HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-07-28 - Minutes•
•
•
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF
TECHNICAL PLAT REVIEW
A regular meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee was held on Wednesday, July 28,
1999 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Admuustration Building, 113 W. Mountain,
Fayetteville, Arkansas.
ITEM CONSIDERED ACTION TAKEN
LSD99-21: Bank of Fayetteville (pp401) Forward to Subdivision
MEMBERS PRESENT
Michael Campbell, SWEPCO
Bob Falk, SWB Telephone
STAFF PRESENT
Tim Conklin
Kim Hesse
David Higgins
Janet Johns
Ron Petrie
MEMBERS ABSENT
Rick Evans, ArkWestern
Kevin Lefler, TCA
STAFF ABSENT
Perry Franklin
Mickey Jackson
•
Transcript of Technical Plat Review
July 28, 1999
Page 2
LSD99-21: LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT
BANK OF FAYETTEVILLE, PP401
This item was submitted by Roger Trotter of Development Consultants, Inc. on behalf of Bank of
Fayetteville for property located at Lot 2, Wedington Place Addition. The property is zoned C-2,
Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 1.00 acres.
Roger Trotter, Shahin Riahi, and John Allen Lewis were present on behalf of the request.
Staff Reports
Jim Johnson. 9-1-1 Addressme
This building could be addressed 3 different directions; off Steamboat, off Tahoe, or if the
address numbers can either be incorporated into or attached to the monument sign it could be
addressed off Wedington Drive.
Kim Hesse. Landscape Administrator
The landscape plan is adequate but will need the following additions prior to the issuance of a
building permit: notes or detail describing proper preparation of the landscape beds; notes or
details describing the proper installation of plants; and, a note concerning the proposed irrigation.
Chuck Rutherfor&Sulewalk & Trails Coordinator
Sidewalks, driveway approaches, and access ramps shall be constructed to Ordinance Number
4005. An inspection is required prior to the concrete pour. Driveway approaches shall be
constructed of Portland Cement Concrete.
A 5 foot sidewalk already exists along Wedmgton Drive. Tahoe Place is a local street requiring a
6 foot green space and a 6 foot sidewalk. Steamboat Drive is a local street requiring a 6 foot
green space and a 6 foot sidewalk. The sidewalks need to be shown continuous through the
driveways. The curb radius lines need to be removed through the sidewalk at the dnveways.
Trotter: I understand.
Perry Franklin. Traffic Superintendent
Warrick: Perry is going to work up a trip generation on this. You don't have that just yet.
• He made the comment that street lights are to be installed for the final plat, which is probably
more a comment for Clary, so we'll get back with them.
s
Transcnpt of Technical Plat Review
July 28, 1999
Page 3
comment for Clary, so we'll get back with them.
Trotter: I'll get with him. I knew he was handling it. He's the man to go to at this point.
Conklin: Okay.
The universal ADA spaces must be at least 16 feet wide with a 5 foot aisle and an 11 foot space.
Show the ADA ramp locations at ADA spaces.
Warrick: Perry's concern was that because these were on angles, there is 16 feet at the rear
of the parking stall bit they narrow down and they have to be 16 feet at the front of the parking
stalls also.
Trotter: Okay. So, ADA says that the very minimum is 16?
Warrick: It's a universal space.
Kim Rogers. Parks QperaSLons Coordinator
No comment since this is zoned C-2.
Dawn Warrick. Development Coordinator
Submittal requirements were adequate.
Regarding plat requirements, the adjacent zoning needs to be labeled. Also, dimension the rights
of way from centerlines on the site plan. For your information, the new flood plain maps are in
effect as of July 21, 1999.
Warrick: I notice that you have a flood plain notation on here and I want you to be aware
that the new flood maps for Fayetteville went into effect last week. There is new flood data.
Regarding street requirements, the curb cut on the western property line was approved in this
approximate location. The eastern curb cut must be considered by Planning Commission and
will require a waiver of the Overlay Distract regulations. Cross access is a requirement of
Commercial Design Standards and this plan does not propose any. Assessment will be required
for the Wedington widening project.
Warrick: The Master Street Plan requirements were adequate based on the right of way
dedication that is being shown along Wedington Drive. That will need to be dedicated by
warranty deed because it is a state highway.
Transcnpt of Technical Plat Review
July 28, 1999
Page 4
Warrick: The western curb cut at Tahoe Place was approved by Planning Commission. The
eastern curb cut, as you know, was not. We still have a concern about that. It does require a
waiver of the overlay district requirements and that should be submitted to Planning Commission
so we can determine that waiver request.
Conklin: The requirement is that it can't be any closer than 250 feet from the intersection.
We went to Planning Commission and Development Consultants did submit to us a layout of the
entire shopping center area. Their concern was whatever curb cuts we allow at Steamboat or
Tahoe, that it doesn't preclude them from additional curb cuts The other standard is one curb
cut for 200 feet of frontage. Right now, this is about 250 feet up to this point. There is a 50 foot
access easement in this area. The issue that the Planning Commission is going to have to make a
decision on is whether to allow a cut within the 250 feet to the intersection. I would prefer the
access to be at the access easement which would be allowed based on DCI's plans they have
submitted to us for preliminary general concept plan for this area with the access drive going all
the way across the back of these lots to allow access at this location which would wind it up over
here so this lot could be developed with access and keep it within the 250 feet range. I would
support this access easement being used.
Warrick: Planning Commission has already located the access easement on the north
property line. That was done in 1996 when this plat was filed. We basically have to go back to
that because they approved it after getting the Information from Clary Development. We need to
utilize that curb cut location. It causes a problem if that access easement is utilized by Clary and
you are still proposing a curb cut within 100 feet -- actually less -- within about 70 feet of it.
That wouldn't meet any of the standards for overlay district or anything else.
Conklin: I Liked the design that your firm came up with which was to develop that access
across between those 2 streets -- Steamboat and Colorado -- and have access off of that. That's
what was requested at the last time we were at Planning Commission. This is a decision that the
Planning Commission is going to have to make.
Warrick: You need to make a formal request in writing for the waiver from the overlay
district.
Riahi: So, we're basically -- for this, we're not discussing with the Planning
Commission. That's not really our property.
Warrick: We have to discuss it.
Conklin: How do you plan this entire shopping center site and plan access? I don't think
• we can just look at this right here because we're going to have potentially, a fast food restaurant,
and where is there access going to be from? We're trying to figure out where do we want these
Transcript of Technical Plat Review
July 28, 1999
Page 5
cuts to line up. Development Consultants had a general idea or preliminary plan of how to
provide access to these lots through the access easement. It does join your property. That's one
thing the Planning Commission has looked at was providing access into this area. That's what
we're looking at. Plus, it was the intent of the overlay district ordinance to get curb cuts 250 feet
from the intersection.
Rialn: What I'm saying is, we can't really proposed anything for the rest of the
development. That's not ours.
Conklin: It's the same engineering firm. It seems like they should coordinate.
Riahi: We're talking about 2 different projects. As far as this project is concerned, we
can't make any concessions about this access to be moved or anything like that. Legally --
Trotter. This is a separate large scale.
Warrick: Back in 1996, when the access easement was located a commitment was made by
the developer of the entire subdivision. That commitment is very specific.
Conklin: I think it would be wrong not to consider the overall development and how
circulation is going to function and be designed. That's all I'm trying to do.
Riahi: I agree with you.
Conklin: We're showing a 50 foot access easement and we have an overlay district standard
that says no curb cuts within 250 feet of the intersection.
Rtahi: I completely agree with you on that. Legally, how do we make concessions for
the rest of the project. That's what I'm talking about. We can't really tell them that we agree to
move this.
Trotter: What did you say the requirement was between the 2 drives?
Conklin: 200 feet.
Trotter: We're at about 121 feet where that access easement is now.
Conklin: But you're not meeting the 250 feet.
Trotter: We'll be asking for a waiver on that.
Transcript of Technical Plat Review
• July 28, 1999
Page 6
•
Conklin: It is something to consider. We're going to have the Planning Commission make
the decision because it is a waiver of the overlay district requirement.
Riahi: I have to go back to Clary Development and tell them to submit their plans at the
same time. That way, you can consider both of them at the same time. I think that is what I'm
understanding.
Conklin: I don't think they have to submit both plans at the same time. It was Clary
Development that wrote the letter to us and submitted that plan. They want to encourage that or
else -- that's my impression. We have a letter from Clary Development trying to make an access
drive back on the north side of this lot. I think we're in agreement that this is what they would
prefer. They want you to do this. I can't speak for Clary, either. I'm just saying they wrote a
letter and what's on their plan
Warrick: What we can rely on is what is platted of record and that's the access easement on
the north property line and minutes that state that the driveway onto Steamboat from lot 2 would
be a shared driveway between lot 2 and an adjacent development on lot 3. That's the record from
September 23, 1996. That's what we have to present to the Planning Commission with your
request for a waiver of the overlay district requirements.
Riahi: We're planning this and we can only write a letter saying that we want our drive
at this location. We can't make any comments about what they may want to do or what you
expect them to do.
Conklin: It's a common access easement. It's not just for this lot but for the lot to the
north.
Trotter: He's going through the large scale development process first and the following
large scale that goes through, be it Clary or whoever owns this lot, I guess they will have to
suffer based on what we grant the bank.
Warrick: We can't operate in a vacuum. We can't say we don't know what's going to
happen here because we know that there is an access easement platted That's going to be an
access point. We know that.
Conklin: I'm trying to follow the intent of what the Planning Commission approved in '96.
You can write your letter and you can ask for consideration to place your curb cut at that
location.
• Riahi: They already know what's been planned for this back lot. You already know
what's been planned for this access. They can make a decision based on that. We believe that is
• Transcript of Technical Plat Review
July 28, 1999
Page 7
the only way we can handle it for our site.
Conklin: Another thing to look at, too, if you do this, it will impact -- we already have this
access easement. That is what we are stating as staff.
Trotter: Can that be rescinded?
Wamck: It can be vacated through Council. It would have to be a vacation request from
the Planning Commission and then through the City Council. The property owner, Clary, would
have to request that.
Trotter: I think this drive through from one side to the other was an effort to provide
access as an agreement to have cross access between these streets. I'm not 100% sure that the
developer wanted that exact plan. He simply wanted to be able to proceed for approval of his
preliminary plat.
Warrick: If Mr. Clary decides that he wants to vacate that, that is his decision and we can
process the request. We can't speculate.
Riahi:
point?
Would that help if we had an agreement to vacate that access easement at this
Warrick: You can present to the Planning Commission whatever you feel is necessary to
make your request.
Conldin: Overall, we're trying to figure out how all the traffic is going to function in the
shopping center and where his access point will be Clary has sent to us a plan showing a
common access drive all the way across. It's not something that we are making up. This is
something that Clary has indicated that he would like.
Trotter: I'm saying that it could be relocated farther north. It may be relocated.
Riahi: It could be.
Warrick: We're talking about a whole lot of "could be's" so let's worry about what we have
in front of us for now. We've got an opuuon. You have to make your request before the
Planning Commission which you need to support. I'm looking on your plat and I see three
variances listed and you do mention the access location which is less than the minimum
requirement. That's fine if you want to make changes, or if you want to make a greater argument
and supply additional information for the Planning Commission, then go ahead and do that in
writing. That's fine. I've also noticed that you have requested a variance on the rear setback of
•
•
•
Transcript of Technical Plat Review
July 28, 1999
Page 8
20 feet. The Planning Commission cannot grant that variance. That has to go before the Board
of Adjustments. I'm assuming that is for the canopy over your teller area.
Trotter: Yes, ma'am.
Warrick: That's about 14 and a half feet?
Trotter: Is that accurate?
Riahi: Yes.
Warrick: We need to get you set up for that meeting. It is a separate item that we will need
to request specifically to them.
Regarding parking requirements, on May 24, 1999, Planning Commission denied a request for
22 parking spaces at this location. The maximum allowable by ordinance for a sale office
structure with 3,372 square feet is 21 including the 20% overage. 17 spaces would be allowed
without the 20% overage. The proposed curb cuts will create potential conflicts with traffic flow
for the future development of Wedington Place subdivision with regard to the location of the
dedicated access easement.
Warrick: 22 parking spaces is not an option. They did not specify in that meeting what
number you could request.
Conklin: Staff has been looking at bank parking and how it is being utilized and looking at
the ratios that we've used. I have decided to use the ratio of 1 per 200 square feet for sales office
as bank parking. It has been used in the past for banks. That gets you up to 21 spaces.
Warrick: Staff will support 21.
Conklin: I'm willing to work with the banks in this community. Maybe it's because the
students are gone, but the bank parking on Friday afternoons is less than 50% utilized. I know
we have quite a few banks in this community and when the students get back, I'll look at it again.
We do not have a bank fisted in our parking ratios. As staff, we have to place banks under a
certain type of use. I put that under sales office with 1 space per 200 square feet. That should
help the banks in this community.
Regarding other requirements, this property lies within the design overlay district. Written
description for any requested waivers is required.
Transcript of Technical Plat Review
•
July 28, 1999
Page 9
•
•
Warrick: Staff felt like this project meets the commercial design standards.
Trotter: If we show 21 spaces, there's no waiver request?
Warrick: You can eliminate that from your request.
In order for this project to continue in the current review cycle, all requested revisions and
additional information must be added to the plat and 37 revised copies must be submitted to the
Planning Division no later than 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday, August 4, 1999. Developers of all
large scale developments are required by ordinance to provide notification to all adjoining
property owners of the upcoming public hearings of the Subdivision and Planning Commission.
Proof of said notification is required to be submitted with the revisions or this project will not
proceed.
Ston Petrie. Engineenng
In general, 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 are required to be provided no later than the standard deadline to continue to
Subdivision Committee on August 4th.
Petrie: We discussed most of this on the phone.
Regarding water, show the proposed meter location and service line. Will this building have a
sprinkler system? Fire protection and fire hydrant locations to meet the published criteria or the
Fire Chief's request. Show the location of the new fire hydrant that the City will be installing.
Add to the plans the new 18 inch waterline that the City is constructing. Move the proposed
monument sign out of the easement. Also, relocate all the proposed trees/shrubs a minimum of
10 feet from the 18 inch waterline.
Petrie: I assume this building won't be sprinldered.
Riahi: It will not be.
Petrie: I have given you a copy of the 18 inch waterline.
Trotter: Is this as built?
Petrie: It is not completed yet. We don't have as builts.
Transcript of Technical Plat Review
July 28, 1999
Page 10
Trotter: We know where it is anyway. We've shot the valves.
Petrie: It is supposed to be 10 feet off the northern easement line which would put it right
underneath the proposed sign. We request that you move that sign out of the easement.
Trotter: Okay.
Petrie: Also move the trees and shrubs.
Riahi: Is that the development sign or is that the sign for this building?
Trotter: That's your sign.
Riahi: Can we just go ahead and remove that sign? We don't need it. The sign will be
on the building.
Petrie: I'm just asking it to be moved off the water line.
Riahi: I thought it was a requirement of the City. If it's not a requirement, we have our
sign on the building and that would satisfy our needs.
Warrick: Do you have your address on the building?
Riahi: We'll put a street number in brass.
Warrick: The reason being that first comment from the 9-1-1 Addressing Coordinator. You
will need to talk to him about which street this is going to be addressed off of and how he needs
that shown on the building.
Trotter: You want the trees and shrubs a minimum of 10 feet from the water line?
Petrie: Trees are 10 foot and shrubs are, I believe, are 5 feet. That is a major
transmission line.
Trotter: I'm hoping we meet all the overlay in that regard for landscaping requirements.
Hesse: You are now but you can rearrange it.
Trotter: We've got the trees pretty much on the line right now.
Hesse: At least a couple of them.
•
•
Transcript of Techmcal Plat Review
July 28, 1999
Page 11
Riahi:
that?
Could we come up with a different kind of tree that wouldn't be rooting deep like
Hesse: None of them will really root deep but they are going to go for the water
regardless.
Petrie: They need to be 10 feet from the water line.
Trotter: He needs his distance for maintenance purposes.
Petrie: That tree could sit there for 50 years and it would have to come out if they had to
do something with that water line. We try to take care of those problems now.
Riahi: We'll take a look at it and try to get away from it.
Regarding grading, the preliminary grading plan does not contain all of the information required
by the ordinance. Provide information regarding minimum erosion control requirements, erosion
and sedimentation control, construction time schedule and descnption of the fill material or
compaction, runoff and sedimentation control measures, and dust control measures by the time
construction plans are submitted or at the preconstruction conference. Add the soil type as
identified by the unified soils classification system. Add to the grading plan, the proposed
revegetation planned for the disturbed areas.
Regarding the drainage, show the new street and storm sewer that will be constructed as a part of
the Highway 16 improvements. A preliminary drainage report must be submitted in compliance
with Section 1.2 of the Drainage Criteria Manual. The final plat dated 9/24/96 states, "Detention
Storage to be determined and/or provided for lots I & 2 at the time of Large Scale Development
submittal." This is a requirement of Section 1.2 that must be addressed in the preliminary
drainage report. Discharging the parking lot runoff directly on the grass/sidewalk/streets cannot
be accepted. This parking lot runoff should be collected underground and discharged at the
proposed drop inlet to be constructed along Highway 16.
Petrie: You need to get this drainage design to me as quick as you can so we can review
it. We need to have all that agreed upon and complete before Subdivision Committee.
Trotter: Okay.
Regarding streets, 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 Wedington Drive widening project. The
• widening project is "50/50" State and City and estimated to cost $2,000,000 by resolution no.
Transcript of Technical Plat Review
July 28, 1999
Page 12
120-97 dated 12/16/97. The requested assessment to the Bank of Fayetteville must be approved
by the Planning Commission. The suggested amount based upon the traditional one-half of a
standard street will be $14,033.25 for 225 feet of road frontage times 14 feet in width times
$4.445 per square foot. Please note that the widening of Wedington is for existing and future
traffic demands. The developer's engmeer 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 August 4 for consideration by the
Subdivision Committee. Note that it is the Planning Commission who has the authonty for the
final requirement, if any.
Conklin: That cost assessment projection would have to be submitted with the revisions?
Petrie: Yes.
Warrick: Two things that you need to note concerning commercial design standards -- we
need calculations on site coverage. In the overlay district, you have a maximum coverage of
75%. You have to maintain 25% green space. Also cross access is required by commercial
design standards and that is not being provided at this point.
• Conklin: When the decision is made on the curb cut, that may do it.
•
Warrick: In May, there was a proposal that this group brought before the Planning
Commission that included a cross access point in the northwest corner. That has been
eliminated. The Planning Commission will be looking for that.
Riahi: On that, we were thinking since these 2 streets were so close, cross access from
either one would create more traffic conflicts.
Warrick: That can be your argument to Planning Commission. The requirement is for cross
access. It's not a waiver but it is required.
Conklin. Staff must make them aware of cross access. You have three streets, that may be
adequate. On the monument sign, you are indicating that you may not want to do that?
Riahi: I think that would be better for the city not to have that as far as the look. We'll
just put the sign on the building which is visible for 2 sides. That is up to the bank.
Conklin: Whatever you do propose, the Planning Commission needs to approve.
Warrick: If you are proposing wall signage, it needs to shown on the elevation.
Transcript of Technical Plat Review
•
July 28, 1999
Page 13
•
•
R�alu: I think it is all ready. I'll discuss that with the bank owner.
Utility Company Reports
Johnev Boles Arkansas Western Gas Company
No Comments
Michael Campbell. SWEPCO
The utility easements indicated on this plat are sufficient. The large scale development shows
there is conduit that crosses undemeath Steamboat from lot 1R back to the west. We're going to
assume those are installed in the correct location. At the point in time when you know the
voltage and load of the building, just coordinate with us for the installation of conduit and the
location of the underground transformers.
Bob Falk. SWB Telephone
The utility easements are adequate. I will need coordination on getting conduit put into the bank.
There will need to be an equipment room in the bank. I will need to talk with somebody from
the bank on what type of services they will be needing.
Kevin Lefler. TCA Cable
Warrick: They request one 4 inch conduit to be placed in the electrical telephone room of
the bank to the green space outside generally following the electrical company's comment Any
cost to relocate cable service in the easements will be at the developers expense. You can
contact Kevin Lefler if you have any other comments. Concerning utility equipment, whether
it's ground or roof mounted must be screened from the public view with vegetation or some other
type of material.
Meeting adjourned at 9:40 a.m.