Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-03-18 - Minutes• • • MINUTES OF A MEETING OF TECHNICAL PLAT REVIEW A meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee was held on Wednesday, March 18, 1998, at 9:00 a.m. in room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. UTILITY REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT: Dennis Burrack with SWEPCO, Richard Evans with Arkansas Western Gas Co, Kevin Leflar with TCA Cable, Andy Calloway with Southwestem Bell, and Mike Phipps with Ozarks Electric. STAFF PRESENT: Alett Little, Jim Beavers, Beth Sandeen, Chuck Rutherford, Tim Conklin, and Debra Humphrey ITEM: PP9$-1.00: PRELIMINARY PLAT (WEDINGTON PLACE, PHASE II) NORTH OF WEDINGTON DRIVE AND WEST OF SHILOH DRIVE Submitted by 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 C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 32.36 acres. Comments from the following were presented: Ms. Little noted Aspen Drive had been changed to Timberline due to the reason that Fayetteville already had an Aspen Drive, and had checked with our Fire Chief who was in agreement to changing to Timberline. STAFF: Solid Waste Division- Cheryl Zotti-443-3400 Street Width: Inadequate - Steamboat Drive appears to dead-end. The Solid Waste Division needed to have the ability to tum vehicles around. The current dead-end feature of this drive eliminates a turn -around option for our vehicles. This drive needs a cul-de-sac which gives a 40' turning radius. Ms. Little stated that we are not concerned with this requirement because Lot 4 had been charged with the construction of both Timberline and Steamboat and with entrance of absence of development of Lot 4, the street would not be built, and she has asked this information be given to her and this should alleviate this problem. Applicant stated he had made a note to her accommodations would be made for a temporary turn around spot if this did not happen. Otherwise, we still expect Summit to develop on coordination on the streets. Landscape Administrator- Beth Sandeen-575-8308 Protection fencing for tree (14" Oak) must be installed prior to construction activity for Timberline Drive. Contact Beth Sandeen at 575-8308 for inspection of fencing before beginning work. Guarantee per 159.34 will include 7 replacement trees. These trees must be installed prior to final plat approval or guarantee must be posted, or at large scale. 0 Ms. Sandeen stated that if the applicant wished to waive this requirement to the large scale development, this is an option. If applicant wanted to defer the 7 replacement trees to the large scale development, make a note on the plat to that effect. 0 Ms. Sandeen responded that she was satisfied with the tree protection conditions, and the only one needed 31 • • • Minutes of Technical Plat Review Meeting March 18, 1998 Page 2 to be protected was along Timberline. 0 Applicant stated they would take the deferral to the large scale development. Sidewalk and Trails Coordinator- Chuck Rutherford -575-8291 1. Sidewalks would need to be 6 feet with 6 feet greenspaces are shown on both sides of Timberline Drive and Steamboat Drive does meet the requirement. 2. A 5 foot sidewalk is already in-place along Wedington Drive. Sidewalks shall be continuous through the driveways. ❑ Applicant would make this revision on the drawing to reflect this requirement. Traffic -Perry Franklin- 575-8228 Change name of street from Aspen to Timberline. Planning -Dawn Warrick -575-8262 Ms. Little noted under Item G it was not time to give the color -rendered elevations. However, it was time to make applicant aware that under Commercial Design Standards should have a unified theme be determined with this preliminary plat for the entire development. ❑ In response to applicant's request whether to wait until large scale development, Ms. Little stated this may need to be put in the covenants so that the first developer set it for the entire rest of lot. ❑ Applicant inquired regarding being specific at the time of final platting, and Ms. Little noted yes. 2. Add note to plat - no curb cuts from Wedington with the exception of Taboe, Steamboat and Timberline street. 3. Improvement/assessment for Wedington widening project needs to be discussed which would be $66,559.39. ❑ Based on frontage of 1067.17 feet x 14 x $4.55 is the formula used for the assessment, is paid at final plat at 100% and is an escrow or a bond to the City. ❑ Applicant inquired after building roads and everything else is done and bring final plat in for filing, then a check is delivered. ❑ Ms. Little responded this was correct. ❑ This is something Jeff I'm not sure how much you and Steve discussed it but when I initially briefed Steve he did not have a problem with doing that, but he did express if there was going to be a widening project he might prefer to do it up front. ❑ Talked to the Highway Department is opposed to us having the developer widen Wedington in advance of them preparing plans because they would have to come back and tear it out. ❑ Talk with the Highway Department and if they agree that is fine, otherwise, cannot make a determination to that effect. ❑ Mr. Beavers stated that in December of last year the Council agreed to go 50/50 with the State on the widening of Wedington from 71 to Meadowlands Drive, but there was no time frame discussed. He further stated when this process with Winwood Shopping Center and the highway department reviewed and approved their plans, and now they are coming in and are going to tear it out. Mr. Beavers stated he will make a recommendation to the Planning Commission not to allow this. 3Z Minutes of Technical Plat Review Meeting March 18, 1998 Page 3 3. A connection between Steamboat and Timberline will be sought at time of further development of this subdivision. ❑ Applicant inquired about when the City would be looking for the connection between Timberline and Steamboat and Ms. Little stated with development of Lot 8 and 3R. 4. Screening requirement as noted on plat; signage to be addressed for entire development (see applicant note in file); Lots IR, 2, 3R, 5 & 6 are affected by the Design Overlay District as shown on plat; all existing and proposed utilities shall be placed underground per PC decision; Commercial Design Standards compliance required for all C-2 development within subdivision; Large Scale Development approval required for every lot (lot 4 LSD previously approved). Fire- Mickey Jackson -575-8364 Spacing for fire hydrants on Steamboat - center one needs to move to the south. Engineering- Jim Beavers- 444-3418 General: 1. All designs are subject to the City's latest design criteria (water, sewer, streets and drainage). Review for plat approval is not approval of public improvements and all improvements are subject to further review at the time construction plans are submitted. 2. Be reminded that lots cannot be sold until there is an approved final plat and all improvements (streets, water, sewer, sidewalks ...) are completed in accordance with the "Guarantees in lieu..." ordinance. ❑ There was some discussion concerning Bruce Adams building the streets, and applicant stated Mr. Adams does not want to build the streets until he has bought the land and wanted to do the streets as part of his financing, due to tax credits, etc. ❑ Ms. Little responded that Mr. Adams had discussed this and that he has requested the City to say it is an off-site assessment fee for tax credit. She further stated that our regulations had not provided for a situation in this regard, and this would need to be worked out with the City Council and obtain a waiver of the ordinance. 3. Clarify that phase one includes all water/sewer to serve lot 4. Water: 1. 8 inch water line, generally as shown - additional coordination at detention ponds will be required. 2. Minimum easement (or combination of accessible ROW and easement) widths for water lines shall be 20 feet. Minimum easement width when the water line is in a general utility easement or in a water and sewer easement will be 25 feet. Wider easements may be necessary to provide 1:1 trench slopes for water and sewer mains. 3. Fire protection and fire hydrant locations to meet the Fire Chief's request. 33 • • • Minutes of Technical Plat Review Meeting March 18, 1998 Page 4 Sanitary Sewer: 1. There will be a fee equivalent to $200 per R-1 lot assessed for improvements in the Hamestring basin. At the time of the first final plat (September 23, 1996) for this property it was noted that the fee for lots 1 and 2 only where collected at that time ($2,560.00). The sanitary sewer fee for Lot 4, proposed as apartments, was assessed an equivalent fee based upon units (132 units at $67 = $8,844). If that project has been canceled, or any new project is proposed for lot 4, then the equivalent fee must be determined and assessed. The fee for the remaining property, proposed lots 3,5,6,7 and 8 is still required and should be collected at the time of further development of these lots based upon proposed usage. The plat should clearly note this requirement. 2. The conflict of the sanitary sewer and "Timberline Drive" has been resolved by Timberline shifting a few feet east. 3. Sanitary sewer easements shall be a minimum of 20 ft. in width and wider as necessary for sewers deeper than 10 feet, or sewers offset in the easement, to provide a 1:1 trench slope. 4. Vehicular access must be provided to any "backyard" or off-site manholes. 5. Sanitary sewers will not be allowed in any detention pond or associated berm. The sanitary sewer must be located to allow trenching without conflicts with drainage. Grading: I. Generally acceptable - except - the locations of the detention ponds are not accepted. The detention ponds shall not be allowed to conflict with any right-of-way or utility. The detention pond must not be in ROW or a utility easement. 2. Will the property be graded to use the detention ponds or will this requirement be delayed? If delayed, it must be clearly stated/shown on the plat that the detention ponds and associated grading will be as necessary to serve the apartments proposed on lot 4 as a part of phase I and completed in phase 11. ❑ Applicant inquired about before doing the final plat all the detention would need to be installed, and Mr. Beavers inquired if the final plat would be for Phase I and then a final plat for Phase 11. ❑ Ms. Little responded making improvements on phase I and then receive final plat on Phase 1. Drainage: The preliminary report in the format submitted will be accepted for format and will not be required to be revised per Amendment No. 2 to the Drainage Criteria Manual mailed to DCI on February 5, 1998. The final report and calculations shall conform to Amendment No. 2 to the Drainage Criteria Manual including the revised checklist dated March 9, 1998. 2. The drainage report has the area B, D2 and CI to pond two and C 1 and D2 to pond 1. Therefore this combines and replaces the pond previously proposed on lot 4. This should function better for the runoff. • • • Minutes of Technical Plat Review Meeting March 18, 1998 Page 5 3. All drainage outside of public street right-of-way, including the detention ponds, shall be private an privately maintained by the owner. The formal agreement must include the off-site portion of the detention pond. ❑ Applicant stated they were not able to get it into one, and therefore, put it into two. ❑ Mr. Beavers said this was good. Streets: 1. The proposed streets are to be constructed as part of this preliminary plat. 2. The street design must conform to the City's standards and is subject to further review at the time construction plans are submitted. 3. A surcharge of $1,500.00 per acre is required, from the original preliminary and fmal plat for this property (Wedington Place), less the $3,840.00 assessed previously for lots one and two for Salem Road and Shiloh Drive improvements. Refer to the minutes of the September 23, 1996 Planning Commission Meeting. 32.6 acres less 2.56 acres(lots 1 and 2) x $1500 = $45,060.00. ❑ There was some discussion about what the money was for a bridge on Salem. The Council is now calling it Salem area improvements. It was originally for a bridge and the amount was negotiated. ❑ Ms. Little responded to the inquiry as to when this assessment was due, and stated it was due at final plat. ❑ Mr. Beavers stated the applicant had the right to question this calculation at Planning Commission. 4. In accordance with 159.33.E of the Subdivision Regulations requiring/allowing improvements to State Highways, an assessment to be finalized by the Planning Commission will be requested for the upcoming project to widen Wedington Drive. The widening project is "50/50" State and City and estimated to cost $2,000,000.00 (refer to resolution no. 120-97 dated 12/16/97). The requested assessment to Clary must be approved by the Planning Commission. The suggested amount based upon the traditional one-half of standard street will be $66,550.27. (1067 feet of frontage x 14 feet width x $4.455/s1). ❑ Mr. Beavers noted that the above assessment includes sidewalks, curbing gutter, and drainage, and if applicant wants to present something else that would be fine. Please note that the widening of Wedington is for existing and future traffic demands. The developer's engineer can provide traffic projections for a "rational nexus" approach (see 159.33.A.3) which could document a different, and probably much smaller requirement. This information should be furnished by March 25 for consideration by the Subdivision Committee. Note that it is the Planning Commission who has the authority for the final requirement, if any. • • • Minutes of Technical Plat Review Meeting March 18, 1998 Page 6 UTILITIES SWEPCO- Dennis Burrack-973-2308 1. The lights as indicated in plat have been worked out with Perry as far as placement. 2. I would reserve placement of these things until facilities, sidewalks, streets, due to the fact there was no facilities to serve them at this time. 3. Estimates for installation of lights would be made before lights on Wedington were paid for 100 watt, and City, Perry Franklin has requested these be upgraded to 400 watt, therefore, there will be an amendment to this effect. Mr. Burrack gave a schematic drawing to the applicant of what was there and what he would need. ❑ Applicant stated he understood what Mr. Burrack was talking about and will explain this to Jeff and he will gather that information. Mr. Burrack stated he will need 3 pieces of switchgear: 1 underneath the road to the property; 1 for the proposed Lot 4; and another one at the far end of Steamboat Drive in order to refeed the existing service that is in that area which includes a couple of subdivisions, apartments, etc. He further stated that due to a road going over a private easement, he would need a some sort of off-site or go into Lot 109 and set a piece of switchgear at that point. He inquired what would happen to Steamboat Drive since it was not going to end there. O Ms. Little responded Steamboat Drive will go east and connect to Dorothy Jean. Mr. Burrack indicated the easement that he would have to refeed two underground dips that feeds other areas, and another one in another location. Mr. Burrack stated he would have to have a dedicated location to put his switchgear in this location. O Applicant stated he had 20' easement on our side and 20' on the other side. Mr. Burrack stated the terms and conditions for applicant will be to provide Ozarks Electric with the conduits and the pads if this is a new one, or Ozarks Electric will install everything and bill it back to the developer, but he will need the locations so he will not interfere with anything else. ❑ Applicant inquired how Lot 3 and Lot 8 will be served 8. Mr. Burrack informed the applicant about a problem concerning the lines that are feeding Wilson Inn, and there was some discussion regarding the refeeding and how City would work this out. Mr. Bun-ack stated he had been informed to put it underground from Wedington on back, with two spans feeding Holiday Inn. He would have to set the poles in the overlay which is now forbidden. Mr. Burrack responded to the question about the cost of installation, and he stated with a piece of switchgear feed this would be approximately $12-$15 per foot. Mr. Burrack had made an estimate of the turn key and then it would be all done, and this would be up to the developer to decide what option to make. 36 • • • Minutes of Technical Plat Review Meeting March 18, 1998 Page 7 ❑ Ms. Little stated that if the developer worked with Mr. Burrack where one digs the trench and the other buries the line, this would limit the expenses. Mr. Burrack informed everyone he had a dedicated easement which cost $17,765.71 in 1996. Under Arkansas Public Service Commission Rules we could install it, but the developer would be required to reimburse us for the light plus pay for the underground going back. ❑ Ms. Little stated when this project was presented to Planning Commission and an assessment for remaining lights were not presented, they would be making decisions without complete information. ❑ Applicant inquired about purchasing the existing lines and still pay for the cost of burial. Mr. Burrack stated Public Service Commission had said they can spend certain number of dollars to serve customers and are a regulated utility. If they had to go in and tear out something that had already been invested and have part of our rate, they would need to be compensated for it because we have invested it in our rate base. Recommendation: This project be taken to the Planning Commission for their decision in this regard. ❑ Ms. Little stated Ozarks Electric is putting some new poles around town which would be starting a whole new 30 year life on some above -ground lines, and mentioned that a meeting may be needed between Ozarks Electric and the City to discuss this issue further. O Mr. Beavers reminded the developer they have the option to request a waiver before the Planning Commission, and from the Council, and if the waiver is not granted then they would have the option of seeking legal action. In response to Ms. Little's inquiry, Mr. Burrack stated the requirement which regulates the life is the Handy Whitman. O Ms. Little stated the ordinance does not address the off-site, and recommended the developer ask the City to pay for the cost and take to the Council and see what their recommendation is. Recommendation: Mr. Burrack will prepare an estimate for the existing service going across the developer's property, a separate estimate for Shiloh Drive to Holiday Inn and will submit this to the developer for their consideration. Mr. Burrack requested the City or the developer until either highway widening streets are installed, the lights not be installed and be deferred until this widening is complete. Mr. Burrack further stated that Mr. Franklin requested the lights be installed along Wedington and different drives, and is requesting a deference. ❑ Applicant inquired about filing the final plat since the street lights and pay SWEPCO to put the lights in. Does the applicant go ahead and submit a check for cost of installation and the electric company send a letter to Planning. ❑ Ms. Little responded this would be okay. 37 • • Minutes of Technical Plat Review Meeting March 18, 1998 Page 8 SW Bell- Andy Calloway -442-3170 1. Mr. Phipps wanted to note regarding the reimbursement issue that all the utility companies did this out of pocket and in the 60's with the advent of consumer advocacy groups and all regulatory agencies state the utility companies are not allowed to do this out of pocket for relocation and requires reimbursement. 2. There are facilities along Wedington and therefore, if any need to be relocated or moved, this will reimbursement 100%. 3. Two pieces of conduit requested is across the Timberline Drive off of Wedington, and on the Northeast corner of the project coming from the east property line of Lot 5 over to intersection Lots 3 and Lot 4R. 4. All utility easements need to be a minimum of 20 feet. 5. Some locations there was a drainage and utility easement combination, and City of Fayetteville is opposed to this. ❑ Mr. Beavers noted the criteria manual required separate easements and this would need to be enforced. 6. Between Lots 3R and 8 a utility easement be shown running north and south of 20 feet. 7. On the southeast corner of Lot 1 R, there was a notation of an existing 30' utility easement for water, and stated to the developer may dedicate as a general utility easement over-riding this, or a 20' easement adjacent to it. Ozark Electric Cooperatives- Mike Phipps- 521-2900 1. Overhead power line on the west side of Timberline Drive. Ozarks electric has an acre on a pole going across the sidewalk and against the curb. Any relocation of this overhead facility will be at developer's expense. Not sure when the ordinance was adopted whether Walnut Grove Subdivision was included in this, but they do have an existing 30' easement to that overhead power line west of Timberline Drive. ❑ Applicant stated this was discussed briefly and there was no definitive direction because what is on the present property is only a small portion of the entire length. ❑ Ms. Litt.le inquired when residential subdivisions go in, is the developer charged to put the utilities underground and what is the charge if any. Mr. Burrack responded excess of $.40 a foot for all trenching costs and are on an experimental rider granted by the Public Service Commission of a certain dollar amount per month for the maintenance of the underground facilities. ❑ Ms. Little asked if the agreement with the Public Service Commission in your contract rate filing with the Public Service Commission. Mr. Phipps responded SWEPCO's was not. Mr. Burrack responded Ozarks Electric was filed, and will furnish copies of those rates. Mr. Burrack stated Ozarks Electric will absorb $.40 a foot which is the proposed cost of an overhead piece of wire vs underground wire and is mainly for excess trenching. If this was refiled today, the cost would have to be adjusted due to the fact it is costing approximately $2.50 to $2 75 per foot for trenching. Originally, the $.40 per foot was based on in the 70's how much the difference is for overhead to underground access that could not be recouped over a five year period. • ❑ Ms. Little inquired if a new commercial subdivision wants to install underground wiring what would the charge be. 38 • • • Minutes of Technical Plat Review Meeting March 18, 1998 Page 9 Mr. Burrack responded they will supply us with all pads, conduits, and pay for installed cost of wire over 250 feet. ❑ Ms. Little stated 250' is free and anything above that is paid for. Mr. Burrack stated this is per customer. If it is a three-phase underground loop such as Glenwood Shopping Center, you take the number of customers, 250' per customer, and obviously there would be more feet than there would be wire, so there would not be an access cost. ❑ Ms. Little inquired according to this project, how many customers would they consider this to be. Ms. Little stated that if this was a new one, there is going to be a procedure that could be followed, and whatever costs are being assessed for installation underground needs to be the procedure for a new subdivision. If the developer would be charged for the unused life. ❑ Applicant stated as a developer and required to pay for the old stuff, then they are back to the beginning, then why could they not pay for the incremental cost of the new stuff. Mr. Burrack stated any rearrangements in system which may be required by customer after the installation of set or temporary work required by the customer shall be paid for by the customer, and this was in place, and due to the request for it being rearranged. ❑ Ms. Little stated there will be some charges for putting the installation back, because per their requirements in a commercial subdivision, you would get 250' line free per customer, provide pads, conduit, in addition to the 250' line free. Recommendation: Ms. Little stated that Mr. Burrack and Mr. Phipps get together with the Council. Mr. Phipps stated in residential subdivisions the money is reimbursed by dividing the number of lots into the total cost, if meters are set within one year of completed construction, SWEPCO will reimburse the whole amount, and will deduct 20% for five years. 2. Mr. Phipps responded there was an easement on the east side of the property line, and stated he would get with Mr. Crownover and get this information. TCA Cable- Kevin Lefler- 521-7730 1. Ask for the same utility crossings as SWEPCO has required. 2. Aerial cables on the poles will need to be relocated. Mr. Leflar requested the cost estimate for Lot 5. 3. Any relocation will be at developer's cost. 4. Does have an aerial line where SWEPCO has that will possibly need relocated. 5. Going up to the Wilson would need to relocate this as well along the east boundary. 6. If the developer wants cable service in there, get with Mr. Leflar in the future, TCA will build in there at no cost. Arkansas Western Gas- Rick Evans- 521-1141 1. Easements are fine, and are just basically awaiting relocation of existing lines. ❑ Ms. Little requested the developer provide them with revisions by Wednesday, March 26, at 10:00 a.m. ❑ Mr. Beavers stated he had talked to Dave Jorgenson and everything will be okay regarding the park, and details will just need to be worked out. 39 • • Minutes of Technical Plat Review Meeting March 18, 1998 Page 10 LSD 98-4.00: LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT (CEDAR LAKE APARTMENTS aka FAY. SENIOR APTS.) NORTH OF EAST 15TH STREET AND WEST OF MORNINGSIDE Submitted by Geoffrey Bates of Northwest Engineers, and William Anderson, architect on behalf of Thomas J. Embach for property located north of East 15th Street and west of Morningside Drive. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential, and contains approximately 12 acres. Comments from the following were presented: STAFF: Solid Waste Division- Cheryl Zotti-443-3400 This developer has done a good job placing containers; however, I have concerns about a container located in a turn -around area There are also concerns about solid waste services for the community center area. It would be beneficial for the developer to contact my office and schedule to discuss this development. Landscape Administrator- Beth Sandeen-575-8308 1. Tree preservation method must be shown on plans - see attached example specification. Also, area for construction material storage, employee parking during construction, cement wash-out and debris burning area must be designated. 2. Owner will have to include proposed landscaping in project guarantee prior to obtaining building permit per Section 159.34 of the City code. Sidewalk and Trails Coordinator- Chuck Rutherford -575-8291 1. Morningside Drive is a collector street which requires a minimum of 6 ft. sidewalk with a minimum of 10 ft. greenspace. 2.. The greenspace needs to be labeled. 3. The streets within the project are shown as residential streets requiring a minimum 4 ft Sidewalk with a minimum 5 ft. greenspace on one side of each street. This needs to be labeled. 4. Sidewalks need to be shown continuous through all driveways. ❑ Mr. Rutherford noted the radius would need to be removed. ❑ Mr. Beaver gave examples of Wilson Park and Maple, and other examples are the mortuary on Happy Hollow, Burger King on 6th Street, Proctor & Gamble on the corner of Milsap. 5. Sidewalks need to be shown in the Legend. Traffic -Perry Franklin- 575-8228 1. If street lights will not be standard SWEPCO fixtures, please call me at the above number. 2. ADA spaces are adequate. 3. Do not feel some of the apartments are too far for senior citizens to be walking from their vehicles. Some apartments do not have good moving van access. Parks -Nancy Dugwyler- 444-3472 • Money in Lieu: 96 @ $240 per unit = $23,040 payable prior to obtaining building permit. 4a • Minutes of Technical Plat Review Meeting March 18, 1998 Page 11 Planning -Dawn Warrick -575-8262 1. Applicant is requesting a reduced front setback from 25 ft. to 10 ft. As a part of this Planned Unit Development. 2. Connection of the street to the West - require additional information on contact/attempts to negotiate with adjoining property owners. 3. There are 118 bedrooms which require 141 parking spaces to be provided (= requirement +20%) 4. Signage to meet requirements of the city sign ordinance. ❑ Mr. Jones stated the signs are 10 from the right-of-way. 5. Written description of setback reduction request is needed. 6. Location of B-37 (25 ft. From water feature). ❑ Mr. Jones indicated the line reflected on the plan is the 100 year flood plain, which is a creek and are considering it a drainage stream, but would make changes per City requirements. ❑ Ms. Little stated this change be made per City requirements. 7. Vehicles backing into right-of-way along west property line (D-52 and D-56). ❑ Ms. Little indicated the parking as shown now will not be approved, and proposed the developer • put in a parking bay which would affect some trees, and another parking bay in another area. 8. Emergency access to B-12 through B-42. 9. Phases 1 and 1I on one year approval each. • Engineering -Jim Beavers- 444-3418 General: 1 All designs are subject to the City's latest design criteria (water, sewer, streets and drainage). Review for plat approval is not approval of public improvements. All improvements, including the drainage report and design, are subject to further review at the time construction plans are submitted. 2. "Trees" will not be allowed within 10 feet of any water or sewer line. 3. All corrections and/or additions are required to be provided no later than the standard Wednesday deadline (March 25 this cycle) to continue to subdivison committee. Water: 1. The 8 inch and looped 6 inch line is generally acceptable. Add a 8 inch stubout at the street stubout to the west. 2. Minimum easement (or combination of ROW and easement) widths for water lines shall be 20 feet. 3. Fire protection and fire hydrant locations to meet the City's water line standards (600 feet maximum spacing or 300 feet maximum radius of coverage) and the Fire Chief's request. 41 • Minutes of Technical Plat Review Meeting March 18, 1998 Page 12 Sanitary Sewer: 1. We cannot allow a sanitary sewer line in the pond, or the embankment, or in the area of the toe of embankment where a 1:1 trench slope excavation could endanger the workers in the trench or endanger the embankment. 2. Minimum easement (or combination of ROW and easement) widths for sanitary sewer lines shall be 20 feet. Wider easements must be provided as necessary to allow a 1:1 trench slope. 3. Provide new, or additional, easements (on this property) for the existing sanitary sewer line to meet the current requirements. 4. Sanitary sewer manholes will not be allowed in "backyards" without truck access. A trail or other defined surface will be required. ❑ Mr. Beavers noted some developers are putting in jogging trails. ❑ Mr. Jones stated they will indicate with a note at this point, and when they get to the final plans they will provide something acceptable, and may call Dave Jergens. Grading and drainage: The preliminary drainage report also needs to include area/basin map documenting the contributing area(s). 2. The drainage calculations are subject to further review. For example, the RCN's for post development may be low. They may be closer to 90? (refer to table 2-3a, townhouse development). 3. Check the proposed water surface elevation of the pond (1219.5) and the proposed bottom of the spillway • 4. (1218.0). The Planning Commission agreed with a "setback" reduction from 100 feet to 25 feet for the buildings but not the south property line. • Streets: As noted at the January 28 plat review: The requirement for the 100 ft. horizontal separation will also effect the location of the embankment/dam from the southern property line. The dam must be moved north into the property as to allow the 100 ft. separation for future development of the adjacent property. Engineering will not support a waiver at the property line." O Mr. Beavers noted that in January Engineering noted it would not support a waiver, but this can be discussed at Subdivision Committee. The dam must go north to approximately building D80 or D81. The "dam" must be designed by a registered engineer and include geotechnical analysis. The final design for the drainage improvements shall conform to the City's criteria including Amendment No. 2 to the Drainage Criteria Manual and the revised checklist dated March 9, 1998. All drainage improvements located within the development, including the private streets and the detention ponds shall be privately maintained by the developer. The general layout does not correspond to the requirements for alignment as detailed in the City of Fayetteville Street Standards (revisions approved by the City Council August 6, 1996). Specifically the distance between tangents, the curve radii and the intersections do not appear* to meet the standards. Sight distance may also be a problem. Refer to chapter 3 of the standards. 4Z • Minutes of Technical Plat Review Meeting March 18, 1998 Page 13 * Curve data not provided. Comments based upon scaled review. Specific curve data is needed along with any variance requested. As detailed in the subdivison regulations (159.46), the Planning Commission, not city staff, has the authority to approve variances, or deviations from the street standards. Provide a written variance request for each specific variance requested. 2. Does the Fire Chief want additional access points to the rear buildings? 3. Require money be put in escrow in case Morningside is widened in the future. O Mr. Beavers responded to the amount and stated the developer can provide us with the amount, or use the Clarion which was $5/sq ft., which includes curb, gutter, and drainage. UTILITIES SWEPCO- Dennis Burrack-973-2308 1. All building setbacks 20' be classified as easements for those areas where there is water and sewer. O Mr. Jones indicated some setbacks will be 10' per a waiver request. • Mr. Burrack stated if there is water in there, they will not be able to be used by SWEPCO. • 2. Are all the buildings firewalled or is there one point of service for each group of buildings? Mr. Burrack further stated if this is one building without firewalls, there could only be one point of service. ❑ Developer would take this under consideration. ❑ Mr. Beavers stated the water/sewer could be in the street, but City prefers installation in the street. O Mr. Bates indicated they would put the water/sewer down the middle of the street. The only conflict was where a sewer line was running, and this could be moved down to the street, either to the edge or to the center. 3. If SWEPCO going to be in the building setback and all 25', all facilities would be in the setback and transformers and pedestals are 30" in height. ❑ Ms. Little stated to the developer to find where the pedestals need to be installed and a waiver request may be required and to go before the Board of Adjustments. Mr. Burrack stated the transformers are 36-38" and pedestals are approximately 32"-34". Separation on telephone and electric would be a minimum of 12" vertical or horizontal, depending on the voltage, it may be greater. Mr. Burrack stated that three of the utilities could get into one 15" wide ditch. ❑ Mr. Jones indicated his plans show a 45' right-of-way and could move over and get 15'. 43 • • • Minutes of Technical Plat Review Meeting March 18, 1998 Page 14 Recommendation: The utility companies would need to work together in order to utilize their utility adjustments. Mr. Burrack would prepare a layout and forward to the developer and they will get together with the other utility companies to facilitate their access. Mr. Burrack stated his point of service would be a pedestal, and will be located in some fashion in order to serve this area. Three-phase circuit on Morningside Drive would not be addressed at this time, on the west side. Mr. Burrack stated it would be impossible to bury across the road. ❑ Ms. Little informed the developer this would be a good basis for a waiver request and asked them to write and file the same. 5. Mr. Burrack stated their estimates for installation of each light run over $1,000 per installation, however, they would only charge $1,000 per. The City will then take over the monthly billing. Mr. Burrack also stated it would be metered service or flat rated, and will go to the NEC code. O Mr. Jones stated there was a consideration for the spillway which will be concrete. The developer stated if they installed any concrete at the spillway they would also install a sleeve for utilities. 6. Mr. Burrack stated he would need street crossings, if everyone would go in the same one, then Mr. Burrack will figure it out and have them put their crossings in there. SW Bell- Andy Calloway -442-3170 The only two street crossings requesting are the entrances off of Morningside, and do have existing buried utilities on this side of the road and due to the grade He further stated he would be willing to work with the other utility companies for installation. TCA Cable- Kevin Lefler- 521-7730 1. Mr. Leflar stated he basically makes the same comments as the other utilities. 2. Require sleeves into entrances and need the points of entry. Arkansas Western Gas- Rick Evans- 521-1141 1. Mr. Evans stated he will work with the other utility companies regarding the crossings and easements. ❑ Mr. Beavers inquired about the greenspace meet the PUD requirements and the developer indicated it did. ❑ Mr. Rutherford inquired how long after Phase I would Phase II be constructed. ❑ Mr. Jones stated the streets and sidewalks will be constructed as part of Phase 1 with two points of access in and out. Ms. Little informed the applicant revisions will be due March 25th, and they would need to meet with the utility companies so that the utilities can be shown on those revisions. 44 • Minutes of Technical Plat Review Meeting March 18, 1998 Page 15 LSD 98-7.00: LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT (BURT HANNAI 1421 EAST 15TH STREET Submitted by Geoffrey Bates of Northwest Engineers on behalf of the applicant for property located at 1421 East 15th Street. The property is zoned 1-2, General Industrial and contains approximately 5.06 acres. The request is for a 14,800 sq. ft. addition to an existing warehouse facility. Comments from the following were presented: 0 Ms. Little stated when the original large scale came through, as well as, Phase 1, this was considered one lot. Some of the property is zoned 1-1 and 1-2 which makes a difference in the setbacks. An 1-2 setback requirement is 25 feet. Landscape Administrator- Beth Sandeen-575-8308 Waiver completed March 16, 1998, for the purpose of area of construction not impacting any existing trees. Sidewalk and Trails Coordinator- Chuck Rutherford -575-8291 15th Street is a principal arterial which requires a 6 foot sidewalk. The sidewalk as shown on the original plat dated August 22, 1994, and has not been constructed. • Planning -Dawn Warrick -575-8262 • 1. Industrial projects are exempt from Commercial Design Standards. 2. Add plat page 604 to title block. 3. City zoning map shows this area to be zoned 1-2 4. Require legal description for entire tract (including property to the west). 5. 59 parking spaces required - 64 spaces provided (within 20% of requirement) Engineering- Jim Beavers- 444-3418 No comments. Grading plan previously approved 8/16/95. Water extension constructed 1996. UTILITIES SWEPCO- Dennis Burrack-973-2308 Mr. Burrack wanted to caution the developer and owner the existing facility has 101 Kv transmission. TCA Cable- Kevin Lefler- 521-7730 The developer would need to get with TCA if they wanted installation of tv. Lis • • • Minutes of Technical Plat Review Meeting March 18, 1998 Page 16 PP 97-5,10: REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT (SERENITY PLACE P.U.D.1 WEST OF SALEM ROAD AND NORTH OF MOUNT COMFORT ROAD Submitted by Brian Moore of Engineering Services, Inc. on behalf of Prestige Properties for property located west of Salem Road and north of Mount Comfort Road. The property is zoned R-1, Low -Density Residential and contains approximately 30.97 acres; 116 Lots are proposed. Comments from the following were presented: STAFF: Sidewalk and Trails Coordinator- Chuck Rutherford -575-8291 1. The local streets within the project require a minimum 4 ft. Sidewalk with a minimum 6 ft. Greenspace on both sides of the streets. This needs to be labeled. 2. Sidewalks shall be continuous through driveways. Traffic -Perry Franklin- 575-8228 1. Street light required at the corner of Tranquil Drive and Mystical Drive. 2. Move street light between lots 63 and 64 to lot line between lots 66 and 67. 3. Street lights required at Salem Road & Serenity Way, and at Salem Road and Reflective Way. Parks -Nancy Dugwyler- 444-3472 Land Dedication Requirement: 116 @ .025 acre per unit = 2.9 acres (need a legal description) Pedestrian Access Easements: Access would be from Serenity Way and Rupple Road. Drainage through Park: Drainage should not drain into ponds. ❑ There was some discussion concerning the drainage into the pond, and Mr. Beavers require all drainage go through the pond before it goes through wetlands, otherwise a sediment pond would be required • ❑ The parks department is taking the 6.29 acres as part of the park planning requirement, therefore, the developer is not meeting the 30% greenspace which is required under the PUD Ordinance. Planning -Dawn Warrick -575-8262 I. Label adjacent zoning and check legal description due to discrepancy. 2. Need to look closer at Rupple Road right-of-way and ownership issues along the west property line. 3. Need copies of deeds of ownership to property. 4. While PUD allows for lots which are smaller than standard R -I lots, a PUD requires 30% greenspace to be classified as such. The greenspace in this subdivision has been designated as land to be dedicated to the Parks system, and therefore, does not count towards the 30% required greenspace to qualify this development as a PUD. ❑ Ms. Little stated this is an R-1 subdivision, which requires 8,000 square feet lots with 70 feet of frontage. These lots are smaller than the requirement. The private spaces which would be purchased and in order to make up for that the requirement was that 30% and provide a space lost to smaller lots. The developer cannot have a PUD requirement and not provide the greenspace, or you could have an R-1 subdivision, but the developer would not be allowed the number of lots. ❑ Require the status of the west property line, and copies of those deeds in order to establish ownership. • • • Minutes of Technical Plat Review Meeting March 18, 1998 Page 17 5. If signage is proposed for this development, it must be located on this plat and it must meet the city's sign ordinance. 6. All utilities shall be placed underground. 7. Possible swimming pool site must be removed from the park. 8. PUD ordinance reference construction of amenities within certain amount of time. ❑ Ms. Little stated this project will be out of process until the issues of lot sizes, PUD, subdivision, and greenspace are resolved Engineering- Jim Beavers- 444-3418 General: 1. All designs are subject to the City's latest design criteria (water, sewer, streets and drainage). Review for plat approval is not approval of public improvements and all improvements are subject to further review at the time construction plans are submitted. 2. The conditions of approval from the September 22, 1997 Planning Commission approval still apply. A copy of the September 22 Planning Commission meeting minutes are attached. 0 Mr. Beavers stated this would include the $200/lot Hamestring Creek Basin, the money toward Rupple Road extension. Once you get to the Planning Commission the developer may want to clarify this information. Water: Public access to the wetlands and preserve has been promised. How/where is this access provided? This was a condition added by the Commissioners September 22'97. All corrections and/or additional information are required to be provided no later than the standard deadline (March 25 this cycle) to continue to subdivision committee. Two feeds shall be required (one at each street). Label the proposed water line sizes. A continuous eight inch water line shall be required the entire length of Serenity Way. This includes connecting across lots 88-116. All dead end lines shall be 8 inch. The looped lines may be 6 or 8 inch. 2. A connection fee of $6,014.00 ($200.00 per acre) will be required in accordance with the Salem Road water line extension Ordinance no.3938 dated November 7, 1995. All trees shall have valves on all three leads. Lines will terminate with a valve, length of pipe and blowoff - not a fire hydrant. Minimum easement (or combination of ROW and easement) widths for water lines shall be 20 feet. 47 • • Minutes of Technical Plat Review Meeting March 18, 1998 Page 18 5. Fire protection and fire hydrant locations to meet the Fire Chiefs request. 6. Provide a 25 ft. utility easement between lots 13 and 14, or 14 and 15, in the event water and sewer should ever need to be extended at this sw corner. Sanitary Sewer: Provide a 30 ft. easement across the entire length of the north property line for a future 12 or 18 inch collector sanitary sewer. There will be a fee of $200.00 per residential lot assessed this development to go towards improvements in the Hamstring basin. This is consistent with charges to other subdivision in this basin. At 116 lots the fee will be $23,200.00. The fee is due at final plat. The capacity of the lift station at CrystaUSalem requires further evaluation by the developer's engineer. Any additional upgrades due to this proposed development shall be the developer's sole cost. 4. Sanitary sewers shall be extended to the west and south property lines to allow future development. Vehicular access must be provided to the "backyard" or offsite manholes. This requires a trail or other surface acceptable to the water/sewer department between lots 4/5, 34/35 and 65/66. ❑ Mr. Reynolds questioned about stubbing out not install a manhole and give them an easement. The cost would be $1,000 and the cost of wood chips, etc., therefore, if there were an easement, they could put this line in. ❑ Mr. Beavers stated this would not be acceptable, the developer would need to install the manholes. 6. Verify that the sewer extension from Salem Village has adequate low elevations to serve the proposed Serenity PUD. Public sewer easements shall be a minimum of 20 ft. in width and wider as necessary for sewers deeper than 10 feet, or sewers offset in the easement, to provide a 1:1 trench slope. Sanitary sewers will not be allowed in any pond or associated berm. The sanitary sewer must be located to allow trenching without conflicts with drainage. Grading and drainage: The Planning Commission must determine if structures may be constructed within 100 feet of the permanent ponds (refer to chapter 5 of the drainage ordinance). 0 Mr. Beavers stated per the ordinance the above requirement and this requirement may need to go before the Planning Commission. 2. Detention may not be required from a quantity and rate standpoint, but provisions, which may include a detention basin for water quality to protect the official wetlands shall be required per the ordinance. • 3. All drainage, out side of public street right-of-way shall be private an privately maintained by the POA, HOA or similar entity. • • Minutes of Technical Plat Review Meeting March 18, 1998 Page 19 4. Underground drainage on the west side of Salem Road will be required with the widening and improvements of Salem Road. The proposed 24 inch RCP on Salem is subject to further review. 5. Is a box culvert or pipe proposed for Serenity? 6. The flood plain is shown - is there also floodway on this property? Have you used the most current data? 7. The preliminary report in the format submitted will be accepted for format and will not be required to be revised per Amendment no. two to the Drainage Criteria Manual mailed to DCI on February 5, 1998. The final report and calculations shall conform to Amendment no. two to the Drainage Criteria Manual including the revised checklist dated March 9, 1998. ❑ Mr. Beavers stated Planning Commission made a requirement the layout subject to the weather map amendment, and if weather map amendment is not accepted, then the lots would need to be a minimum of 1 acre within the flood plain area Streets: 1. Refer to the previous Planning Commission conditions of approval from September 22, 1997 as referenced above. UTILITIES Ozark Electric Cooperatives- Mike Phipps- 521-2900 There was a question about the overhead line and the overhead over Salem. ❑ Mr. Conklin stated if the overhead lines are on the subject property the requirement was to be placed underground. Planning Commission could approve a waiver request. ❑ Mr. Reynolds stated it was approved last time without it, and inquired why it was now being addressed. ❑ Mr. Beavers stated the first approval was September 22, 1997. ❑ Mr. Reynolds requested an estimate from Ozarks Electric. Mr. Phipps stated the line size was 14.4. ❑ Mr. Beavers stated the original Planning Commission approval had a condition to dedicate $124,000 for Rupple Road, and developer stated this was revised with at the Council meetings, and require the developer provide us with the information in order to give this information to Planning Commission. ❑ Mr. Reynolds stated the agreement reflects there would be a $440,000 contribution with $185,000 for Rupple Road. The portion paid on Serenity would be a credit to the $440,000. ❑ Mr. Reynolds stated the timing is up to 12 years for everything. 49 • 0• Minutes of Technical Plat Review Meeting March 18, 1998 Page 20 LSD 98-8.00: LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT (ARKANSAS NATIONAL BANK NORTHWEST CORNER OF SALEM DRIVE AND WEDINGTON DRIVE Submitted by CEI Engineering Associates on behalf of the applicant for property located at the northwest corner of Salem Drive and Wedington Drive. The property is zone R -O, Residential -Office and contains approximately 1.61 acres. Comments from the following were presented: STAFF: Landscape Administrator- Beth Sandeen-575-8308 1. Prior to initiation of site work, an inspection of tree protection fencing will be required. Contact landscape administrator at the above number. 2. Guarantee for landscaping is required prior to issuance of building permit. ❑ Ms. Sandeen noted to the engineer to provide her with an estimate for the landscaping or she could prepare an estimate. However, she noted if she prepared one it would be higher. It would have to be fine binding contract. Contact Ms. Sandeen prior to any work started on the property for inspection. Sidewalk and Trails Coordinator- Chuck Rutherford -575-8291 Salem Drive is a Collector Street requiring a minimum 6 ft. sidewalk with a minimum 10 ft. greenspace. 2. Wedington Drive is a principal arterial requiring a minimum 6 ft. sidewalk. Money for this sidewalk should be collected and put towards getting the sidewalk in, at the time Wedington Drive is widened. 3. Sidewalks shall be continuous through driveways. The existing sidewalk along Salem Drive is 4 ft. with a 5 ft. greenspace. To get a larger greenspace it would need to be a minimum of 17 ft. because of the two landmark pine trees. 5. Recommend the sidewalks and greenspace remain as is, however, asking for a 70 ft. right-of-way. Traffic -Perry Franklin- 575-8228 Street Lights: 1. Show any existing street lights. 2. A 400 -watt high pressure sodium cut-off street light is required at Salem and Wedington and one 300' west of the same intersection (just west of the exit onto Hwy 16). 3. A standard street light is required 300' north of the intersection if not existing. 4. Left turners at the shared access drive will be blocked by vehicles at the traffic signal during the AM traffic peak. ❑ Mr. Honeywell stated this would need to be discussed further with the property owner due to the fact they would want to move the access point, at Wedington - highway 16. ❑ Mr. Rutherford stated the extension of the island beyond the sidewalk would need to be removed. O Mr. Honeywell responded he had talked with the highway department and made some revisions to the plan. They highway department is proposing an mountable curb extension beyond the sidewalk. 50