Loading...
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.