Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-11-16 - Minutes• • • MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE A regular meeting of the Subdivision Committee was held on Thursday, November 142000 at 8:30 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville,'Arkansas. ITEMS CONSIDERED - ACTION TAKEN LSD 00 -30.00: -Large Scale Development (St. Paul's Episcopal Church, pp 484) Forwarded Page 2 LSD 00-33.00: Large Scale Development (Lots 13-16 Millenium Place) Forwarded Page 13 AD 00 -42.00: -Administrative Item (Tri-State Precast, pp 756) Tabled Page 24 Administrative Item• Glennwood (sign) Approved Page 27 Administrative Item: LSD 00-20 Approved Page 34 MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Lee Ward Laurel Hoffman Bob Estes STAFF PRESENT STAFF ABSENT Tim Conklin Sara Edwards Ron Petrie Chuck Rutherford Kim Hesse Mike McKimmee Perry Franklin - Kim Rogers • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 2 —LSD 00-30.00: Large Scale Development (St. Paul's Episcopal Church, pp 484) was submitted by Arnold D. Rankins of McClelland consulting Engineers, Inc. on behalf of St. Paul's Episcopal Church for property located at 224 N. East Street. The property is zoned R -O/C -2, Residential Office/Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 2.0 acres. The request is to add a 11,000 square -foot -addition. - Estes: Welcome to the Thursday morning November 16, 2000, meeting of your Fayetteville Planning Commission Subdivision Committee. The first item on our agenda is LSD 00- 30.00, a Large Scale Development for St. Paul's Episcopal Church submitted by Arnold D. Rankins of McClelland consulting Engineers, Inc. on behalf of St. Paul's -Episcopal Church for property located at -224 N. East Street. The property is zoned R -O/C -2, Residential Office/Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 2.0 acres. The request is to add a 11,000 square foot addition I'm going to have to recuse from voting on this item but I can go ahead and chair if there's no objections -from any of the Commissioners or from the applicant. Tim, what's this all about? Conklin: This project is located on the corner of Dickson and East Street. The church property is zoned R-0 and the property to the east where their parking lot is located is zoned C- 2. On August 7, 2000, the Board of Adjustment did approve variances for a 14 foot front setback from Dickson Street which is the north setback, a 10.5 foot setback from East Street which will be the west setback and a 1.5 foot setback to the east. The additional will be a parish hall and offices. It will not require any additional parking. The parking lot that they currently have east of this property will satisfy their parking for this church. Staff recommends forwarding this to the full Planning Commission. Conditions to address includes approval of a Conditional Use to allow the church in an R-0 district. The Conditional Use will be heard November 22, 2000, Planning Commission meeting. Any time -we have a church that doesn't have the Conditional Use, I've been requiring that. This church has been here since 1871, well before zoning. Hoffman: Will we hear the Conditional Use at that same as the Large Scale Development? Conklin: Yes. The broken sections of sidewalk along East Street will have to be replaced as part of this Large Scale Development. A final Certificate of Occupancy will not be issued until this is complete. Dickson Street is shown as a collector on the Master Street Plan. Currently 35 feet of right-of-way is required. The Planning Commission has forwarded the change on our Master Street Plan to only require 50 feet. They have 27.5 feet of existing right-of-way from centerline so that amendment that's going to City Council December 5, 2000, to the Master Street Plan will take care of that. If the City Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 3 Estes: Council disagrees with what the Planning Commission recommended, I'll have to take a lesser dedication of right-of-way to the City Council. Right now I'm looking forward to the City Council amending our Master Street Plan to only require 50 feet of right-of- way on historic collector streets. As part of the variance request a church is required to remove the portable -wood and metal storage buildings that currently exist on the site. This will be required to acquire final Certificate of Occupancy. Staff needs some additional clarification with ingress and egress to the small parking lot adjacent to the building. It's hard to determine how the vehicles are going to be entering and exiting that parking lot. Number six, there is currently 38% existing tree canopy on the site, the applicant is proposing to preserve 16% of the existing canopy and replace 9.4% of the - canopy. The total canopy of this site will be 25.4%. The ordinance requires 20% tree canopy preservation under the R-0 zoning. Kim Hesse is in support of this tree protection preservation canopy on this site. The Planning Commission will have to determine compliance with Commercial Design Standards Any new free-standing sign would have to be approved by the Subdivision Committee and the rest are standard conditions of approval. If you have questions, I'll be happy to answer them. Any questions Commissioners? Mr. Rutherford, anything on sidewalks? Chuck Rutherford - Sidewalk and Trails Coordinator Rutherford: Rankins: Rutherford: Rankins: Estes: Petrie: I have one question for Jim and Arnold. Right above where it says Center and East Street asphalt section of sidewalk that needed to be removed it says 3 to 4 inch drainage inlet not found. Can you explain? Are you going to put in a drain? No. It's supposed to be existing but we didn't find it. I'm Arnold Rankins. If it was going to be a drain the City of Fayetteville requires that drains go underneath the sidewalk. It can be a grate. I just want to make that clear. Okay. Ron, do you have anything for us? Just a couple of things, one condition I would like to add to this is that all the work within the Dickson Street right-of-way is coordinated with the Dickson Street Enhancement Project. The other comment I had on the location of this water meter, I would just ask if you or Don, you've got it shown within your fence, I don't know if he'll accept that. If it will allow access to read the meter. • • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 4 -Rankins:— - This is supposed to be an existing line? They are going to use the existing water. Petrie: So you are not adding any? Rankins: No. We are just adding sewer services all the way in. Petrie: Okay. That's all.. Estes: Sara did you have anything? Edwards: -No. Conklin: On that clarification of the parking lot? Edwards: Okay. - Is this an entrance and is this an entrance? Rankins: Yes. What it amounts to is there are no curbs here. This is all open, you can drive over it anywhere. Hoffman: Is this alley being used for other businesses too? Rankins: Yes. Hoffman: This is Southwestern Bell here? Rankins: Yes. We'll put a curb here and this will be painted. Edwards: These will be removed? Rankin: Yes. Conklin: So they enter right here? Rankins: Yes. This parking lot over here has two entrances on College. Edwards: Just out of curiosity, have you counted this and this in your parking calculations? Rankins: No. We do have agreements with the people adjacent but no we didn't count it. • • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 5 Estes: Are the applicants represented by Mr. Rankins and now that you have identified yourself and answered some staff questions, do you have a presentation you would like to make? Rankins: No. Conklin: I would like Jim Foster to go over the design of this building, materials and colors. I would like to hear about that right now. Foster: Okay. I'm Jim Foster. This view is from East Avenue. The existing church is to your right. What we have in the view from East Avenue is the new welcome center and this is parish hall. There is a terrace in front of parish hall that goes out over the green space of the lawn. Hoffman: That's this? You are pointing us to this building with this view? This is the terrace and the playground is approximately where it is now? Foster. The playground will be a fenced area for the toddlers. The open green lawn is a multiple purpose and will eventually be used for a labyrinth, meditative area Ward: On the Dickson Street side, is that all brick? Foster: Yes sir. On the Dickson Street side this is the view and you see the end of Parish Hall. We have raised the periput on that side so that as you come down Highland, that higher elevation you don't see the rooftop equipment. From the alley the Estes Law Firm building screens this part of it which is the kitchen. This is the new welcome center seen from the east side where most of the public sees. Hoffman: I'm having trouble finding that, is that this area here on the plan? The welcome center? It looks like you have a major sidewalk coming in. Foster: The welcome center comes from the parking lot, you go through a covered walkway and into this welcome center. Hoffman: Okay so you have a gable roof this way and this way? Foster: Yes. That's this elevation. Hoffman: Will you be bring a material board to the Planning Commission meeting to show the • • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 6 Foster: compatibility of the siding material with the existing church? - We do have a brick selected. We can bring a few bricks. Some of the other decisions to be made by the committee of the church. We know that we want everything to blend in with -the -current church. Ward: Is that just an architectural shingle in there? Foster: It is a composition shingle to match the existing shingles which are gray. Edwards: Are you using any siding or anything other than brick? Foster. We do have some fiber cement siding that is really not seen from public areas. That's basically in areas on the north side of this welcome center, that little piece of roof on the wall there, on the south side of the welcome center on a little piece of wall there. There is no masonry below those walls to carry brick so we have siding. It will be more economical. On the south side of parish hall above the periput of this element, this part has siding on it. Hoffman: Can I see the board a little bit closer please? It looks like you have certainly tried to match the existing elements of the church and we appreciate that. My only comment is that is looks very attractive and generally we like to, at Planning Commission, know what the materials will be so if you can bring a brick and be able to show us that. I want to talk about the landscaping and make sure we all understand what is being remove and if they are rare trees and what's being replacement Can one of you all address that for us? Staff or somebody? Who knows the most about this? Conklin: Does Kim have a memo with her justification, rationale for removal of the trees? Edwards. No. Conklin: We can certainly request that our Landscape Administrator have that for you at Planning Commission. • Foster. We have reviewed the trees on site with Ms. Hesse and our plans for removal and replacement. We have modified our plans to save a tree. Hoffman: It looks like there are some in here. Subdivision Committee Meeting • November 16, 2000 Page 7 • • Foster: Yes. There is a whole row. Hoffman: They are not large trees, they're 8 inch maple, 8 inch maple, save the 32 inch, 12 inch. Foster. It's actually on the neighbors property. Hoffman: Are you, somewhere along Dickson Street or East Avenue, replacing some of these lost trees and where is that shown? Foster: On the next sheet is a landscape plan. We are replacing the tree here. We are saving - the others that are along Dickson Street except for a pine tree or two in the way. Hoffman: It looks like some additional landscaping towards the entry. Foster: Yes. It's all asphalt now, it will be replacedwith landscaping. Conklin: Jim is this your official tree preservation plan? Foster: Yes. Estes: Anything Lee? Ward: It looks like they are replacing all the chain link fence with a wrought iron In the front phase on that on the thing it says zoned 12-0, is it supposed to be R-0? Conklin: On their plan? Hoffman: Is that the football score? Foster: Should be R-0. Ward: What part is C-2? Conklin: The parking lot over here. Foster: It runs up to College. Conklin: It has 72 spaces. • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 8 Foster: We had that R-0: Edwards- What does this parking lot look like, does it have any landscaping in it? Foster: -Yes it does. - Estes: Commissioners any motions, discussion? Any public comment? Foster. I have a question about the screening item. I want to point out that we do have a screen wall around the dumpster area on three sides. We don't have a screen wall -around the transformer. Clearance is required for service there. It would take an enormous amount of space just to screen that. Edwards - Hoffman: Foster: Hoffman: Foster: Hoffman: Conklin: Foster: Conklin: Foster: Hoffman: Foster: Hoffman: You got that labeled as the Baptist church. Let me go on record saying I don't have Can you plant? Where's the transformer? The new transformer. That's just in the middle of the parking lot right now? Yes. Is landscaping possible for that on one side maybe? You are saying this is a landscaped island right here? Yes. Maybe we can look at that because you're more concerned from College Avenue. We're screened from College Avenue. What's here? The Estes Law Firm. • any problem with the variance requested for the conditional approval for the use of a Subdivision Committee Meeting • November 16, 2000 Page 9 • • Foster: Conklin: McKimmee: Conklin: McKimmee: Hoffman: church in an R-0 district. Did you have any other stuff to add? I did want to point out that we do have a new sign proposed which is illustrated at the corner of East and Dickson Street we are showing a new brick sign. This church is one of the hardest to find in the community and we are trying to make it more obvious. With regard to your sign, you will have to check with our Inspections Division to see if that's allowed. Mike, you happen to be here this morning, in an R-0, what's the maximum sign size? If the monument style is depicted, 16 square feet just in surface area. 10 feet setback. 10 feet setback from the property line. However, most churches use an exemption given for free standing bulletin boards which has different requirements. As long as they are a message board they can't exceed the amount given. There is a conflict of what type of sign it is. Can you work that out before agenda session? Can you figure out what type of sign that is? McKimmee: I'll be happy to work with you on that. Foster: This is not a changeable message board, it's a permanent sign. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: Estes: Does any member of the audience have any comment? COMMISSION DISCUSSION: Estes: MOTION: Ward: Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the Subdivision Committee for motions or discussions. I'll go ahead and make a motion that we forward to full Planning LSD 00-30.00 with the setting of conditions plus the other one that we brought up is the all Dickson Street right-of-way will be in conjunction with the Dickson Street Enhancement Project Subdivision Committee Meeting • November 16, 2000 Page 10 • • approval: We need some kind of letter from Kim on the landscaping agreement and also something about the monument sign before you bring it to us How big is that monument sign now? Foster. The service area is larger than 16. Ward: Is it part of a fence now and that's what you are going to incorporate? Foster: Yes. It's part of the fence. Ward: —Then youarejust putting the -letters on part of the fence? Foster: Right. Ward: Okay. Hoffman: I second the motion and just say that whatever on the sign that you agreed on. Can we grant variances for signs9 Is that within our power? Does that have to go to the Sign Board or can we approve it as part of the Large Scale Development with another condition of approval? Conklin: It would have to go to the Board of Sign Appeals. You can make it more restrictive but if you are going to allow something larger it needs to go to the Board of Sign Appeals. -- Hoffman: It's up to you whether or not you want to go to that. Since I've seconded it, I'll recommend in the second that it go forward with the Subdivision Committee approval to the full Planning Commission. Is everybody clear with this parking lot? Do we all understand? Do we need a curb -cut at the alley or can we just drive across it the way it is? Do we have to approve anything? Conklin: It's all paved right now. Hoffman: It's all existing pretty much to remain and all the work that's going to be confined to the site over here so we don't need any alley improvements? Conklin: Sara and I can take a look at that closer. I don't think there is any additional improvements. Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 11 Hoffman: I understand about the cracked sidewalks but the alley has potholes. Ward: When you come through Planning Commission go ahead and make us a board of materials, exact colors of the brick and a piece of it, a part of the shingles, a color of the shingles of exactly what you are -going to use on it. Just something real simple. Estes: Kim, we have been discussing LSD 00-30.00, that's the St. Paul's Episcopal Church and there were several matters regarding the Tree Preservation Plan and the Landscape Plan. Does any Commissioner have any questions for Kim at this time? Hoffman: I do. We were just wanting you, in your absence, if you could give us a memo before the Planning Commission recommending approval and a part of that was based on your approval of the tree plan. Do you have any comments at this time or do you want to write us a letter about it? Hesse: • - I'll write a letter. I was out on the site a while ago.— It's hard to go out there and see now with all the leaves off but especially some of these trees are in pretty bad shape. Basically, the reason for the removal of a lot of these is that I don't see any way they can put an addition on that site. I can give you a memo to that affect. The drainage situation, we were worried about this tree and getting the drainage past it. Rankins: We are still proposing going down the sidewalk if possible. If we can't do that, then maybe something else. This area out here is too low to bring it that way. It's lower than the flow line. Hesse: We will just have to work on that area So you are going to uncover the sidewalk completely and redo the whole thing? Rankins: The Dickson Street Enhancement is going to do that. Hesse: We'll just have to work with you to get protection measures. That's all I have. Petrie: Are you planning on moving the sewer service out of the tree preservation area? Hesse: There is a tree right here we are showing. Rankins: The way that's shown we can bring that sewer around here. Hesse: I don't know you are hooking into the system here. Subdivision Committee Meeting • November 16, 2000 Page 12 Estes: Thanks Kim. We have a motion and a second and I've abstained. So LSD 00-30.00 will be forwarded onto the full Planning Commission. • • • • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 13 LSD 00-32.00: Large Scale Development (Lots 13-16 Millennium Place) was submitted by Steve DeNoon of Jordan and Associates on behalf of Kirk Elsass of L & E Investments, LLC for lots 13-16 of Millenium Place. The property is zoned C-1, Neighborhood Commercial and contains 1.5 acres. The request is to build 2 office buildings. Estes: The next item on our agenda is LSD 00-33.00. This is a Large Scale Development for Tots 13 and 16 at Millenium Place. Tim, what can you tell us about item number two? Conklin: This property is zoned C-1, Neighborhood Commercial and contains 1.5 acres. They have requested to build two office buildings on this site. Each office building will contain 6,600 square feet with a total of 53 parking spaces. They plan to build this project in two phases and they do have a phase line on this project separating the project in half running north to south. Conditions to address, there are no existing trees on this site. As part of the Millenium Final Plat requirement, they are required to plant 4 inch caliper trees along Millenium Drive. No free-standing sign has been requested therefore a free standing sign will not be permitted without approval from the Subdivision Committee. Planning Commission determination with compliance of Commercial Design Standards With regard to Commercial Design Standards, they do plan to use vinyl siding on the south elevation of the building. Keep in mind that Joyce Boulevard is further to the south from the lots, in between Joyce and the back of this building. We had a similar concern when we looked at the development directly to the northwest of this with regard to use of vinyl siding. At Technical Plat Review I did request that they use the same materials that they are using on the sides and the front of the building. However, they are in disagreement with that recommendation and have requested the vinyl siding. Staff's position is to not allow the vinyl siding, to use the same materials that they are using on the side and in front of the building. The rest of - the conditions are standard. If you have any questions, I would be happy to answer them. Estes: Rutherford: Estes: Petrie: Estes: Thanks Tim. Chuck, do you have anything on the sidewalk issues? They made the corrections that I asked for. Ron, do you have anything for us? No sir. Mike, no signs so you are out. • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 14 McKimmee: I have been contacted about signage. Estes: Alright. Tell us what you have. McKimmee: They are requesting a sign substantially like the entrance placed signs, a triangular column. Apparently there has been a change since I've been contacted. Hoffman: So that's one for each building? Conklin: Wall signs. McKimmee: One per lot. Hoffman: Okay. McKimmee: That is the request. Conklin: The monument sign you are talking about. Yes. McKimmee: They will be in the monument configuration. Edwards: So there is not going to be a monument sign? DeNoon: There will be. I'm sorry. Conklin: Where are they located? DeNoon: My name is Steve DeNoon for Jordan and Associates representing Kirk Elsass. As of yesterday afternoon, fairly late, Kirk informed me he would like to have the possibility of putting a single pylon sign at each drive, located two feet back from the right-of-way and one for each property. I've brought one copy this morning in the rush I've been work with Mike McKimmee as far as the sign size and area We are looking at a total of several square feet and designing it to have thirty-five square feet on each side. Hoffman: These are not pylon signs, these are monument signs. DeNoon: I'm sorry, monument signs. Hoffman: What's the letter in -fill material where the letters are going to be? • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 15 -DeNoon:— '• I'm not -sure yet, it's probably bronze lettef.--l'm-not•sure what he's planning on using there. . Conklin: DeNoon: The background material. The background, dry -vit. The material will be a split faced block like the building and cuffed off with a red brick to match the building structure. Kirk, I sent him a fax of this yesterday but I don't have approval from him. Estes: Kim, do you have anything on landscaping? Hesse: No sir. Estes: Sara, do you have anything? Edwards: No sir. • Estes: The applicant is represented by Steve DeNoon and he has identified himself and been responsive to some questions, do you have any presentation you would like to make? • DeNoon: No sir, other than the siding issue that was brought up. We feel that the siding is in context with the building since we are using siding on the front. We'll have the vinyl socket system around the perimeter of the roof. This is the rear of the building which faces Joyce Street. We have the split -faced block face and we are going to have a pretty wide, probably an 8 inch breeze board around the top that sort of frames this area out. Kirk was going over the materials with Tim, one of the materials would be --siding and the issue is -that there would not be any metal -siding which dominates the main facade and of course this is not the main facade. Also, the reason we are using the same material is to help justify the cost of the building. As you know Kirk has put out quite a few funds on the drainage structures, drainage ditches and which the overall budget is sort of shot so we are having to compensate in some areas and it's a little bit less expensive material. The siding we are using is not just a real cheap vinyl siding, it's a deep groove siding, probably 4 or 4 '/ inch grooves on center. We would be happy to bring a sample of that to you. I've used some of this on my own residence and it's a durable substance. All in all the total building is in context with the buildings to the northwest that were just completed that you passed for us. Other than that, I really don't have any other comments. Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 16 PUBLIC DISCUSSION: Estes: Thank you Steve. Is there any member of the audience or a member of the public that would like to comment on this proposed Large Scale Development? COMMISSION DISCUSSION: Estes: Seeing none, I will bring it back to the Subdivision Committee for discussion and for motions. Steve, let me ask this, this vinyl siding is on the south side, is that correct? DeNoon: Yes sir. That's correct. Estes: What is the elevation? In other words, on the Joyce Street side and coming from the south on 45, what are we going to see? DeNoon: Coming from Joyce Street? Hoffman: On Joyce Street. DeNoon: From Joyce Street you would be looking at the south of the building on the side that the vinyl siding is on. Estes: My memory of the property having toured it several times by myself is that the topo goes up to the north, is that correct? DeNoon: More to the west on this site. The total site does rise to the north. This terrain pretty much follows Joyce Street. Ward: On the other buildings that we had up there on five and six, our recommendation was that anything that was going to be seen at all from Joyce Street was going to have to have split -faced block and brick and all that kind of stuff, which you agreed to go ahead and do. I think this is going to be seen right there on Joyce Street. This is too nice of a development not to have it first class. I know I won't be able to go on with that vinyl siding on that site. There might be some other things to dress it up but it doesn't meet anything that we are talking about. It looks like It's a box like structure, there's nothing to break the whole side of the building back there and I think it's going to be too visible. Hoffman: I want to echo Lee's comments and then further say, don't we have some kind of • • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 17 screening, landscape screening requirement in addition to when you have a site visible from a street in the back of the building? Don't we require that? Because usually, what I'm getting at is in context with mitigating the back of a building on several things we have taken site lines and said put in landscaping and add brick to minimize the look of the unarticulated wall surface. Conklin: We have done that in the past. That has come up as we looked at this as how do you mitigate something like this that's been proposed. We don't have anything by ordinance between different residential districts that we do. Keep in mind when we looked at this one, he had a front, front and this was a side and a side. This one happens to be on a curve like this and you got front, side and, in my opinion, another side over here. This one is really not bad because as you are driving north on Millenium you are going to be seeing this elevation. It's not like this back elevation of these buildings. I mean you are really going to see it. Overall, I'll compliment Mr. DeNoon here and that is he's designed all the projects of this development and with regard to coming up with a unified theme and compatibility, he's done a great job. Hoffman: Yes. The front looks great. Ward: One of the things we try to stay away from large blank unarticulated wall surfaces and I don't know what else that could be called. Hoffman: I can only give you examples of other buildings that front they bypass or something like that. What's the other street where all the Lindsey stuff is and CMN? Conklin: Futrall. Hoffman: No Shiloh. The front of the buildings are facing that and the backs are facing the bypass or whatever it is there and they are all brick. I think that you really need to take a hard look at it and what my concern is that it comes to the Planning Commission like this, two of three of us expressed our opinion. Ward: This is too upscale of an area If this was in another area south of town somewhere. Estes: I agree and concur with what Commissioner Ward and Commissioner Hoffman said so you can make that two of three, three of three Steve, let me ask you about, this is lots 13 through 16, what about connectivity between, have you got two buildings out there is that what you are doing? • • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 18 DeNoon: Yes sir: Estes: What about connectivity between the buildings? Is that going to be possible? DeNoon: As far as inclosures, no they will be two separate buildings that are both separated by a common parking lot there. Hoffman: Any connectivity to other parking lots? DeNoon: Probably not because we are bordered on the east by a 30 foot utility and drainage easement and it would take a great deal of expense to try to go over that drainage ditch. We've already been through that on lot one and it was thousands of dollars. We wouldn't have to do the whole ditch but that project it was close to $20,000. Estes: Because of that utility easement we are not going to have any connectivity between 13 and 12? DeNoon: That's correct. Hoffman: What about back in here where the dumpsters are? DeNoon: Once again we've got a concrete drainage ditch there. It's a drainage and utility easement that I don't think we can cross within the budget. Lot one, I'm not sure with the existing property we have planned for that development will line up with where the dumpster spaces are located. I think it would be hard to connect lots one and two with this project. Drainage is the main thing. The expense of putting in a culvert to cross -these drainage structures is really just out of the question at this time. Estes: What's the problem with some connectivity between lots two and fifteen or sixteen or lot two and lot fourteen to try to get some connectivity into this project? DeNoon: Once again it's the expense of putting in and the expense of a drainage structure. Conklin: The issue is there is a concrete drainage swale here and a concrete drainage swale here wrapping both the south property line down this one and this one. They would have to build a culvert to get across. Estes: I see the drainage easement on the east but where is the second drainage easement? Subdivision Committee Meeting • November 16, 2000 Page 19 • • DeNoon: It's along the south line: It's really just a utility easement.- It's not a drainage easement. Petrie: That was only put in to drain these parking lots. Hoffman: I -guess the drainage easement is over here on this project. Conklin: How wide is that Ron? Petrie: It's fairly small. I think they show it here on the plan. DeNoon: It actually stops up here around lot 16. Petrie: I don't think you would be talking about a very big pipe if you crossed it from the south. Hoffman: — We are not talking about building it right now, just put an area where you could eventually connect when the other properties develop. DeNoon: It is in an easement and if we get to design lot one, I would sure like to consider connecting. Conklin: Typically, if we were going to make the connection we would make them build it up to the property line. Hoffman: That's what I mean. If that property line doesn't hit that ditch then he doesn't have to worry about it. DeNoon: It should be on the property. Conklin: Then you have the issue with the dumpsters. We need to plan where to put those. Hoffman: What do you all think? Estes: I would like to see some connectivity, I think that's real important for obvious plain spoken reasons, the traffic patters, traffic circulation and particularly when you have a street like this. The 45 is so highly traveled. 1 understand the utility easement issues but I'm still struggling a little bit because I don't quite understand. Ron, what do we have to the south? • • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 20 Petrie: It's a fairly small concrete ditch. It was only designed to pick up parking lot 2, half of it drains back to the north. It really only picks up about half of lot 2. I wanted a way to get that water back to this ditch. It's across these other lots. That's one reason why I required that concrete ditch back there. There's not really much drainage going back _there_and_it'_s.a.fairly .small ditch. — . _ _ Hoffman: They could put a pipe? Petrie: I'm sure an 18 inch pipe to carry it. DeNoon: —As far as connection, that's fine we could plan on it at this time, we could say that would be a common access easement that connects from where the dumpsters are over to that property line or something to that nature. Hoffman: Just put the dumpsters on the side? DeNoon: Maybe at a 45 degree or something like that. Moving the dumpsters to the east of the property, that's drops off in that drainage ditch several feet, it's just a steep slope and we couldn't put the dumpster over to the drainage easement anyway. Hoffman: I'm talking about right up here. DeNoon: Yes, ma'am, that's what I was thinking. Maybe at a 45 there and maybe even one over here and just for now calling that an access easement. On lot one, the property line is adjusted, I think it's more over in this area so I'm worried about connecting this with a future property line in that area. Will they line up? Hoffman: In thinking about connectivity, this is a pretty good size development and it can work with the future design. I think it's a good idea. We were just talking about where the proposed parking was going to come and I guess it's going to come within on lot one and would come within a few feet of this area or maybe this could even be moved over this way. That would wipe out these parking spaces, never mind Anyway I generally think it's a good idea when we have a big development going in so we don't have people going back out on the street to get around to this other business if that's possible. Ward: The only thing I have to say about connectivity, I see no problem trying to connect this way but to be honest about it, these are going to be strictly offices like oral surgeon or dentist, it's going to be going to a place for a certain reason, CPA or something. It's • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 21 not like it's going to be retail. If this was all retail; like little shops and so on. It's all office. Ward: The only thing that's retail or has a chance to be retail is out here. All this is just going -to be special office. Hoffman: That makes sense. Ward: If this was all retail then yes we need connectivity for the whole thing. -Hoffman: - I thought we •had that Perfect Partners place in somewhere. Conklin: This is zoned C-1 but I think what you are saying is because of the location. Ward: It's going to be professional offices. Hoffman: Well that's a different animal so unless there's like a Collier's Drug Store proposed for here and the people would be needing to go to something like that. Ward: There could be one put out here on Crossover but it's not in here where they are trying to get to it. I don't think it's quite as important in office buildings but a little retail strip center. Hoffman: Can you clue us in on what's coming? DeNoon: Nothing is certain at this time. Unofficially, I think he's looking at a dentist that may go there. As far as the rest of it, there is not really plans but, as far as I know, he is looking at professional office, no retail. The buildings are where they could be divided up into 1,500 square foot units. It will be 1,500 to 3,100 on up to 6,400 square feet. The traffic, we are not planning on a lot of traffic in the complex. Ward: I like the idea of connectivity. If we can go ahead and at least plan for it, that's great. I'm Just saying I'm not sure in this particular subdivision, it's going to be a big deal because I feel like the use is going to be specialty type of offices only. DeNoon: We don't know what's going to happen in the rest of the C-1 at this time further to the east. There is a better opportunity for connectivity there. • Ward: That's exactly what I'm more interested in personally. I think that's a great place for it. • • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 22 Hoffman: If you want to just show a proposed, are you talking about over here then to show a proposed parking lot extension if that goes? DeNoon: That's a drainage structure. Hoffman: I know. Estes: It would have to be here where we were talking about moving the dumpsters, opening that area up and have connectivity to lot one. Hoffman: I don't want to put it if it's not going to be used. If this is all going to be other office and whatnot. Ward: We know that one's going to be Perfect Partners. You've got the Perfect Partners store in front there on Joyce. Hoffman: You are going to be showing you got a parking lot existing on this side of this line and nothinghere yet right? DeNoon: Right here is where we are trying to make our connection. Conklin: It still could work. You could put an access drive behind the building. DeNoon: But see the dumpsters are there. There is no place to relocate the dumpsters for this building. We proposed to have a dumpster here for this building. I may have access over here that we are not using. If they don't use that as parking then we have a better chance to make a connection there. Conklin: It's hard to tell. If they use it for parking then you just put an access drive to that. DeNoon: I said we can call it a common access easement twenty-four foot wide right now. Wait until lot two develops and then try to make that connect a little at that time. Hoffman: If you are willing to do that, I think it's a good thing and then when this other lot develops and becomes feasible, you can take it off when that comes through like as an administrative item or something like that. DeNoon: This is dead territory right now, it's just used for drainage setback with utilities. • • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 23 Hoffman: I don't want to be punitive about it if it's not going to be used. Estes: Any further discussion? Any motions? Hoffman: I'll make a motion to forward this to Planning Commission subject to all staff comments and that the Subdivision Committee recommends further review of the Commercial Design Standards on the south side of the buildings. Ward: I'll go ahead and second that. I have no problem allowing the one monument sign per building to the specs that we have here. Estes: Does your motion include showing the common access easement, twenty-four feet? Hoffman: It does, if that's agreeable. DeNoon: Yes ma'am. • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 24 AD 00-42.00: Administrative Item (Tri-State Precast, pp 756) was submitted by The City of Fayetteville on behalf of Tri-State Precast. The request is determination of street improvement for McCollum Avenue. Estes: Our next item is an administrative item AD 00-42.00 submitted by the City of Fayetteville on behalf of Tri-State Precast. The request is determination of street improvements for McCollum Avenue. Tim, could you tell us what we need to know about this? I'm going to pass the Chair to Mr. Ward while I go get us some coffee. Conklin: Sure, Randy Allen our Street Superintendent contacted me several weeks ago regarding Tri-State Precast: -It's now called -Sherlock Industries. That's on McCollum Road which is off of Willoughby Road in south Fayetteville, just north of Drake Field. The issue is creating a "T" intersection at McCollum Road and Willoughby Road and - paving the existing roadway at McCollum Road. When Tri-State Precast was built, they put $35,000 into escrow here at the City of Fayetteville. That amount is now near $50,000 with accrued interest. They are willing to use this money for the mentioned improvements to McCollum Road if the City would approve and perform the work. Our Street Superintendent has no problems doing these improvements, however looking at the file, I found the discussion about when that work did occur that the City would cost share that work and make McCollum Avenue a standard city street. The City of Fayetteville doesn't have the money, in my understanding, to share in this. Tell me if I'm wrong Ron. Randy Allen has requested to use this money to make the street as wide as possible and to do as much intersection improvements as possible up to the entrance of Tri-State Precast. Hoffman: Are you talking about connecting here? Conklin: Yes, Tri-State Precast. Hoffman: They want to do what? Conklin: South of Willoughby Road. The issue is we have had the money since 1994, we haven't spent it. The Street Superintendent would like to spend it and the conditions when we talked about it was to cost share with the City and make a standard street to their entrance up to Willoughy Road on McCollum Road He would like to just take the money and build what he can for $50,000 and spend it. That's the request. Hoffman: Instead of going on further south? • • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 25 Conklin: Instead of trying to find money here at the City to make it a standard city street. Petrie: The issue is all the money for cost shares has been spent for this year's budget. —Ward: -What kind of money are you talking about? Petrie: This is the first I've seen of this. Conklin: I apologize Ron. He went directly to me with this and I didn't get a chance to talk with you about it. Randy Allen is out for three weeks so he was not able to attend this meeting this morning. I'm assuming it would be at least as much as what has been escrowed, another $50,000 at least, I would think, if not more: We have to acquire a right-of-way. I'm not sure about utility relocations. There is ditches on both sides of the road, that's one of the issues. They would probably be doing storm drainage work to get the road wider It would probably be more than $50,000. What he is trying to do is use the existing road base which is a gravel road and improve that road and intersection to the best of his ability with $50,000 this year Hoffman: This is just a concrete company? Conklin: Yes, they make precast concrete products. Hoffman: That's the only traffic using this road really? Conklin: There's a single-family home and then there's a mobile home further back, back behind Drake Field, it comes down to the Ernest Lancaster Drive and heads directly and it's a mobile home way back in there in Washington County that uses this drive. Anything we do is going to improve the drive from how it's currently constructed right now and it hasn't been improved for five years. Ward: The project is a $250,000 project and you just go in there and kind of waste money to not really improve it that much, it would be better to get it done and I can see using $50,000 and getting the basics as far as you can but just going in there and patching something, that's not going to solve anything. Conklin: I think he wants to do some intersection improvements on McCollum and Willoughby. Right now it's somewhat dangerous with the big semi trailer tractor trucks going in there. It's been five years. If you want to wait until Randy is available and I get more information, that's fine, we don't have to make a decision this morning on it. It's one of Subdivision Committee Meeting • November 16, 2000 Page 26 • • -- those things I added to the agenda -two weeks -ago and didn't really get enough information I guess to you guys. Ward: I would just hate to waste $50,000. Conklin: I could have Randy Allen draw up a plan of what his proposal is for that intersection and street and give you a better idea of how that $50,000 will be spent. Why don't we just table it and I'll get back with Randy when he gets back and have him draw something up and bring it to another Subdivision Committee. Hoffman: --Can you notify the two people affected that use the road. I don't see any point in doing anything. It makes sense to me to do something to make the intersection safer. I don't want to just say yes spend $50,000. Ward: _ The whole thing is we will spend $50,000 and not have anything to show for it. Hoffman: I'll make a motion to table. Estes: I'll second. Ward: I'll concur. Subdivision Committee Meeting • November 16, 2000 Page 27 • • Administrative Item: Glennwood (sign) The request is to approve a Free Standing sign under construction. Estes: The next item on our agenda is an Administrative Item. The request is to approve a -Free Standing sign under construction. Tim, what do we need to know about item number four? Conklin: I have brought this to you this morning because I feel the Planning Commission needs to approve all signs that are associated with Large Scale Developments and with this case, we had some mis-communications here at the City between our division and Inspections Division. The applicant, Mr. Don Cozart, the sign is installed, it's a joint identification sign. Glennwood Shopping Center is a shopping center on Highway 45/265 Harp's, Madame Woo's, McDonald's, Cafe Santa Fe. The sign is there. I think it's important that when we do have free-standing signs that are installed that they are shown on our Large Scale Development plans and that they are approved by the Planning Commission or Subdivision Committee and therefore, even though this is constructed and there's names of businesses on the signs out there, I think you need to approve it this morning. I'm not recommending denial. We held Kantz Place Large Scale with the WalMart Neighborhood Market and all those businesses to that one WalMart monument sign on Highway 265. It makes it hard for me when they come into my office if we just allow people to build signs on other large scales without getting approval so that's why they are before you this morning. Mike McKimmee is here with our Inspections Division, he probably could give you more information on this. Estes: Mike, what do you have for us? McKimmee:This sign was discussed -for quite a while before the construction. In fact, last year, I made it a point to research all the history of the minutes on this and found no items referencing signage. The subdivision also came in at the time the Commercial Sign Standards Ordinance was first adopted and seeing no prohibitions for it I worked with them to find an approved sign that would meet the ordinance and went ahead and signed off on the permit. That's where we are at now. The sign has been built. It's sitting before you. Conklin: I agree with Mike's statement about the Commercial Design Standards on this project. The only point I would like to make on that and Mr. Cozart is here and is aware of it too, we went through so much with he volunteered to guarantee his development would look a certain way and presented elevations and we talked about McDonald's and Taco Bell and all the different ones. That's why I feel it's really important, even though • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 28 this did come in before Commercial Design Standards, you were presented an overall unified design theme and colored elevations and what materials were going to be used and where the signs were going to be located and that's why I feel it's important that you need to approve this freestanding joint identification area sign. Estes: Mr. Cozart, do you have anything you would like to add? Could you come up here and say your name so we can pick you up on this recording device? Cozart: I'm Don Cozart. Only a couple of things. We have tried to make that shopping center meet the original design standards. I think it's fairly decent looking shopping center. -It's been a lot longer in development than I would like it to and I can't understand why we pay an architect $62,000 to leave a sign out of the large scale in the first place. The fact is she did so we are just where we are. We came to the City and explained the problem to them. I've got basically twenty tenants out there that jump me every day all year long about why they can't be seen from Highway 45. We came to the City and discussed it and Ken submitted all the stuff and basically, I don't have any more to say than that. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: Estes: Is there any member of the audience that would have any comment regarding this administrative item regarding the Glennwood sign? COMMISSION DISCUSSION: Estes: Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the Subdivision Committee for discussion and motions. Hoffman: I have no problem with this sign and I also want to deal fairly and equitably with the other center across the other way so with this, I'll open the door for them to come back and request revisions for their sign. Conklin: Actually last January, this issue did come up between this shopping center and we also talked about bringing Kantz Place back together both at the same time so you could deal with them equally. In my opinion, yes, I think if you are going to let them have a free standing joint identification sign, I would be recommending a free standing joint identification sign for the other center also. Hoffman: It's just two major shopping centers and I want to try to be equitable to everybody. If • they can come back, I'll approve the sign. • • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 29 Conklin:-- - - Ward: Cozart- Hesse: Cozart: Hoffman: Ward: Estes: Hoffman: Conklin: McKimmee: -Mike and I have talked about that this year and I would not be surprised if they are not back before you. Where is this sign located? You know where the big tree is where the Bank of Fayetteville just opened last night? Right there. We met with Mike several times. My tenants don't actually like where it because of that tree. They are hoping that tree dies. I didn't want to say that out loud. You just did. That's not my thought. It's back forty feet. I'II make a motion to approve this sign as shown and located. I'll second. Just briefly, let me say this, I don't like this situation. 1 don't like a large scale development being approved without any signage. Then there is some ancillary issues that we must consider, one is that Mr. McKimmee approved it and signed off on it so there an estoppel issue, I don't see how we can go back and change that. I'm concerned because we were pretty hard on the development over on the northwest corner of WalMart, we insisted they have a monument sign. I'll vote for this with the understanding that they will give some notification of what we have done and they will have the opportunity to come back because otherwise we have a due process issue. I don't know how we ever ended up in this mess, I suppose that each of us need to accept -some responsibility with the approval of a -large scale development and I didn't ask any questions about signs. In all of this mess I think we have to accept at least 50% of the responsibility as the Subdivision Committee. With that all said I'll concur with those conditions. If you will please notify the folks over there on the northwest corner and tell them what we have done and if they want to knock down that nice monument sign. They already have installed their sign. I thought about that, does that mean that they can come back because they have an option to put up another freestanding sign? Mike, we talked about this last January, did they contact you? The Lindsey Group contacted me with a joint identification sign request for that • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 30 Estes: Conklin: Hoffman: McKimmee: Conklin: Hoffman: Estes: subdivision. We found that they were bound by agreements made previously and were not able to do that because of agreement with the Planning Commission. There were no agreements specified to the signage for the other subdivisions. Their sign is substantially like their request The request of their sign is substantially like Mr. Cozart's sign. It is a two pylon multi -tenant with various decorative features to it. It is substantially the same type of sign. We have a monument sign modification for February which does allow subdivision signs and joint identification signs which are in excess of what you have been approving. These are the ordinances, they come to me and ask me what can I get a sign. This is what I tell them. I have to go by your decision as a Planning Commission if you specify. So I would recommend and ask that you specify if you have a position on signs that you ask for drawings Please be very particular. It will help me in my job and help me work with Tim much better. Thank you Mike. There is no question what this Subdivision Committee and the Planning Commission overlooked the detail. That detail was the signage for this project and I think we need to accept that responsibility. We as staff we ask if there is any signs. We try to make sure they understand. We had those conditions this morning. We ask please show your signs, if you don't show a sign, it will have to approved. I take the position that, if they don't plan a sign and it's not shown on there, doesn't mean that we said"We don't care if you have a point identification sign." It means that one wasn't approved. If you don't show it you didn't get it approved. That's the position I've taken. Mike disagrees with that somewhat saying that if you don't address anoint identification sign and they come in. That's sort of like addressing connectivity, we need to think of the project overall and the signage is a big part of it and it could be that Mr. McKimmee could be included in Subdivision Committee when we have large scale developments. I'll be happy to. He is invited. We send all the plats to Inspections Division every two weeks. My real question that I wanted to make clear here is that the other subdivision has a monument sign already on erected. Does that preclude them? Do they have to tear that sign down to put up a pylon sign? Excuse me but if I could also follow that. Where do they want to put this pylon dual identification pylon sign? • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 31 McKimmee: This is going to be up on the curve. On Commerce Drive right there. Hoffman: No it's the Phyllis Johnson Memorial Road. McKimmee: Yes. That's Phyllis Johnson Memorial Road. The request is up there on the shopping center proper on top of the curve. Estes: Is that on 45? McKimmee: No, it would be off of 45. It would be above where the new bank is. Estes: As much as I don't like that, I'm afraid because of due process considerations, that's where we are headed. Cozart: Can I ask one last question? Estes: Sure. Cozart• I'm not here about the other shopping center, I'm here about mine. I'm trying to make a living Just as they are. If for example, they put up a freestanding sign that lists their tenants and they keep their monument sign, do we get to put up a monument sign? Hoffman: That was my next question. Cozart: I'm not trying to be hard about it. I didn't even think of it. Estes: - - -Don''-t-push it okay? — Cozart• I'm not pushing it but it's a very competitive corner, let me tell you. Hoffman: It is. The reason I brought it up is because if you have separate lots and correct me if I'm wrong, you can have one freestanding sign per lot. McKimmee: At a shopping center, all those business doing businesses doing business under one name, and get one freestanding sign and it's their option to make it a Joint identification sign or not. Hoffman: We put a burden on the other shopping center for already having erected a sign that • they are not going to want when they can find out they can have a bigger one. • • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 32 Estes: McKimmee Cozart: Hoffman: Cozart Hoffman: McKimmee: Hoffman: Estes: Hoffman: McKimmee: Hoffman: McKimmee: They are going to get a bigger one. They will be vying for exposure. I don't have any problems with what they do. My concern is for me not for him. It needs to be equal. How much is a monument sign? The one we are doing which is a very simple sign, it isn't neon and it's decent looking but it's nothing elaborate, it's $12,000. That doesn't count the electrical or the individual name placements on the sign. How much is a monument sign? Signs can range anywhere from roughly $1,000 for a modest monument sign a little block sign. The Appleby's package was $17,000. The mall was $29,500. Real money. I'm going to say in all fairness he should get a monument sign because of the cost that they already spent on theirs or something. I have to think about it but it's like let's say they spent $10,000 on building a monument sign. Of course they will want a bigger sign. Instead of making them waste their monument sign. Are you saying Mr. Cozart gets one monument sign? I'm going that way. - The ordinance gives one per lot. If it's just an area identification sign, that's the only case they can have two signs. As far as joint identification signs. If they want to make it just the name of the center, they can set up two signs. The other place could change the name on their sign and make it an identification sign? It's conceivable that could be worked out but it has to, again more particular with the ordinances, it's very difficult to administer these people's creativity as you might encounter here. Anyway, I couldn't recommend in the future to say they could have two signs. The ordinance doesn't provide for that. • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 33 Cozart: I'm not going to be back up here bitching at you guys aboutwhat that other shopping center does, however, we have an identification problem on Highway 265 where Taco Bell is and the video store and McDonald's coming in from the south being that identified as Crossroads Village Shopping Center. I can envision us wanting to put up an identification sign or monument sign that just says Crossroads Village Shopping Center on 265 south. We've known all along we were going to put up one sign, we are going to identify our tenants and I let me tenant's choose to put this on Highway 45, that's their choice. They could have put it over on the other side of the shopping center. McKimmee: I pushed them pretty hard for a monument sign but the ordinance gave the option. Cozart: I appreciate it. Hoffman: You see where I'm headed though. We are going to have to have another discussion separately for the other people. You are approved. Cozart: I appreciate your concern and bringing that up. Thank you all. I'm sorry, we didn't try to do anything out of the procedure really. I wish again three or four years ago when we first started developing this thing we paid an architect, I'm not going to tell you who it is, I paid $62,000 and didn't have a sign. Hoffman: It took a long time to get the unified development theme for your project from that particular person and I do remember. • • • Subdivision Committee Meeting November 16, 2000 Page 34 Administrative Item: LSD 00-20.00 The request is to discuss the tree preservation on Cornerstone. Estes: Hesse: The last item is an Administrative Item LSD 00-20.00. As an introduction Ms. Hesse called me to discuss this matter. She is prepared to handle this administratively. I suggested that it come on as an administrate item. I understand that Ms. Hesse then talked to Commissioner Hoffman and Commissioner Hoffman concurred so here we are. Kim what do we need to know about this? Basically what happened was this walnut tree. The reason why we are here today is because this does happen. What I don't want is a habit of the contractors being aware —of this where the hurt the tree seriously during •construction so they can remove it. This is the tree that we are discussing today. When this was brought through there was a gas line running through the middle here. As part of this development, they had to relocate that gas line. The gas company came in and trenched right here, right next to the tree. The tree is going to die and is not in very good shape right now, between the trenching and the drought we had and the fact that right now it's at the drip line but there's no root. It's cut all the way around that tree as part of the construction for that. Lyndy Lindsey called me and asked me to remove this tree at this point. He is willing to replace with 30 2 inch pin oaks. I confirm that, we are talking 30 trees. They really want to remove that tree. I can understand that. The cost of removing this tree is going to be quite a bit more with that building right there. They are going to have to slowly remove it. It's probably a safety hazard as it is right now. My recommendation is to allow them to remove it and to accept 30 trees and in the future during our ordinance revision we are going to draft that a different way. Hoffman: To make it real punitive. Hesse: Yes. To make it costly to replace trees prior to preservation that die during construction. Hoffman: What about size? Those 2 inches hardly ever last through drought conditions and we have had problems with getting replacement. Can we get fewer bigger trees? Hesse: We've discussed this at great length during our Ordinance Review Meetings We had a horticulturist there and I agree that 8, 4, or 2 inch trees within ten years are all the same size. A tree bigger and this is very evident on Joyce, they were required to put in 6 inch trees, those trees have not grown yet. A tree goes into shock and the bigger the tree is, the longer that shock so they don't grow for several years. A smaller tree would begin to grow right away. Really a two inch tree can catch up with a four inch tree within Subdivision Committee Meeting • November 16, 2000 Page 35 • three or four years in size, if it's watered. They are not going to use the thirty trees within there own development, they are giving them to the City for us to use in public rights-of-way. That's another part of this recommendation, I would like to ask that we put those at the two middle schools but I know that is not public land. The two middle schools are open, they are under temporary occupancy permit and when I speak with the Assistant Superintendent, they don't have a budget left to plant anything. I don't know if those two middle schools will ever be able to plant. I would like to provide 15 trees each for each middle school and think that the parent teachers can plant them and maintain them. Estes: -- Kim -did I understand that there are 30 replacement trees on the Cornerstone Project that are not going in. Hesse: The 30 replacement trees that he has offered for this rare tree is not for this development. - Estes: He's not taking away any replacement trees on this project? Hesse: He's not taking any back. I have to compliment Lindsey Construction with the fact that they have put a lot of landscaping in these developments above and beyond what we require. Hoffman: Do they need to put another one back where that tree was? Hesse: I think they probably will with what they have here. I'm sure they will fill that in. Hoffman: I think that sounds like a great idea. I don't know who has to approve it. Ward: I don't know that we can actually do that. Estes: I think Kim can. Hesse: You mean the location of the 30 trees? Hoffman: Yes. Basically trading off, I like the concept. I would say I would approve replacement trees in the number of 30 trees for this project but does the Subdivision Committee have the authority to say "Go put them on the middle school."? • Ward: I think we say we leave it to her discretion. Subdivision Committee Meeting • November 16, 2000 Page 36 Hoffman: Thenjust do it: Ward: I don't think we need to talk about middle schools. I think we are going to say we'll take thirty two inch caliper trees for the one dying walnut tree as replacement and use your discretion as to where they go. Estes: Is that a motion? Ward: That's a motion. Estes: Maybe in your motion you could say something about the trees being placed within Fayetteville Public School lands so that we are not leaving this within public lands and then Kim is not in conformance. Ward: I think we can take that all out and just leave at her discretion. Estes: Just to be placed within the city limits to the Landscape Administrator's discretion. • Ward: Yes. Estes: That will work. Hoffman: I seconded that by the way and that's great. • Estes: I'll concur. Is there any new business? Old business? The Thursday, November 16, 2000, meeting of the Fayetteville City Planning Commission Subdivision Committee is now adjourned until the next regularly called meeting.