HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-01-13 - Minutes•
•
•
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF
TECHNICAL PLAT REVIEW
A regular meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee was held on Wednesday, January 13,
1999 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain,
Fayetteville, Arkansas.
ITEMS CONSIDERED
LSD99-1 Opti Pro, LLC pp213
PP99-1 Candlewood Subdivision pp294
MEMBERS PRESENT
Dennis Burrack
Rick Evans
Kevin Lefler
Mike Phipps
STAFF PRESENT
Kim Hesse
Janet Johns
Alett Little
Ron Petrie
Kim Rogers
Chuck Rutherford
Brent Vinson
Dawn Warrick
ACTION TAKEN
Forward to Subdivision
Forward to Subdivision
MEMBERS ABSENT
David Chance
Minutes of a meeting of
Technical Plat Review
January 13, 1999
Page 2
LSD99-1 LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT
OPTI PRO, LLC PP213
This project was submitted by Richard Grubbs on behalf of OptiPro, L.L.C. for property located
at 3418 Plainview Avenue, Lot 17 of CMN Business Park. The property is zoned C-2,
Thoroughfare Commercial, and contains approximately 1.964 acres
David Swain, Richard Grubb, and Bob Kelly were present on behalf of the project.
STAFF COMMENTS
Kim Hesse, Landscape Administrator
Only small tree species will be allowed within 5 feet wide islands. If possible, widen some of the
proposed islands to 8 feet allowing larger tree species to be grown within the parking lot interior.
The ordinance requires that a landscape plan be included that indicates the species of all plants,
size of each species at the time of installation, spacing requirements of each plant, and the type of
edge and mulch to be used. All plantings must be within a defined area Notes or details must be
included that indicate the need to amend the soil within the planting beds. Indicate the location of
the hose bibs or automatic irrigation system.
Chuck Rutherford, Sidewalk and Trail Coordinator
Sidewalks, driveway approaches and access ramps shall be constructed to Ordinance An
inspection is required pnor to the concrete pour. Driveway approaches shall be constructed of
Portland Cement Concrete.
The curb and gutter lines need to be removed through the 6 feet sidewalk at the driveway
approaches. The 6 feet green space between the curb and sidewalk needs to be shown. The
sidewalk needs to be added to the legend.
Perry Franklin, Traffic Superintendent
A trip generation report was attached to his report. Check the dumpster location with Solid
Waste. The ADA spaces are fine as shown.
Warrick: The dumpster space is located in a cross access and it needs to be relocated where
Solid Waste can access it but it cannot impede a cross access between the two lots.
Little: We were on site and we saw that the adjoining property's dumpster is also in the
Minutes of a meeting of
Technical Plat Review
January 13, 1999
Page 3
cross access and they will need to relocate it.
Swain: How big a space?
Warrick: You need to check with solid waste. It depends on the volume generated by the
building and they also require space for recycling facilities.
Little: 12 by 24 is a good rule of thumb but please check with them.
Warrick: When the dumpster is located there is a requirement that three sides of that
dumpster location be screened.
Kim Rogers, Parks Department
No comment.
Dawn Warrick, Development Coordinator
The fee was received for the grading and drainage plan. A fee waiver request has been submitted
for the Tree Preservation Plan review. Adjacent zoning needs to be labeled. Add plat page 213
to the title block. There seems to be a large number of compact spaces. The setback reduction
request needs to be submitted for review for 25 feet front building set back. All utilities shall be
located underground. Provide information on the utility equipment such as where it will be
located and how it will be screened. The dumpster location needs to be moved. Provide
screening on three sides of the location and label the screening to be installed. The adjoining
developments include Proctor & Gamble, Single Tree Plaza and the City Fire Station and this
project is compatible.
Warrick. You should be aware that in general, compact spaces don't work very well. The
length of the drive on the south side of building between the parking spaces, you have a
measurement that states it's 51 feet from the building and the aisle is too narrow. Your lane must
be 24 feet between the end of the parking stall and the curb. What utility equipment will be used?
Kelly: It's a VAV system and it will be on the roof. The parapet will screen it. They are
six and eight feet.
Warrick: It looks as if you have provided a future connection to Plainview Avenue. There
are some dash lines for the south parking area and I'm not sure what that represents.
Kelly: We don't know who the tenant is going to be. It could be that they would prefer
•
•
•
Minutes of a meeting of
Technical Plat Review
January 13, 1999
Page 4
the drive in a different location. This is an alternate.
Warrick: You must understand, we are looking at one curb cut.
Ron Petne, Engineering
All designs are subject to the City's latest design criteria. Review for plat approval is not
approval of public improvements and all proposed improvements are subject to further review at
the time construction plans are submitted. All corrections and/or additional information is
required to be provided no later than the standard deadline to continue to the Subdivision
Committee meeting on January 20. Fire protection and fire hydrant locations shall meet the more
stringent of the published water standards or the Fire Chief's request. Is an additional fire hydrant
needed? There is existing sewer service onsite and no further improvements are required. The
preliminary grading plan does not contain all of the information required by the ordinance and a
Grading Plan Checklist was included with the staff report. The proposed grading does not meet
the required property line setbacks on the north and south property lines so a variance will be
required. A preliminary drainage report is required to be submitted. Additional information on the
downstream pipe capacities will have to be provided because of the propose rerouting of the
existing runoff and the additional runoff generated onsite.
Petrie: For grading there are setback requirements. You can fill or cut over a property
line if there is joint submission with owners of both properties.
Kelly: You're saying we are filling or cutting on someone else's property.
Petrie: Not necessarily. You're not meeting the setback requirement.
Little: You can bring a letter from the adjoining property owner saying there will be a
retaining wall or a cut on their property line.
Petrie:
easements.
Also, there are setbacks from easements. There are existing utilities in these
•
Kelly: We're going to have to put the utilities underground.
Petrie: There is existing telephone and gas. By lowering that down you may expose those
so they will have to be relocated. That will require written approval from all utilities. Feel free to
call me if you have any questions.
UTILITY COMMENTS
Minutes of a meeting of
Technical Plat Review
January 13, 1999
Page 5
Dennis Burrack, SWEPCO Engineering
We have two 4 inch conduits going across the street. The pole is existing and is shown as a bench
mark to the cotton spindle. We can go underground from there. It is my understanding the City
is doing the underground relocation on their property for the fire station. The bench mark pole
has 12kv running down the easement and it's at 36 inches. Do not touch it. If we have to cut it
we'll get in and lower it. This feeds the businesses on the north side of Millsap. The new building
for Proctor and Gamble is being fed from this point. As part of the City's relocation we will need
a piece of switch gear which feeds underground into the switch gear and feeds out and this will be
the future piece that feeds the other direction.
Little: Is this in an easement? It's not shown.
Burrack: It is in an easement by Lewis Brother's Leasing.
Little: Please add that easement to your plat so we know how wide that is.
Burrack: The point of service for the new office building will be back at the corner and I'll
need another piece of switch gear. The switch gears will set on a 9 x 9 concrete pad. I'll get the
cut sheet on it to you. The switch gear is about 6.5 square by about 5 feet tall. The pole that is in
the corner, that feeds back to the east and north and I have to keep that. What kind of a grade cut
are you going to be making on the east side?
Kelly: We're not doing anything. This is drainage.
Burrack: The switch gear pad will have to be graded before I put my facilities in.
Kelly: How do we go on somebody else's property and put that electric in?
Little: The easement is for utility purposes.
Burrack: That was recorded as a general utility easement at the time Lewis Brothers went
in. Originally it was a private.
Grubbs: Who owns that easement then?
Little: All public utilities. Anybody has the right to use it. The land underneath it is
owned by Lewis.
Kelly: So we have to get permission from them?
Minutes of a meeting of
Technical Plat Review
January 13, 1999
Page 6
Little:
property.
It's always nice to tell them you are going to utilize the easement that is on their
Burrack: SWEPCO would be the one getting in there.
Kelly: We don't have the easement or the utilities on our property.
Burrack: We will leave the overhead power line running east and west and also going north
because I cannot make a transition at that point.
Wan -ick: You'll have to request a wavier from the Planning Commission.
Kelly: The reason for that would be?
Burrack: I can't make a transition.
Little: How big a hurry are you in? If you weren't asking for a waiver then you could be
•
approved at the Subdivision Committee. But since you need a waiver, you'll have to go to the
Planning Commission. It doesn't take that much longer.
•
Burrack: As the point of service on this, I would like it to come from that pole that is more
or less in the middle. In the future, if this is put underground from the next developer to meet the
City Ordinance I will have to put a vault in. You will be obligated to provide us with a pad and
conduit over to that pole. In the future, if the pole is taken out, I'll put a vault in and we'll refeed
it from what other piece of switch gear we have to put in.
Little: Can that pad be in the easement?
Burrack: Yes.
Little: They have a wall there.
Burrack: I need to know the cut information and what will be cut or filled behind that.
Kelly: We're less than a 3% on that. We have 3 feet.
Grubbs: Could that be used a parking lot?
Burrack: It could be. There couldn't be a building but there could be drives or parking
provided we have access to it.
•
Minutes of a meeting of
Technical Plat Review
January 13, 1999
Page 7
Kelly: Would it be better to put that pad m the back then instead or the middle?
Burrack: I don't have a good way to get down to it. The pole that is existing is clean and I
can get down to it. In the future, if we do put this down underground, I'll put that pad back in
the corner and we'll refeed back down to this pole location inside the vault.
Kelly: The only thing that's kicking this out is it's not all underground. Both sides have
to go underground or none. What's the cost of getting that underground?
Burrack: About $20 to $30 a foot plus the switch gear applications.
Kelly: About $12,000.
Burrack: Installing a switch gear would be someplace between $10,000 and $12,500. The
first piece of switch gear is going to be the City's. The one in the back would be a combination
between this property owner to the south.
• Little: If you all put up the money that it would cost to put this underground, would that
still have to be considered a waiver? I think we could ask the Subdivision Committee that and let
them make the decision. It might be a way to expedite. It would be the $215.
Burrack: The 46,000 square feet, is that total building/office space?
Kelly: That's correct.
Burrack: The covered parking that is shown, is that going to be the first floor of two?
Kelly: Right.
Burrack: The transformer location has not been selected or not that I could find on this for a
point of service.
Kelly: That would be back at the switch gear?
Burrack It could be. By definition it would have to be on this piece of property. You
could take the little island and make it slightly larger and put the transformer in there. If you do
have parking that close to it, we would ask for some protective bollards.
• Kelly: We'll work with you where ever you put that thing.
Minutes of a meeting of
Technical Plat Review
January 13, 1999
Page 8
Burrack: Street lighting is existing.
Rick Evans, Arkansas Western Gas
We have lines along the south side, the east side, and the north side. Any relocations or those
lines and the cuts you have to make will be at the owners expense. Do you know how many
offices they will have? Will you need one large meter to serve it all or will it be individual meters?
Kelly: My understanding is that it will be one large meter?
Evans: We'll have to work on the location of the meter.
Kevin Lefler, TCA Cable
If you want any future cable service then I would ask that you place a two inch conduit along the
same line as SWEPCO with the same entry place. Any cost of relocating existing lines will be at
the owners expense.
Kelly: Are you on the pole?
Lefler: I think we are and there may be a piece of fiber and I'm not sure what we will do
about that right now. Just get in touch with me later one, we'll talk it out.
Warrick: We do not have a Southwestern Bell representative for this morning, so I would
ask that you please contact them.
Kelly: Who should I call?
Warrick: David Chance.
Little: He's just filling in. He's doing it for Springdale and Fayetteville. He's pretty busy.
Warrick: In order for this to go on to Subdivision, we need revisions by 10 a.m. on
Wednesday, January 20. Your elevations are fine. We don't need revisions on that. We do need
revisions on the plan. We do need you to go ahead and make your public notification. We need
the proof of that notification. Notify the Subdivision meeting on the January 28 and the Planning
Commission meeting on February 8. You can make a statement in there that if the project is not
approved at the Subdivision Committee, it will go forward to the Full Commission on February 8.
Kelly: As long as I get the signature that has received it, that's fine? Or do you want
•
•
Minutes of a meeting of
Technical Plat Review
January 13, 1999
Page 9
certified mail.
Warrick: There are three ways. You can publish in the newspaper and provide us with that
publication. You can actually take the plat around to the adjoining property owners and have
them sign it and say that they understand that there is something going on. Or you can do
certified mail and just bring us the receipts.
Minutes of a meeting of
Technical Plat Review
January 13, 1999
Page 10
PP99-1: PRELIMINARY PLAT
CANDLEWOOD SUBDIVISION PP294
This item was submitted by Dave Jorgensen of Jorgensen and Associates on behalf of David
Chapman for property located north of Township and east of Highway 265. The property is
zoned R-1, Low Density Residential, and contains approximately 45.60 acres with 60 lot
proposed.
Dave Jorgensen was present on behalf of the project.
STAFF COMMENTS
Kim Hesse, Landscape Administrator
Preservation has been shown on the grading plan and most of the rare trees within the boundaries
of construction have been identified. The plan shows exactly what I have been asking for and I
appreciate the cooperation. I would like to discuss some minor design changes that could save
some exceptional trees. Please have the engineer and/or developer contact me to discuss these
issues.
Chuck Rutherford, Sidewalk and Trail Coordinator
Sidewalk, driveway approaches and access ramps shall be constructed to Ordinance. The 4 feet
sidewalks with a 6 feet green space on both sides of Candlewood Dr, Silverton Dr., and
Waxwood Dr. meet the local street requirement. Hwy 265 is a principal arterial and Township is
a collector, the requirement there is for a minimum 6 feet sidewalk with a minimum 10 feet green
space. This needs to be shown on the plat and added to the street and sidewalk notes. Sidewalks
need to be added to the legend.
Perry Franklin, Traffic Superintendent
Street lights as shown are okay. Will the street lights be standard Ozark or SWEPCO and 100
watt high pressure sodium fixtures?
Chapman: We are looking at gas lighting.
Warrick: We need to be sure that you get the correct amount of light that would be
produced by our standard light.
Little: He will probably want a signed agreement as to who maintains what.
•
Minutes of a meeting of
Technical Plat Review
January 13, 1999
Page 11
Kim Rogers, Parks Department
This proposal was approved at the Parks and Recreation Board meeting of October 5, 1998. The
PRAB recommended money in lieu of land. The City Council approved a waive from Ordinance
3793 to also accept money in lieu on October 20, 1998. The fee is $22,500.
Dawn Warrick, Development Coordinator
The grading and drainage and tree preservation information and fees have been submitted. Please
provide a project diskette. Label the adjacent zoning and add plat page 294 to the title block.
The legal description on the plat does not match the legal description of the recently approved
rezoning. Show the right of way dimensions for Township. Is a lot split necessary and was
Brown the original owner? We need discussion regarding future connections and whether or not
a contribution is needed toward the Hwy 265 improvements. The lot is in the floodplain and
those requirements need to be addressed. All utilities shall be located underground.
Jorgensen: I think the reason the legal description doesn't match is due to the right of way.
Originally, the rezoning matched the existing right of way and our new right of way is 55 feet
from the center. I know that is part of the problem.
Warrick. I have the legal check from Tony and he has blocked in areas where he found
differences. Please review this In reviewing whether a lot split was necessary, it seems this
property comes from a combination of different parcels and so it was put together or was this one
legal description? How did this come about?
Jorgensen: The overall property has been intact for a long time except for a portion that is in
the southwest corner which was owned by another owner so they have been combined.
Warrick: So that approximately 4 acres, was that in this legal description or was it part of a
larger piece? If it was part of a larger piece then we need to see about a lot split.
Jorgensen: As far as I know it was a single. They bought that property.
Chapman: I bought all the four acres.
Little: We'll just look at the property records from the County. So all of these were
bought in whole pieces.
Jorgensen: The original owner was Thornberry for the overall farm.
•
Minutes of a meeting of
Technical Plat Review
January 13, 1999
Page 12
Beavers. It almost looks like there is a strip between you and the right of way. Is there a
drafting error there? Is there a line missing?
Jorgensen: The Brown's property goes between our property and the right of way. Our
original property went all the way out to the right of way.
Warrick. Brown needs a property line there on his north side. In regards to areas for future
connections, we are looking for a connection to the north. We are looking for a possible
connection to the west and we are looking for the opportunity to connect to Brookbury Crossing
if that were to extend. That one we may need to talk about more.
Jorgensen: On the last one, we thought that the creek, sometimes river, constitutes a fairly
well defined geographical barrier of such that it would be more likely to use Township with the
new box culverts that are going in and eventually travel to the north through Brookbury Crossing
and that is the main reason we did not make a connection there is because of that barrier and the
fact that the installation of a bridge over the creek at that point would be very expensive and we
have adequate box culvert to the south on Township that would provide that crossing of the creek
and eventual connection to the north to Brookbury Crossing.
Little: We may just look at pedestrian crossing. We know the Planning Commission is
going to want to talk about that because that is so many lots in row without a break.
Jorgensen: We do have an access easement provided between Lot 27 and 28 for pedestrian
traffic over to the parks property.
Little:
Warrick:
Little:
Petrie:
Chapman:
Petrie:
Chapman:
Jorgensen:
They kept asking us about that at Council and I told them that we would have it.
How will that be surfaced? It looks like it is also an access to a rear lot manhole.
Does Jurgens make them pave them?
Not paved but some kind of hard surface.
It's going to be hard to sell a lot and have a road going down there.
No matter if there is a road or not, we will have to have access.
Could we have a hard surface and then maybe sod over it.
The existing easement along the whole creek is very accessible for all the sewer
•
•
•
Minutes of a meeting of
Technical Plat Review
January 13, 1999
Page 13
lines and force mains and various things that run in there. It doesn't have a hard surface but it's
like open ground and you can travel it at any time. It is expected to remain accessible. As far as
the 20 feet access and utility easement between Lot 27 and 28, that is what that is for.
Warrick. I'm sure that Parks is going to want that done in a specific way.
Rogers: Is there anyway you can mark those with stakes.
Jorgensen: As we get into the project, that would be a good idea.
Chapman: This easement is so people can walk through our subdivision?
Warrick: It's so the people from your subdivision can access the park land that is located
here.
Little: The other thing is that the Planning Commission tries to look for when we have
subdivisions that don't have streets that connect them where kids can walk on sidewalks that if
one child needs to go over and do homework with another child in another subdivision that they
don't have to get in the car and drive them and It provides a way for them to ride their bike or
walk over there.
Jorgensen: This might be awhile taking place. Crossing the creek is going to be expensive.
Little: I had questions about that at Council during the rezoning and I tried not to
convolute the process so I think it was an agreement that was made there.
Jorgensen: Even the Parks Department recognizes it's rough going along the creek to the
north.
Chapman: I don't think anybody could use it because you can't hardly cross that creek.
Little: We said we were going to have it.
Jorgensen: That was one of the conditions the Council requested.
Rogers: We have discussed building a bridge across there.
Chapman: Is there something established that says it has to be a paved sidewalk?
Little: Parks will be responsible for part of it. It's mainly controlled by Dave Jurgens who
•
Minutes of a meeting of
Technical Plat Review
January 13, 1999
Page 14
is the Water and Sewer Superintendent and he has to have enough of an access so he can get back
there with a truck.
Chapman: It's kind of hard to sell a lot if everyone is going to be walking through their yard
all the time.
Little: We need to make it where it is not part of their yard.
Warrick: This lot is a good size. It's got 95 feet of frontage and 200 plus depth.
Chapman: These lots are large.
Little: They should be able to site away from it. It will be up to Dave Jurgens.
Jorgensen: I'll get with him and work it out.
Rutherford: Behind Root School, there is a paved asphalt pathway that gives access to the kids
in the neighborhood to get to the school without having to get out on Mission Blvd. I have had
comments from the property owners along that and they are glad the kids use it.
Jorgensen: About the idea of a connection to the east, I understand we have to bring it to the
Planning Commission for their determination. We thought about a connection to the north.
Chapman: We tried to buy that land and they wouldn't sell it.
Jorgensen: There is a problem with the oak tree on the Township extension. I don't think the
Reynolds are interested in a connection.
Warrick: Our comments are for the Planning Commission to determine whether or not they
will make those requirements. It is basically because we we're looking at pieces of property that
are large acreages that are not developed. Even if the current property owners don't want a
connection they will not be there for perpetuity.
Little: As far as showing the connection to the east, we could look at Lot 14 as easily as
we could look at Lot 8. It might make more sense to center it between the Jones and Reynolds
property line.
Chapman: You're talking about a road access?
Little: Yes.
Minutes of a meeting of
Technical Plat Review
January 13, 1999
Page 15
Jorgensen: We should check with Reynolds and find out how opposed he is. If he thinks it's a
good idea, we don't mind.
Little: It really doesn't matter about the adjoining property owner unless they want it in a
specific location. If they want it in a special location, the Commission will work to get it there.
Just the fact that they say they don't want it, is no guarantee. We have to look at it for long term.
Chapman: Are you saying there will be a road?
Little: Your chances are 80% or better that there will be a road. Planning Commission
has to decide. How many acres is this?
Chapman: 46.
Little: It only has two points of access right now and it's just so that other people can
utilize those public streets which are being operated and maintained by the City in order to gain
access to their property if they want to develop in the future. You got quite a windfall by having
.
this street built and this is the same thing.
Jorgensen: We'll just bring this to the Planning Commission. The access to the north, would
that be paved to the property line.
Warrick: Right. We're talking about construction to the property line.
Little: The one that we didn't allow that and the one that we didn't cause that to happen
is at Brookhaven and it's a problem.
Jorgensen: But the access at Lot 13 or 14, you're talking just an easement.
Warrick. We're talking about construction.
Little: That's so the people there don't get confused and think that is their yard either.
We are going to need you to define the flood plain and establish those base flood elevations in
order for us to make sure these lots are of adequate size. The ordinance says there has to be
6,000 square feet of buildable area if part of the lot is in the flood plain. If all of the lot is in the
flood plain it has to be an acre.
Jorgensen: This came for the FIRM.
Beavers: But there is not a detailed study there. The Flood Plain Administrator determined
Minutes of a meeting of
Technical Plat Review
January 13, 1999
Page 16
that the Flood Plain Ordinance requires that you do a detailed study to show that those lots have
enough area. The Drainage Ordinance is separate.
Petrie: Basically, you need to determine the water surface elevation primarily because the
danger on Lots 29, 28, and 27. You look at the contour. It's more realistic that the flood plain
will be well into those lots.
Jorgensen: What we have marked on here is only from the FIRM map but we do have our
calculation as to what the flow is for this. It's not that big of a problem in our drainage
calculations. We'll get with Tim.
Little: We talked about Candlewood Drive going all the way through. We like that and
we were surprised that Jim Johnson allowed that. Mickey Jackson specifically said he did not
object if this street nght here was the same.
Jorgensen: Jim had to have it because it turned.
Little: You might have Mickey to talk to Jim.
Conklin: Under the Flood Damage Prevention Code, any subdivisions greater than 50 lots
or 5 acres, a base flood elevation has to be generate for the subdivision.
Jorgensen: I'll get with you on the details of this and we won't take everybody's time up. I
partially understand what they're saying.
Conklin: In Zone A, there are no base flood elevations generated and you will have to
generate that base flood elevation and one of the requirements under our code is you can't have
any lots in the flood plain and if you do have lots within the flood plain, you have to have 6,000
square feet of buildable area outside the flood plain boundary. So based on your base flood
elevation, that could potentially impact your lot configuration. You may need to fill or redesign
your lot making it an acre.
Beavers: Does that have to go through the Corp to be reviewed or do they do that through
you?
Conklin: The Corp will review that information and we also will review it.
Ron Petrie, Engineering
All designs are subject to the City's latest design criteria. Review for plat approval is not
•
•
•
Minutes of a meeting of
Technical Plat Review
January 13, 1999
Page 17
approval of public improvements and all proposed improvements are subject to further review at
the time construction plans are submitted. All work within the AHTD right of way requires
AHTD approval. All corrections and/or additional information are required to be provided no
later than January 20 at 10:00 a.m. The minimum easement or combination of right of way and
easement widths for water lines shall be 20 feet. Wider easements shall be required if the
easement contains any other utility. Fire protection and fire hydrant locations shall meet the more
stringent of the published water standards or the Fire Chief's request. Steel encasement will be
required under box culverts and wing walls. Provide truck access to all manholes. Either provide
truck access to the manhole located between Lots 42 and 43 or move the connection further to
the north to be closer to the existing access drive. A note should be added on the plat and also
incorporated into the protective covenants that prevents any lot owner to block access along the
existing 18 inch sanitary sewer line and the existing 24 inch sanitary sewer force main easement to
insure access at all times. The minimum easement or combination of right of way and easement
width for sanitary sewer line shall be 20 feet with the sewer centered. The minimum distance
from the edge of the sanitary sewer line to the easement will be 10 feet. Wider easements shall be
required if the easements contains any other utility or if the depth of the sanitary sewer is greater
than 10 feet. Steel encasement will be required under box culverts and wing walls If additional
street stub outs are required, the water and sewer will have to be extended to the property line
adjacent to the street. Provide a 20 feet utility easement between lots 14 and 15 for possible
future sanitary sewer extension. All manholes need to have "rain catchers." The preliminary
grading plan contains all the information required. The preliminary drainage report that was
submitted was reviewed for general compliance. A more detailed review will be done when the
construction plans are submitted. New swales, when requested or required, shall have concrete
bottoms and either concrete or sodded sides as determined in the final design and review process.
Also, all swales not located in public street right of way shall be private and privately maintained
by the Property Owners Association or Home Owners Association or similar entity. The
easement located between lot 35 and 36 and 28 and 29 should be labeled Drainage Easement.
Drainage Easements and Utility Easements cannot be combined. The open swale as shown
between Lot 54 and 55 cannot be accepted. A storm pipe will have to be designed to transport
the ten year runoff with an overflow swale designed for the 100 year rainfall. A drainage
easement should be added to one of the lot lines between lot 9 through 14 to allow for future
development upstream. Also, it should be studied before the construction plans are submitted
whether a swale is needed in this are to intercept the sheet flows onto the back of these lots.
Adequate easements will have to be provided as necessary. The 100 year flood plain lin as shown
along the Mud Creek Tributary seems to be in conflict with the existing contours. A more
detailed study will be required that establishes the 100 year water surface elevations and submitted
with the construction plans. The minimum centerline radius for residential street curves is 150
feet. If the street island is to be irrigated, provide an adequate under drain. For the Highway 265
widening an easements must be provided as necessary for any water and sanitary sewer
relocations and this will required further review and coordination. Please contact the AHTD to
•
Minutes of a meeting of
Technical Plat Review
January 13, 1999
Page 18
determine if any improvements to Highway 265 are need at this time in conjunction with this
development In accordance with the ordinances, and to be consistent with other developments,
staff will request that the Planning Commission determine the requirement for a developer
contribution to the widening of Highway 265.
Petrie: Getting back to the line you are going to relocate on the south side, we request
that the manhole between Lot 43 and 42 be accessible or move it down closer to that access road.
They are asking to vacate.
Jorgensen: To relocate sewer to the east closer to the driveway.
Petrie: In general, you have to have pipes for a 10 year rain fall and your overflow swales
are allowed. In between Lots 51 and 52, and Lots 54 and 55, that will have to have a pipe in
there with an overflow swale.
Little: That's okay for that to be in there with the utility easement?
• Petrie: No.
Little: That's a 25 feet utility easement. What is that 10 feet?
Jorgensen: 10 feet is the drainage easement and 15 feet of utility easement.
•
Petrie: The 10 feet is too small. The minimum is 20 feet for drainage easement. They
have to be separate easements.
Little: That will go from 25 feet to 30 feet.
Petrie: We will need an additional drainage easement. This depends on where we decide
to locate an additional access. We have sheet flow and there is no kind of drainage easement to
provide access for future tie ins. It depends on the stub out. We need to look at that further. Do
you understand what we need on the floodplain?
Jorgensen: Not really. I'll get with Tim.
Beavers: You need to get with us. Before the construction plans are reviewed we need the
same information for drainage. It sounds like Tim will be sending it to the Corps.
Chapman: I just finished a subdivision in Springdale and we had to do some calculations
because some of it was not already calculated. Basically, the Corp of Engineers kicked everything
•
•
Minutes of a meeting of
Technical Plat Review
January 13, 1999
Page 19
back to the City. All they did was write a letter and it took them six months to write the letter
stating that they had nothing to do with this.
Beavers: I know that the Corp is in the process of studying this. They may have some
information to share or they may not.
Petrie: Regarding Highway 265, you can get with Perry Franklin. He has some traffic
numbers.
Warrick. Also regarding streets, there would not be a problem with narrowing the right of
way on the Silverton and Waxwood Drive route. It's not the main street in the subdivision and
we do have a standard that allows for a 20 feet right way and 24 feet street.
Little: We wouldn't support it on Candlewood but we could on the loop street.
Beavers: 24 feet streets are 350 per day. It would depend on the traffic counts. How many
people will be cutting through?
Chapman: I originally wanted only one entry but I was told I had to have two. I don't like
chopping up an aesthetically nice subdivision with all these streets. I don't want people cutting
through here to avoid the traffic sign.
Little: They probably won't unless something is going on at that signal. Then they
probably will. It's beneficial to the residents in that if there is a fire and something is going on
there and there is another way for the fire truck to get there, they will be glad to have it coming.
Rutherford: I know our standard on 24 feet streets are sidewalk on one side. We might
compromise and widen the right of way for sidewalks on both sides.
Little: Say 4 feet of paving then the street. You might want to look at that and talk to
Perry.
Warrick: We have a question concerning Lot 46 and the area with the existing access drive
to the Terminella and Ford properties? Is this entire piece here part of Lot 46?
Jorgensen: Yes.
Warrick: Is the driveway going to continue to be in that location? Is there an access
easement?
•
Minutes of a meeting of
Technical Plat Review
January 13, 1999
Page 20
Jorgensen: Yes. It would be much better for him to access through his mother in Taw's
property directly to the brand new Township Street and go due west. At this time, he will retain
that access easement drive.
Petrie: It is access only to Terminella?
Warrick. It branches and goes to a couple of different properties.
Jorgensen: Freida's access will be off of Township.
Little: That will be much better.
Petrie: Will Dave Jurgens have access to get back to the manholes?
Jorgensen: Do they use that for trash service?
• Little: They do.
Petrie: That needs to be shown as an access easement instead of existing access easement.
Beavers: We have to be careful and not do anything that would require Randy to maintain
that.
Little: Is there any kind of agreement that Lot 46 is not going to be sold?
Chapman: No. I hope it can be sold.
Warrick: You need to check with the sign inspector. We think you will probably only be
allowed one sign. You show one on either side of your entryway drive. I'm not sure but you may
only be able to have it on one side.
Chapman: Is there any recourse on this street?
Little: The Planning Commission makes that determination.
Warrick: We're not requiring it and the Planning Commission will either require or not.
Utility Comments
• Mike Phipps, Ozarks Electric
•
•
•
Minutes of a meeting of
Technical Plat Review
January 13, 1999
Page 21
I would like the existing overhead lines shown. They feed to the east and the west. Before we
could get that overhead out, we would have to get underground in this subdivision. I would get
my underground and overhead points off this property. The way it feeds now, it feeds off 265
and on Skillern Road and I can't take it out. This line may have went in dunng the 40's and the
easements were not recorded. In fact, the property owner back then probably had to put the line
in. Crossings we need are Candlewood Drive and 265 intersection and Candlewood Drive and
Township. We will need the easements for the street lights which would be 10 feet utility
easements at Lots 19 and 20, Lots 13 and 14, Lots 8 and 9, Lots 5 and 6, Lots 3 and 4, Lots 25
and 26. You have a 20 feet utility easement shown at Lots 57 and 58 and you could make that a
10 feet utility easement. Is there going to be a sewer lift station in here anywhere? I bring this up
because we just completed Heritage Village and they are making the lift stations 3 phase. A lot of
time, we don't have 3 phase. The reason they go 3 phase is because it's cheaper than a single
phase. Eventually, it costs more because we have to get 3 phase to the lift. We can take the
others out. We need the same crossings. 4 inch is fine. Between Lot 6 and 7, you are showing a
20 feet easement. We don't need that. You have an easement between Lots 40 and 41 that won't
be used either. There is an easement between Lots 9 and 10 that we don't need. Also, the
crossing from Lots 9 and 10 over to Lot 36. You're showing an easement on Lot 35 and 36.
That needs to be a drainage easement. From Lots 16 and 17, the easement there is not needed.
The crossing on Centerton is not needed and also the easement between Lots 47 and 48 is not
needed. The easement between Lot 59 and 60 is not needed. You're crossing from Lot 59 and
60 over to Lots 32 and 33 we don't need. Your easement between Lots 32 and 33 is not needed.
Your easement between Lot 20 and 21 is not needed. The crossing from Lot 20 and 21 over to
Lots 51 and 52 is not needed. That will help you with your easements. We need to keep the
easement between Lots 12 and 13 along with the crossing. We going to run a line north and
south. We need a utility crossing from Lot 13 to Lot 47. You can leave off the crossings
between Lots 5 and 6 over to Lots 41 and 40. Leave your crossing at Lot 24 and 25 over to Lots
53 and 54 and the easement between Lots 24 and 25 needs to stay. You're showing a 40 feet
utility easement along the flood plain where you have the two sewer lines Try to make sure you
keep 20 feet on the west side of the sewer lines for the utilities. You're showing it that way but
we want to make sure it stays that way when you adjust your flood plain elevations.
Jorgenson: I have a drawing that shows all the overheads on the original survey and there is so
many of them that it clutters up the plat. I thought I would get a copy of that to you and you can
see where they're at.
Little: One you get underground in this subdivision, then all the overheads can come out?
Those easements will take an abstract to figure it out.
Phipps: Yes.
•
Minutes of a meeting of
Technical Plat Review
January 13, 1999
Page 22
Kevin Lefler, TCA Cable
We'll go with the same crossing and easements. We don't have service on the Ozarks poles.
Warrick. The Southwestern Bell utility rep is not here today so contact them individually.
Hesse: This is full of large trees. Can we relocate that street light?
Jorgensen: Yes. Can we give a bigger easement and leave the trees?
Hesse: They did that in Savannah and went around the trees.
Phipps: We'll look at an as built and locate the lines.
Little: When will you have the decision that the lights will be gas?
• Phipps: We're working with the state on that to determine a rate. Another thing we can is
to have someone bore underneath the tree.
•
Wamck. We need 37 revised copies by 10 a.m. on January 20, 1999. We will also need
proof of notification to adjoining property owners. The Subdivision Committee meeting is
January 28 at 8:30 a.m. and the Planning Commission meeting is February 8. at 5:30 p.m.
PLAT REVIEW MINUTES INDEX
ALLIED STORAGE LSD99-3 01/27/99
ALTUS ADDITION PP99-2 02/10/99
ALTUS ADDITION FP99-2 03/17/99
AR RESEARCH & TECH PK PP99-8.... 09/01/99
ARTHURS LSD99-7 02/24/99
BANK OF FAYETTEVILLE LSD99-802/24/99
BANK OF FAYETTEVILLE LSD99-2107/28/99
BRIDGEPORT IV, V & VI PP99-10 09/15/99
BRONSON LSD99-18 06/16/99
BURTON LS99-6 03/17/99
BUTTERFIELD TRL VILL LSD99-2208/18/99
CALHOON LS99-3.10 03/31/99
CANDLEWOOD SUB PP99-1 01/13/99
CANDLEWOOD DEV FP99-5 09/15/99
CHARLESTON PLACE FP99-3 04/14/99
CONLEY LS99-15 06/30/99
CONNOLLY LSD99-20 07/14/99
CONNOLLY LSD99-20 09/01/99
COVINGTON PARK PH I FP99-4 08/18/99
CREEKSIDE PLAZA LSD96-18.1 06/02/99
DAVIS LS99-19 09/15/99
EASEMENT PLT FOR GLENWOOD03/17/99
FAIRVIEW MAUSOLEUM LSD99-19... 06/16/99
FP99-1 WEDINGTON PL 03/17/99
FP99-2 ALTUS ADDITION 03/17/99
FP99-3 CHARLESTON PLACE 04/14/99
FP99-4 COVINGTON PARK PH 1 08/18/99
FP99-5 CANDLEWOOD DEV 09/15/99
GLENWOOD EASEMENT PLAT 03/17/99
HAMMOND LS99-10 04/28/99
LARSON LS99-11 06/02/99
LIFE COVENANT CHUR LSD99-23.... 08/18/99
LS99-3.10 CALHOON 03/31/99
LS99-5 SMITH 03/17/99
LS99-6 BURTON 03/17/99
LS99-8 SHOEMAKER 04/14/99
LS99-9 SISCO 04/28/99
LS99-10 HAMMOND 04/28/99
LS99-11 LARSON 06/02/99
LS99-12 SCHMITT 06/02/99
LS99-15 CONLEY 06/30/99
LS99-17 WILLIAMS 06/30/99
LSD99-18 WARREN 08/18/99
LS99-19 DAVIS 09/15/99
LSD96-18.1 CREEKSIDE PLAZA 06/02/99
LSD97-20.1 WEDINGTON PLACE.... 01/27/99
LSD98-12.1 TRICHELL MEDICAL06/02/99
LSD99-I OPTI PRO LLC 01/13/99
LSD99-2 TOWN CTR 01/27/99
LSD99-3 ALLIED STORAGE 01/27/99
LSD99-5 WALGREENS 02/10/99
LSD99-6 MILLSAP CTR 02/24/99
LSD99-7 ARTHURS 02/24/99
LSD99-8 BANK OF FAYETTEVILLE.. 02/24/99
LSD99-9 MNT INVESTMENTS 03/31/99
LSD99-10 MARSHALLTOWN TOOLS.. 03/31/99
LSD99-11 MARSHALLTOWN TOOLS.. 03/31/99
LSD99-12 RAZORBACK ESTATES03/31/99
LSD99-13 SUNBRIDGE CTR LT 7 04/28/99
LSD99-14 NELMS AUTO PLAZA 04/28/99
LSD99-15 ST. LOUIS BREAD CO 05/19/99
LSD99-16 MCILROY BANK 05/19/99
LSD99-17 SPRING CREEK 06/02/99
LSD99-18 BRONSON 06/16/99
LSD99-19 FAIRVIEW MAUSOLEUM06/16/99
LSD99-20 CONNOLLY 07/14/99
LSD99-20 CONNOLLY 09/01/99
LSD99-21 BANK OF FAYETTEVILLE... 07/28/99
LSD99-22 BUTTERFIELD TRL VILL... 08/18/99
LSD99-23 LIFE COVENANT CHUR.... 08/18/99
MARSHALLTOWN TOOLS LSD99-10.. 03/31/99
MARSHALLTOWN TOOLS LSD99-10.. 03/31/99
MCILROY BANK LSD99-16 05/19/99
MILLENNIUM PL PP99-7 08/18/99
MILLSAP CTR LSD99-6 02/24/99
MNT INVESTMENTS LSD99-9 03/31/99
NELMS AUTO PLAZA LSD99-14 04/28/99
OPTI PRO LLC LSD99-1 01/13/99
PP99-1 CANDLEWOOD SUB 01/13/99
PP99-2 ALTUS ADDITION 02/10/99
PP99-3 ROBINWOOD SUB 02/10/99
PP99-4 SUMMERSBY 04/14/99
PP99-5 STONEWOOD 05/19/99
PP99-6 SILVERTHORNE 06/16/99
PP99-7 MILLENNIUM PL 08/18/99
PP99-8 AR RESEARCH & TECH PK... 09/01/99
PP99-10 BRIDGEPORT IV, V & VI09/15/99
RAZORBACK ESTATES LSD99-1203/31/99
ROBINWOOD SUB PP99-3 02/10/99
SCHMITT LS99-12 06/02/99
SHOEMAKER LS99-8 04/14/99
SILVERTHORNE PP99-6 06/16/99
SISCO LS99-9 04/28/99
SMITH LS99-5 03/17/99
SPRING CREEK LSD99-17 06/02/99
ST LOUIS BREAD CO LSD99-15 05/19/99
STONEWOOD PP99-5 05/19/99
SUMMERSBY PP99-4 04/14/99
SUNBRIDGE CTR LT 7 LSD99-1304/28/99
TOWN CENTER LSD99-2 01/27/99
TRICHELL MEDICAL LSD98-12.106/02/99
UNDERGROUND UTILITY ORD 04/28/99
WALGREENS LSD99-5 02/10/99
WARREN LS99-18 08/18/99
WEDINGTON PL FP99-I 03/17/99
• WEDINGTON PLACE LSD97-20.I01/27/99
WILLIAMS LS99-17 06/30/99
•