HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-09-16 - Minutes•
•
•
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
TECHNICAL PLAT REVIEW
A regular meeting of the Fayetteville Technical Plat Review Committee was held on Wednesday. September 16,
1998. at 9:00 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building located at 113 West Mountain Street,
Fayetteville, Arkansas.
ITEMS REVIEWED ACTION TAKEN
PLA 98-18.00: Property Line Adjustment (Thurlby) Approved
LS 98-31.00, 32.00, 33.00: Lot Splits (Bond) Forwarded to Subdivision Committee
LS 98-34.00: Lot Splits (Papa) Forwarded to Subdivision Committee
LSD 98-28.00: Large Scale Development (Plainview Ave. Fire Station) Tabled
LSD 98-29.00: Large Scale Development (Hopkins Retail Center) Forwarded to Subdivision Committee
STAFF PRESENT: Chuck Rutherford, Kim Hesse, Perry Franklin, Mickey Jackson, Jim
Beavers, Alett Little, Dawn Warrick and Liz Hopson
UTILITY REPRESENTATIVES: Dennis Burrack (SWEPCO), Andy Calloway (SWBT). Rick Evans
(Arkansas Western Gas), and Kevin Lefler (TCA Cable)
PLA 98-18.00 Property Line Adtustment (Thurlby)
north of Whillock Street, south of Skelton Street, east of Hwy 71 Business
This item was submitted by Al Hughes on behalf of the applicant for property located north of Whitlock St., south of
Skelton St., and east of Hwy 71 Business. The property is zoned R -I, Low Density Residential and the property to
be adjusted contains approximately 5.32 acres.
Staff Comments:
Warrick:
The engineering department comments that per the city's atlas, two-inch water
and six-inch sanitary sewer lines are located in Whillock and Skelton. If the
property located between Skelton and Whillock is ever further developed, then
these lines will need to be extended.
Utility Comments:
Burrack: SWEPCO will need a 20 foot easement on either side of the Moore property.
Little: The 20 foot utility easement will be on the west side.
Burrack: Where will the property lines be?
Warrick: The 5.32 acres shown will be added to the existing Moore tract.
There were no other utility comments.
This item was approved with all staff and utility comments.
Zzo
•
•
Technical Plat Review Minutes
September 16, 1998
Page -2-
LS 98-31.00, 32.00 & 33.00: Lot Splits (Bond)
north of Huntsville Road, west of Roberts Road
These items were submitted by Jack Butt of Davis, Cox & Wright on behalf of Paul and Geraldine Bond for property
located north of Huntsville Road and west of Roberts Road. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential
and R -S, Residential Small Lot and contains approximately 6.65 acres The request is to divide the parent tract into
a total of four lots for the purpose of estate planning.
Jack Butt appeared on behalf of the applicant.
Staff Comments:
Warrick: The zoning label is incorrect and needs to be changed from R-1 to R -S. The
adjacent property owner to the north is the City of Fayetteville (Parks Division).
The plat page, 569, needs to be added to the title block. Huntsville Road is
classified as a principle arterial on the Master Street Plan --110 feet of right of
way is necessary; dedication of 55 feet from centerline is required for this
project.
Beavers:
Rutherford:
Butt:
Warrick:
Butt:
Rutherford:
Butt:
Warrick:
Butt:
The sanitary sewer per the survey does not match our as -built drawings. Please
verify the field survey data and provide any information you have on the sanitary
sewer as shown on the proposed lot split.
Huntsville Road is a principle arterial which requires a minimum 6 foot sidewalk
with a minimum 10 foot greenspace. The sidewalk is required along the frontage
of all three addresses.
Are the sidewalk requirements necessary right now or when the lots are
developed? Is this required as a condition of getting a lot split? What about the
greenspace requirements?
The sidewalk is placed on the right of way line. Based on street standards, the
correct amount of greenspace will be provided for.
Is the sidewalk constructed by a private contractor, or does the city build it and
wait for reimbursement from the applicant; how does that work?
You hire a contractor to build the sidewalk per city standards.
Is sidewalk construction a condition of the lot split?
The sidewalk must be completed before the deeds are filed
If the lot split is approved but the property isn't deeded for fifteen years, can
they defer building until the splits are filed?
Little: When will the splits be filed?
• Butt: The splits will be entered as part of the will, and when the property owners die,
the children receiving the property will file the splits.
22
l
•
•
•
Technical Plat Review Minutes
September 16, 1998
Page -3-
Little:
If the splits are not occurring now, the need for the sidewalk is not occurring
now. If the splits are filed at the time the will is probated, that would be the
appropriate time for sidewalk construction.
Beavers: Williams Jenkins needs to be contacted. The sanitary sewer shown does not
match the records. Engineering needs clarification on that point.
Little: On the 40 foot area, it needs to be dedicated as right of way. It allows the
property to be developed at a future time.
Butt:
Little:
Utility Confluents:
Evans:
There is no present plan to develop the property.
The area still needs to be dedicated for right of way.
His records indicate a 50 foot easement for the gas line, and he would like it
indicated on the plat.
Lefler: When the splits occur, the right of way line will shift. Will there still be a utility
easement?
Warrick: There will still be 10 feet of easement.
There were no other utility comments.
The items were forwarded to the Subdivision Committee meeting scheduled for October 1, 1998. The applicant is
requested to make the corrections discussed and submit 37 copies with revisions of the project before the 10:00 a.m.
deadline on September 23, 1998.
Technical Plat Review Minutes
September 16, 1998
Page -4-
LS 98-34.00: Lot Split (Papa)
south of West Sixth Street, west of Razorback Road
This item was submitted by Dave Jorgensen of Jorgensen & Associates on behalf of Carl Papa for property located
south of West Sixth Street and west of Razorback Road. The property is zoned I-1, Heavy Commercial, Light
Industrial and contains approximately 9.57 acres.
Tom Hennelly appeared on behalf of the applicant
Staff Comments:
Rutherford: Razorback Road is a principle arterial which requires a minimum 6 foot sidewalk
and a minimum 10 feet greenspace. The sidewalk for lot B is required for the lot
split. The sidewalk for lot A will be required at the time of development. The
sidewalk for lot B shall be continuous through the driveway as this area is now
broken and in an unsafe walking condition.
Warrick:
Utility Comments:
Razorback Road is a principle arterial on the Master Street Plan and requires 55
feet from centerline dedication if it does not currently exist. Plat page 560 needs
to be added to the title block. Master Street Plan designations need to be noted
on the vicinity map. Include the dimension right of way from centerline, and
label building setbacks. Any new commercial development shall be subject to
Large Scale Development review process, Commercial Design Standards, and
the Underground Utilities ordinance.
Burrack: Their needs are served already, and he will defer comments until tract A comes
back through the process.
Calloway:
He recalls that tract B already had a dedicated easement parallel to Razorback
Road, which is indicated differently on the plans and needs correction. He
would also request a 20 foot perimeter easement on tract A.
Evans: The 20 foot perimeter easement requested by SWBT will meet his needs.
Wan -ick:
She has a question about the distance between the parking lot and the south
property line. That area needs to be dimensioned and must be at least 5 feet.
The item was forwarded to the Subdivision Committee meeting scheduled for October 1, 1998. The applicant is
requested to make the corrections discussed and submit 37 copies with revisions of the project before the 10:00 a.m.
deadline on September 23, 1998.
•
-z3
Technical Plat Review Minutes
September 16, 1998
Page -5-
LSD 98-28.00: Large Scale Development (Plainview Avenue Fire Station)
south of Millsap Road and west of Plainview Avenue
This item was submitted by Wes Burgess of Wittenburg, Delony & Davidson on behalf of the City of Fayetteville for
property located south of Millsap Rd. and west of Plainview Ave. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare
Commercial and contains approximately 1 acre.
Wes Burgess appeared on behalf of the applicant.
Staff Comments:
Warrick: Street lights are required on Plainview every 300 feet and at intersections. The 6
foot sidewalk and 6 foot greenspace need to be shown. The radius lines need to
be removed through the sidewalks on all pages. Sidewalks need to be
continuous through the driveway. Sidewalks need to be added to the legend.
The Solid Waste division requests that the plat should show dedicated space for
the pads for solid waste containers. Minimum size should be 2 cubic yards
which can be accessed by city collection vehicles. Additionally, those pads need
to be screened on 3 sides. The existing tree canopy of all trees 6 inches DBH
(diameter at breast height) or larger needs to be shown on the plans. Trees 24
inches DBH or larger (defined as rare trees) need to be surveyed identified and
shown on the plans including rare trees 100 feet beyond the boundary of the site.
Tree preservation may be required but requirements cannot be determined until
this information is provided. Planning requirements include the addition of plat
page 213 to the title block, addition of flood plain reference to the plat, and an
addition of a legend. All utilities shall be located underground.
Jackson: He would like to review the need for cross access to the hospital property to the
west and defer a decision until later.
Beavers: This item needs to be pulled from the agenda until the proper grading and
drainage information is supplied.
Franklin: There needs to be a street light located before resubmittal of this project.
Utility Comments:
Burrack: He will prepare an estimate for placing the existing overhead lines underground.
There is a problem with the transformer on a slope, and something will have to
be done to make sure that structure is on an 8'x9' level area. Also, the
transformer needs to be relocated to a more accessible area, possibly in the area
to the west. In reference to the street crossing, he requests two 4 inch PVC lines
under the street from right of way to right of way. This allows the utility to tie
into the line in case the street gets built before he can access the site. This action
requires coordination now.
Calloway:
There are off-site easements which are not shown on this plat, nor are adjacent
lot lines shown. He thinks there is a junction point at the northwest corner of the
property, and there needs to be verification on that issue before resubmittal.
Z24
Technical Plat Review Minutes
September 16, 1998
Page -6-
Beavers:
Burgess:
Evans:
Lefler:
The retaining wall in the area shown would greatly limit the site.
They are not happy with the location of the retaining wall and will work on that
issue.
The gas meter is shown at the building, but the utility shows it at the north
property line. The retaining wall will be an issue for him as well.
They will need one 4 inch connection and can utilize the one provided for the
power company. He has concerns about a small mechanical room located in the
center of the building but can resolve that issue with the developer before
resubmittal.
This item was tabled pending resubmittal with the corrections made as noted.
775
Technical Plat Review Minutes
September 16, 1998
Page -7-
LSD 98-29.00: Large Scale Development (Hopkins Retail Center)
southwest corner of Wedington Drive and Garland Avenue
This item was submitted by Steve Hesse of Engineering Design Associates on behalf of Mike Hopkins for property
located at the southwest corner of Wedington Drive and Garland Ave. The property is zoned C-1, Neighborhood
Commercial and contains approximately 1.27 acres.
Steve Hesse, Mike Anderson and Mike Hopkins appeared in support of the project.
Staff Comments:
Franklin: He has called the Arkansas Highway Department and spoken with Brian Powell.
an inspector. He would like to meet with the developer to discuss the drive that
comes onto Wedington, at the northwest corner of the property. The Highway
Department is about to complete that project and is concerned about interfering
with the current development.
Rutherford:
Kim Hesse:
Jackson:
Garland Avenue and Wedington Drive are principle arterials. The requirement
is 6 foot sidewalks. The existing 4 foot sidewalk along Garland Avenue is in
unsafe condition. The developer will need to replace the sidewalk from the point
where the Highway Department has stopped to the south property line on
Garland Avenue. The sidewalk needs to be continuous through the driveways.
The radius lines need to be removed through the sidewalk at the driveways. The
developer needs to work closely with the Highway Department.
Twenty-seven percent of tree replacement is required by ordinance. Sixty-seven
percent of this site was covered by tree canopy in 1995. Those trees, including a
rare 31 inch oak were removed from the site prior to a proposed development.
Several trees were to be preserved based on the previous development plans.
With the removal of these trees, the square foot percentage of "canopy area
required" for a Neighborhood Commercial site was below the minimum. Since
the removal of trees occurred within five years of this development review, the
replacement canopy required must be increased by 10% of total canopy per
ordinance. The ordinance requires "canopy area replacement" of 20 % plus
6.7% additional canopy area replacement for the previous removal of trees. The
17 trees shown on the plan will meet the replacement requirements if these trees
are specified as large shade trees. The one tree that is indicated on the plans as a
tree to be preserved is too close to the proposed retaining wall to be adequately
preserved. The landscaping shown on the plans does not meet the off-street
parking lot requirement or the Commercial Design Standards. One tree is
required for every 30 linear feet along the front property line, and 3 shrubs for
every 40 linear feet of parking lot frontage. Buffer requirements are also
inadequate between the proposed development and the R -O zoned property to
the south. A view obscuring fence or wall vegetation is required along the south
property line.
Add a fire hydrant at the northwest entrance to the project off Wedington and at
the southeast entrance at Garland. It is believed that the water lines for both
these hydrants will have to be extended from Wedington Drive, and the lines will
have to be 8 inches.
2z4
•
•
•
Technical Plat Review Minutes
September 16, 1998
Page -8-
Beavers:
Warrick:
There is no water in that vicinity. The developer will have to bore under the new
part of Wedington, an expensive venture. The closest line from the subdivision
is inadequate. There is a 6 inch line from Hall Avenue, but it will be a long
extension.
The adjacent zoning needs to be labeled. The zoning the developers show is C-
2; it is actually a C-1 designation but will still support the proposed
development. Plat page 443 needs to be added to the title block; the vicinity
map needs to reflect the master street plan designations specific to Garland and
Wedington, principle arterials. There needs to be a label and dimension on
easements and right of way from centerline. The dimension on the west side of
the property indicates a 40 foot alley, but planning department records indicate a
20 foot alley.
Anderson: The surveyor found that the portion to the west is an easement, and the portion to
the east was deeded to the city, which changed their western property boundary.
Warrick: Street requirements need to look at cross access, potentially to the south.
Parking layout review indicates that the parallel spaces won't work; eliminate
those spaces. Look at the numbers of parking spaces --the developer is allowed
30% compact spaces. As to the issue of traffic flow, the bank drive-thru is a
conflict. In order to go through the drive-thru, the cars would have to loop
around the entire site, enter from Garland, or turn around in front of other cars.
The Planning Department feels that this will be a problem. The drive-thru could
potentially be relocated, but there needs to be resolution on this issue. Screening
is required between commercial and residential property. Signage needs to be
shown in the elevations. There is no indication of a free-standing sign. If there
is one, elevations and dimensions will be required. Utilities will need to be
placed underground. Regarding Commercial Design Standards review, the
utilities need screening from public view, and the location will need to be shown.
Are the utilities ground mounted or roof mounted? The trash dumpster needs to
be screened on 3 sides. There needs to be a site coverage calculation, building
plus pavement combined with a maximum of 85%. Cross -access information
will need to be provided, with a stub out to the south property line. The metal
siding on the south and west elevations needs to be minimized. Anything visible
from the public right of way will be scrutinized by the Planning Commission,
and the commissioners are opposed to metal.
Beavers:
All designs are subject to further review at the time of construction. Water is not
available on Garland. It is on the north end of Wedington. There is a 6 inch line
to the west at Hall. The developer can determine the connection. Engineering
would prefer a looped 6 inch connection, but a dead-end 8 inch connection
would work. The fire hydrant and sanitary sewer need to be shown on the plat.
Please provide cross sections for grading through the proposed retaining walls.
The new grading ordinance goes into effect in two days, so the developers need
to acquaint themselves with the new ordinance. Check conflicts with utility
easements. Show the drainage by schematic. There is no summary of flows
according to off-site and on-site individually as well as combinations. The
retaining wall will need a rail. The developer will need to contact the Highway
Department to coordinate improvements to both Garland and Wedington, which
227
•
•
•
Technical Plat Review Minutes
September 16, 1998
Page -9-
Jackson:
Franklin:
Utility Comments:
Burrack:
are state highways. The Highway Department may ask for a contribution toward
the widening of Garland and Wedington.
Hydrant locations need to be shown.
There needs to be lighting shown.
Has the developer worked with an electrical engineer? With a 10 foot retaining
wall, the developer will have to place utility easements within the wall. The
existing alley shown on the west side can be used as a utility easement. The
developer will have to provide him with conduit of sleeves. He asks that the
developer provide him with two 4 inch conduits on the northwest corner of the
property or on the west side of the drive that the Highway Department shows.
They will have to have access to the western side of the project. He has a
question about the retaining wall as it relates to utility easements and will refer to
the new grading ordinance.
Calloway: Hispoint of service is going to be the northwest corner. He needs two 4 inch
conduits, and he will consider using the same lines for power and phone. He has
questions about where to locate the existing power pole.
Evans: The closest gas line is on Hall Street, and he has questions about how to run the
line to the building.
Lefler: The cable accesses the site on overhead poles. He is willing to consider running
the same lines as power and phone, but that can be coordinated before the next
meeting.
Warrick:
There is a problem with an entrance drive off Garland where there is discussion
of cross access in that location. One option is to provide a shared drive with an
access easement from the adjoining property owner.
Anderson: He would like to maintain this cycle of meetings if at all possible and will work
on making the necessary corrections.
This item will await further review. If corrections can be made in time, this item will be forwarded to Subdivision
Committee on October 1, 1998. If corrections cannot be made, this item will be put into holding until revisions are
submitted.