, I have been working on getting driveways down to 24 feet further to the east on Township. Estes: When you scale it out it's more like 30 feet. What about the street lights? Tell us where those need to go. Conklin: The street lights do not match what is shown on the final plat. Street lights need to be shown every 300 feet. You're showing one currently at the entrance. There was a light shown 150 feet on Candlewood Final Plat. They're showing one at the entrance of the drive. That is about 600 feet. Estes: Is that a street light behind? Conklin: That is a fire hydrant. I believe there should be two street lights to get the proper spacing along Township Street. Jorgensen: We showed two on this but evidently they are not in agreement with the final plat of Candlewood. We will get that corrected. • • • Subdivision Committee Minutes February 17, 2000 Page 10 Conklin: You need to make sure that what you are building for Candlewood has been called out there and that we have the proper spacing. Staff will work with Dave to make sure we have the property spacing. Estes: Does the City staff have any comments on this proposed lot split? Petrie: This does require a formal grading plan. I don't need it at this time but before I sign off on a building permit. Estes: Commissioners any questions or discussion? If I understand correctly, what we are being asked to do at this level is approve this lot split and then later we'll see the conditional use for the multifamily use. MOTION Commissioner Marr made a motion to approve the lot split Commissioner Bunch seconded the motion. Estes: The street light issue, the driveway, and the grading can be taken care. Are you okay with that? Conklin: Yes. Bunch: I would like for Tim to expand a little bit on the flood plain and the new standards coming out. This has a bridge on either side of it and I know it had to drastically change the watershed area. Conklin: The Corps of Engineers for the past six years has been restudying all the watershed of Fayetteville except for the White River. I have about 60 percent of that study done and it has been submitted to FEMA and has become official. This part of the study won't be available until the Spring. I have advised Dave Jorgensen and asked him to advise his clients that the study could result in higher 100 year flood elevations. Also, the study will establish flood way areas on this property which you will not be able to build in. He is aware of that. I will use the higher of the two numbers and the base flood elevation will be 2 feet above and that will impact the development on these site. It should be available this Spring. Jorgensen: Did you notice the note in the right hand corner? It addresses that. Conklin: I see that on there. Thank you, Dave. • • • Subdivision Committee Minutes February 17, 2000 Page 11 Estes: Any other discussion? Rutherford: You are showing the sidewalk on the plat but it needs to be in the legend, also. Jorgensen: Okay. Estes: All: Estes: Are we ready to vote? All in favor of the proposed lot split? Yes. That's unanimous. Any other business to come before the Subdivision? Meeting adjourned at 8:55 a.m.