No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-06-28 - Minutes• Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 1 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF TECHNICAL PLAT REVIEW A regular meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee was held on Wednesday, June 28, 2000 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS CONSIDERED LSD 00-15.00: Large Scale Development (Lake Hills Church, pp 255) LSD 00-17.00: Large Scale Development (McDonalds, pp 134) STAFF PRESENT • Tim Conklin Sara Edwards Ron Petrie Kim Hesse Chuck Rutherford Mickey Jackson • UTILITIES PRESENT Mike Phipps, Ozark Electric Johney Boles, Ar Western Gas Bill Smith, Southwestern Bell ACTION TAKEN Forward w/revisions Forward w/revisions STAFF ABSENT Perry Franklin Cheryl Zotti UTILITIES ABSENT Kevin Lefler, Cox Communications Jack Regale, SWEPCO • • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 2 LSD 00-15.00: Large Scale Development (Lake Hills Church, pp 255) was submitted by The Benham Group on behalf of Lake Hills Church for property located on the east side of Hwy 265 north of Township. The property is zoned A-1, Agricultural and contains approximately 3.59 acres. The request is to build a church. Conklin: Good morning. We will start our Technical Plat Review Committee for Wednesday June 28, 2000. First item of business is LSD 00-15.00: Large Scale Development (Lake Hills Church, pp 255) was submitted by The Benham Group on behalf of Lake Hills Church for property located on the east side of Hwy 265 north of Township. The property is zoned A-1, Agricultural and contains approximately 3.59 acres. The request is to build a church. Good morning. Fox: Good morning. Conklin: I'm Tim Conklin, City Planner. This is Sara Edwards our Development Coordinator and Ron Petrie our Staff Engineer. We will start with Sara Edwards She will go over our planning comments first. Edwards: Hwy 256 is a principal arterial and the requirement is for a minimum 6 foot sidewalk with a minimum 10 foot greenspace. That needs to be shown on the plat with the sidewalk continuous through the driveway. The sidewalk also needs to be added to the legend. From Perry Franklin our Traffic Superintendent, he does have a note that sight distance does need to be checked where the entrance drive is located. A detail for tree protection fencing will be required and tree protection fencing shall be shown on the grading plan except fencing along the east limits of grading can suffice as tree protection fencing. Tree protection fencing shall be required along the limits of disturbance for the construction of the sewer main from the building east to the existing sewer. Trees along Hwy 265 shall be preserved and tree protection fencing indicated on grading plan. Please submit in writing if and why these trees cannot be preserved. A buffer to the south will be required to screen the building and parking area from the existing residents. Some form or irrigation is required for new landscaping, water spigots placed at 100 foot radius intervals is the minimum requirement. Please include all applicable details and notes required for Landscape installation. See off-street parking lot landscape ordinance. Right now the application that you turned in for this large scale development the property owner has not signed. So we will need to remedy that before Subdivision Committee. We would also like elevations provided for the east side of this building. Do you know if they will be using any monument signs? Fox: I don't know. • • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 3 Edwards: You don't know? Okay. Conklin: If they do plan to have a monument sign that needs to be shown on the plan and it needs to have an elevation submitted. Edwards: Also we need you to apply for a new conditional use because this plan, there is a major deviation of the approved conditional use meaning square footage, where it sticks out. Also, we would like for you to indicate the square footage of this building on the site plan. Fox: Okay. I thought I did. Edwards. Please add plat page 255 to the site plan. We need you to correct the floodplain reference to panel #103 D dated July 21, 2000. I'd also like for you to show the floodplain on the vicinity map on the front. I think that we've established that this property actually continues down. I just have a note that the Board of Adjustment did approve a variance for 0 side setbacks to the north and for a 15 foot side setback to the south, so you are meeting setbacks. Conklin: Sara, did you check the distance, we thought we had a distance of where that room had to go, from what I recall from the Board of Adjustment meeting. Edwards: It's exactly right. Conklin: Is it meeting that? Edwards. Yes. Conklin: But this additional building setback, we are not going to have a problem right? Edwards: No. Conklin: Okay. Edwards: You are meeting our parking requirement. The driveway is shown as 25 feet. That needs to be reduced to 24 feet. Parking lot must be setback five feet from the side property line. I have a question about your driveway. You haven't filed an easement? Fox: Right. Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 4 Edwards. Conklin: Edwards: Phipps: Edwards: Fox: Jackson: Fox: Jackson: Fox: Conklin: Fox: Edwards: Petrie: You will need to take care of that also, permission to build your driveway on there before you actually build. We would like that before Subdivision Committee. With that easement we will have the signature of that property owner to the north so that you can go on that property with your drive. You are showing overhead electric lines do you know if that is over 12 KV? Yes it is. It serves the Candlewood Subdivision. Also, note dumpsters are required to be screened on all large scale development. I don't think you are showing that. Regarding fire protection, The water line showing coming into the building should be 8 inch and a fire hydrant should be located in an island in the parking lot. The water line could be reduced down stream from the hydrant connection. Okay. If you want an alternative idea to that that will work, and I don't know which is the least expensive or the easiest to get done, you might just stub a short 8 inch there at your driveway entrance and put that hydrant in that first island there east of the highway. You talking right here? Yes. It's okay with us either way but you do need a hydrant there that we can use to get in there with supply line trucks. Okay. Can I get your name for the record? Gerald Fox. Ron? Let me give you a copy of my comments. We will start off with water and sewer. The first has to do with additional fire hydrant that Fire Chief Mickey Jackson requested. It will also be one of my conditions too. So, I assume the building will not be sprinkled? • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 5 Fox: I don't know. I'll have to check that. That would be my assumption also, but I really don't know. Jackson: Let me just comment about that. Check with your insurer and to see how much difference that would make. A sprinkler system might amiturize in five years and if it does it's a pretty good investment. It's certainly good fire protection so, it might be worth checking into. It may be to your advantage to do that. Fox: Okay. Jackson: It is not required by code. Petrie: But one of the requirements is that a fire hydrant be installed 100 feet from the FDC. So, we would be looking at, possibly, this fire hydrant in a different location to meet that requirement. On the plan you show the water line not to end part way through the property. I just made a note that that water line extends all the way across the private property. The grading, we are needing some revised plans. Turn back a couple of sheets there is a checklist. If it's marked incomplete most of them have a note by them on the next sheet those notes are listed. We can run through those real quick. Look on the next sheet. We need a copy of the Thermal Storm Water Management Permit. A copy of that is also attached. We need to make sure we get a gravel entrance for construction shown on the final plan. I had a note about getting the signed temporary easement. Also, all the retaining walls are required by ordinance to be setback a minimum 5 feet from the property line. You have one that I believe is closer than 5 feet. Fox: This one right here. Petrie: Yes. I also have a comment that that retaining wall is not shown on the grading plan. It's shown on the site plan but it's not shown on the grading plan and I need you to clarify that. I want to make sure you are aware that those retaining walls are required to be designed by a registered engineer and could possibly require safety railings on top. We need to see the existing grade showing dash line contours. If you can clarify how tall these retaining walls are going to be. It's a little unclear. Fox: Okay. Petrie: Add the soil type in accordance with the Unified Soils Classifications System. • We've gone over the 100 year floodplain note. Also, label what is planned for all the disturbed areas. That's just going right down the checklist. We do need quite • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 6 a few additions. The grading plan before Subdivision Committee. Getting back to the first page of this, you'll see under item 2 for grading has to do with that retaining wall we talked about, just to clarify that on the grading plan. Fox: Okay. Petrie: For drainage, I had a note to make sure you are aware that we will consider everything inside this development as private including the detention pond and we expect those to be maintained by the owner. On the next page are comments regarding the detention pond and our requirements for those. First is we need a concrete trickle channel that connects your inlet and outlet from the bottom of it. The entire detention pond is required to be sodded. Lastly, and this may effect location of that, there is a requirement in the drainage manual that your 100 year water surface elevation and detention ponds be setback 20 feet from all buildings. We will need to look into that one. The preliminary report is acceptable as a preliminary report. Of course, we will look at a final report when the construction plans are submitted. I had a note we lent you one of our drainage manuals. We do have copies available, so if you would return that one we would appreciate it. Last item, the right-of-way along Hwy 265 is required to dedicated by warranty deed since that's a state highway. Fox: We show that additional right-of-way? Petrie: That's right. It's correctly shown. Fox: Ron, a question. I was given some boundary requirements by the architect on this to deal with. In meeting the requirements I think we may have to move some things. Will there be a problem with that? I'm thinking the building may need to be shifted to make, I think they need to make some decisions on allowing me to put that detention pond on the other side of the parking lot or something. Conklin: You say building shifted, where are we talking about? Fox: Well, if I have to stay 20 feet or more here, and I'm not sure what it scales right now, for the 100 year floodline, I was thinking it may be violating that so it could be as simple as shifting two feet or whatever that is, for the building. I don't think I have any room to shift anything forward. Petrie: My opinion is that if that's all you are doing is keeping everything basically the same and just shifting it even 20 feet back to the south that doesn't effect me. • • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 7 Conklin: Are we shifting the building or the pond? Fox: I'm going to say we are shifting, the pond is between the building and the parking, so there's no way we can shift the parking. Conklin: The only thing I'm concerned with is at the Board of Adjustment we told those property owners and the agreement was that the building would be in this location. Now I don't know how much room you have. Edwards: It's exactly where they approved it. They gave you 2 feet. You can move it 2 feet and that's it. Other than that we will have to go back. Fox: So anything different I'd have to eliminate parking. Conklin: It's very controversial with the adjacent property owners. The property owners want to know where the building is going. The client, his client negotiated with the property owners and withdrew his rezoning and they set it all up. I made a statement during those meetings, I said, we have not reviewed this plan for compliance with our ordinances and I can't guarantee it's going to work. So now we are sitting here today talking about moving the building. Fox: Well, I'm not saying I want to move the building, I'm just hearing that, apparently Ron has scaled it and I'm within 20 feet of the building with the 100 year floodline. Petrie: You don't have it labeled. I don't know if you are or not. Fox: I don't either. I'm just saying if that's the case then I have to find something else to do. One thing I did consider was piping the water to the back. That's a pretty deep pipe to do that. It sounds like making any shift in the building is not acceptable I didn't know about the agreement with the neighbors and all of this stuff. Conklin: We've been doing this for a year. Over a year. Fox: On the parking, I could reshape the parking to try to meet the requirements you are talking about? I'm assuming you want me to show that 100 year line on here? Conklin: So where does the water go when it gets out of the pond? Petrie: To a ditch on the highway. • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 8 Conklin: You have to worry about the hill right here right? Fox: The very top of the hill is right back in here. Petrie: You may want to consider shifting the parking lot back to the east and try to get that pond out in front. Fox: Put more parking behind the building? Conklin: No. Just saying move your parking lot closer to the building and put your pond out here. Petrie: You already have a pretty good gap and if you can move that over another 20 feet you will have a pretty big opening in there. I'm Just throwing that out there. Fox: Okay. Edwards: Utilities? • Smith: Bill Smith, Southwestern Bell. In the front you did have a 25 foot utility and you are going to dedicate 15 of that to the highway and that leaves us 10 feet across the front for any future. You'll have gas and phone in there and that will be kind of tight in the 10 foot. I wouldn't mind that being a 20 foot easement outside of the new right-of-way. Conklin: Okay. Smith: My feed is going to be coming front and I need at least one 4 inch conduit to run under the parking lot to get to the front. Possibly their 15 foot setback would be a utility easement on the south side. Fox: I'm sorry? Smith: 15 foot setback, make that a utility easement on the south side. Conklin: This 15 foot setback also called out as a utility easement. Fox: Okay. • Conklin: And he needs that 4 inch conduit underneath that parking lot and you are going to have a retaining wall there too on this side. • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 9 Smith: You are going to move that retaining wall more towards the parking lot? Fox: No. Conklin: No, you really can't. It's a 5 foot setback off of that property line. So your conduit is going to have to go underneath that parking. Fox: And you are requiring the church to put that conduit in? Conklin: That's Just one 4 inch conduit? Smith: Yes. Conklin: And no one else needs that underneath that parking lot? One 4 inch conduit for Southwestern Bell. Fox: And what about the easement? • Conklin: Just that setback, make that the utility easement. • Smith: 15 foot setback and utility easement. Fox: And even though we have the retaining wall in that doesn't bother you? Smith: As long as you provide a conduit under there for me. Petrie: The conduit would be under the parking lot and in that easement? Smith: Yes. It would follow that easement to the pond. I assume we are going to feed the line from that side. That's what you showed on one of the plats. You wanted the phone coming in from the south. So the conduit from the building all the way out to the front. That's all I have. Phipps: Mike Phipps, Ozarks Electric. Gerald, I haven't scaled this off but we have 3 phase overhead power line back there with TV cable. Approximately 90 feet from the northeast corner of the property and 120 feet from the southeast corner of the property is about where it comes through. Taking that underground, if you want to put it underground, there will be a charge for that. I would have to put it underground all the way across the Shoehee property too, all the way to Candlewood. I'm not sure how far that is. • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 10 Fox: Phipps: Fox: Phipps: Conklin: Phipps: Fox: Phipps: Fox: Conklin: Phipps: Conklin: Phipps: Conklin: Phipps: Fox: Phipps: Conklin: No one has mentioned putting it underground. That's not what you require is it? No. I would like to serve the building from the east side. That would be the existing 30 foot easement there too for that power line. It's shown on the survey I think. Yes. That line is over 12 KV right? Yes. It's 15.4. And you said if they want it underground it would have to go to the next property? Yes. It would have to go all the way to the new Candlewood development where I have underground there. I have no idea where that is. How far is it? And who would pay for that on the neighbors property? The developer. The developer. Otherwise we would have underground, overhead, underground and it's not consistent. And what does that cost per foot? I know the trenching is $2.50 per foot, $0.70 per foot for the conduit and the wire is $1.75 a foot. And how far is it over to that development? If I remember right it was, I'm thinking it's probably around 400 feet. On Perry's comments he wants a street light at the entrance?. I think so. • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 11 Phipps: I'm sure he is. There's nothing in there. I would need an easement along that north property line to get there because we have no power around this entrance anywhere. Fox: You are saying an easement from here to there? Phipps: Yes. Conklin: There's a septic system in there too. Fox: Right. I've carefully stayed out of that with my work. We don't have room to get any utilities in there like underground line I don't think. Phipps: Well, you've got construction and egress, that's on that other property. Is that just a temporary construction easement? Conklin: It's got to be a permanent access easement. I've not seen that document so I can't answer your question. Phipps: Just from that overhead power line I'd have to go from that overhead power line to the entrance which I'm scaling it at about 300 feet. Fox: You are saying right in here? Phipps: Yes. On the north side right in here. Fox: So that would be over on the adjacent property. Phipps: Back to that overhead power line. Fox: So that's on the neighbor's property? Phipps: Yes, or in that utility easement which I don't think we had one across there. Are you across there? Fox: We have a general utility easement across here but you need it out this way? Phipps: Yes. That would leave 15 foot. • Conklin: So you are needing a 15 foot utility easement and are we going to get that on Lake Hills Church property through that parking or you are asking for it to be on the Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 12 Mineky property to the north? Phipps: I'd like to have it on the property to the north but if we can't get it there we can go ahead and go to the Lake Hills property. Conklin: So we will be looking for either an offsite easement document showing a 15 foot utility easement for Ozarks Electric to provide electricity to a street light along Hwy 265 at the entrance or a 15 foot utility easement on Lake Hills Church property. Fox: Okay. If the provider doesn't want to do that, can I put the light on this side? Phipps: Well, then your distance is getting where I would have to probably run some primary and set a transformer just for that light. That would get expensive to have an underground transformer just to serve the street light. You are talking about coming the other way? Fox: Coming down through here and being on this side of the drive instead of that side. This side is still on our property. On that side we are off of our property. Phipps: Okay. That's fine. As long as it's a 15 foot easement I don't care if it's in the parking lot or not. Conklin: Okay. So the street Tight is going to be on the south side of that drive and there will be a 15 foot easement to it. Fox: Obviously if we run that under the pavement we will have to do a conduit? Phipps: That wire is inch and a half. Boles: Johney Boles, Arkansas Western Gas. At the present time our existing facilities wield a transmission line on the west side of Hwy 265. We have a road crossing just north of your property crossing to the east side of Hwy 265 servicing Williams. Fox: On up here somewhere? Boles: Yes. The best scenario for us would be to get an offsite easement from Williams and feed it from that highway crossing back to the south. The meter will be located out here at the highway. We are not planning on putting the service at the building so the meter would probably be located on the south side of that drive • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 13 entrance. At the front of the property at the highway. The customer would have to run a private line from that point to the point of entry to your building. That's all I have. Conklin: I have a question. Kim, with regard to tree preservation, they have not submitted a tree preservation plan that shows any of the rare trees identified, is that correct? Hesse: I talked to Joe Roberts last night. They showed one tree on the grading plan that is rare. I'd have to go back over it again. Conklin: Are they removing that tree? Hesse: Id doesn't appear by the grading plan that they were. Conklin: They were? Hesse: I don't believe that the grading along Hwy 265 will effect it. • Conklin: Is that going to cause any redesign of this project? Hesse: No, by the grading plan it doesn't look like they should have to. Conklin: And that's along Hwy 265? Hesse: Yes. Fox: Unless we shift out there with the detention pond. • Hesse: If the parking moves closer to the building the detention should stay out of the drip line of that tree. Conklin: What size tree is it? Hesse: It's not labeled. Conklin: But it is under 24 inches? Hesse: Yes. Conklin: Ok. • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 14 Hesse: It's actually almost off of this property in the very southwest corner. Conklin: So potentially it might be in our right-of-way? Hesse: Yes. It would be with extra dedication. Conklin: With extra dedication it would? Fox: 1 gave you a copy of the survey didn't I Tim? Hesse: I'm working with Joe Roberts. Conklin: I'd like that information submitted by Subdivision Committee. This is zoned A-1, no preservation requirement and zero percent canopy. But rare trees do apply with that ordinance. Also, I have one question with regards to a zoning issue, what is that showing on your site plan right here? This little rectangle? Fox: I think that's a slab. I really don't know what it is. Conklin: Anything over 30 inches in height has to meet setbacks so if it's an AC unit or something you probably can't locate it there. Fox: Okay. Conklin: Also, setbacks are measured from the eave or overhang of the structure. I'm assuming what I'm looking at here is a footprint showing setbacks measured from your eave or overhang. You probably don't have much of an overhang looking at the elevation but I just don't want any misunderstandings. Once we go through the process and I go out there and I see an eave or overhang that doesn't meet the setback. Fox: I'll check that. Sure. Conklin: And for the record can you kind of go over the building materials? What's proposed on this site? Fox: I can't. Conklin: You can't do that. Okay. Do we have a detail, Sara, of what these materials are? • Edwards: Not that I'm aware of. Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 15 Conklin: I need a detailed list identifying what the materials are and listing the colors so when Sara and I go out there eight months from now we can make sure it's block or split face block or dry-vit or whatever material you may be using. Based on this drawing I can't tell. Also, notification is required. You are required under ordinance to send by certified mail to all the adjoining property owners 7 days prior to the Subdivision Committee meeting of this project being heard by that committee. Fox: You said adjacent owners, right? Conklin: Yes. Including across Hwy 265. We will need the proof of certified receipts returned to our office so we can put those in the file. Edwards: Revisions are due by July 5 at 10:00 am. Conklin: Do you know who owns the property right now? Fox: You mean this? Conklin: Yes, this property? Fox: I think it's the church. Conklin: Does the church own it? Fox: That's my understanding. Edwards: Then you just need to send whoever can sign for the church in here to sign the application. Fox: I thought they had already done that. Conklin: If the application is not signed before the revisions are due we will have to pull it from the Subdivision Committee level and you will be delayed another 2 weeks. Rutherford: Tim I have one comment. You will need to notify Mike Pickens at the Arkansas Highway Department in Fort Smith for a permit to do the sidewalks and approach work on Highway 265. Here is a copy of the specifications for the sidewalk construction Conklin: Chuck, are they, I don't know if I've seen a sidewalk on here. • • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 16 Edwards: They are not showing it. Conklin: They are not showing it. Rutherford: Did you read the comments, Sara? Edwards. Yes. Conklin: So that's taken care of. Okay. If you have any questions, call Sara, Ron or myself and we will be more than happy to clarify any of the requirements that were made today. Thank you very much. Fox: Thank you. • • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 17 LSD 00-17.00: Large Scale Development (McDonalds, pp 134) was submitted by Ben Aguirre on behalf of McDonalds for property located at the northeast corner of Joyce Blvd. and Mall Ave. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 2 acres. The request is to build a McDonalds Restaurant. Conklin: The next item is LSD 00-17.00: Large Scale Development (McDonalds, pp 134) was submitted by Ben Aguirre on behalf of McDonalds for property located at the northeast corner of Joyce Blvd. and Mall Ave. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 2 acres. The request is to build a McDonalds Restaurant. Why don't you come forward Kris and Bill. Brown: I'm Gary Brown. Ben's on vacation. Conklin: Once again, I'm Tim Conklin, City Planner. This is Sara Edwards our Development Coordinator. We will have Sara go over staff comments then Ron Petrie, our Staff Engineer, go over his. They we'll take utility comments then any other staff comments. Go ahead Sara. Edwards: A landscape island is required along the west strip of parking. Shade trees shall be required in the islands of the parking area. Trees are to be planted at 30 foot intervals along both Joyce Boulevard and Mall Lane. A 10 foot wide landscape area is required between all rights-of-way and parking areas. Some form of irrigation is required and shall be noted on the plans. Joyce Boulevard is a principal arterial requiring a minimum 6 foot sidewalk with a minimum 10 foot greenspace. Mall Avenue is a local street at this location. This requires a minimum 6 foot sidewalk with a minimum 6 foot greenspace. This needs to be shown on the plat with the sidewalk being continuous through the driveway. The sidewalk needs to be added to the legend. Brown: Question on the 6 foot greenspace, is that in-between the sidewalk and the roadway? Conklin: In-between the curb and the sidewalk. Chuck is back there. This is an interesting situation. Your sidewalk when we do that is going to be on your private property. One of the things we want to discuss with you this moming is if that should be additional dedication for the City of Fayetteville to be able to obtain the 6 foot greenspace which is required under our Master Street Plan and the 6 foot sidewalk. So, that's what we are looking at. Right now on Mall Avenue your sidewalk is right up against the curb. It's not your typical situation. Typically we would have right-of-way in-between. I think part of the reason is you've got the landscaped island median on Mall Avenue which has pushed the road further to • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 18 • the east. It's something to look at. Edwards: So basically between Chuck's and Kim's and our comments we are wanting 6 foot of greenspace, a 6 foot sidewalk and that 12 feet to be dedicated so that relieves you of the liability on the sidewalk. Then you need an additional 10 feet of landscaped area Brown: Between the sidewalk and the curb? Edwards: Between the sidewalk and the parking lot. Fullerton: 6 foot green, sidewalk and ten. Conklin: We have two ordinances working here. I will work with you. I'll have to bring it up. I want to be consistent here. We will go with 10 but I'll have to point out to the Commission that under another ordinance it states 15. Brown: Back on Joyce, you've got 10 feet of landscape between the walk and the street and then 10 feet between the walk and the curb? Edwards: Yes. Conklin: One of the reasons I'll go along with this 10 feet is because it's more right-of-way than the minimum on our Master Street Plan that we need to get dedicated to meet the standards so it's pushing your project back to the northeast to achieve that. I'll bring that to the Planning Commission's attention. Edwards: Your ADA spaces are okay. The existing street Tight located at the intersection of Georgetown and Mall Avenue is fine. We are still showing the property owner on record as Orena Nelson. Fullerton: Yes it is. Edwards: We will need to have her come in and sign the application as the owner, until you purchase it. Are you purchasing it? Fullerton: Yes. Conklin: We need that owner's signature on the application. Where it says owner's • signature it needs to be on the application. • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 19 Edwards: Also, I didn't get elevations of your monument signs so I need that. Brown: A question I have is the requirement for the overall height that's allowed? Conklin: Six feet. Brown: I know Circuit City's is higher than that. Edwards: That's not a monument. Conklin: I'm not sure what the setback is. Your sign can be higher the larger setback you have. It's a sliding scale. That's why if you look at the signs the bigger signs are setback further. We have amended our ordinance to allow monument signs to have a 75 square foot sign, I believe, with a 10 foot setback to encourage monument signs in Fayetteville. Fullerton: This is what we were going to be submitting, one of these two. We would prefer this. Brown: That is at Rogers over by the bypass on 46ih Street. Conklin: Okay. Fullerton: And this is at Crossover. Brown: That's the sign we actually built at Crossover Road. Conklin: How high is it? Brown: About nine feet. Conklin: Well, if you want to move your sign further back, let me just say one thing, the Planning Commission required monument signs. My guess is you're going to have to do a monument sign. Brown: I'm just wanting to know what size they have to be and make sure that we have the right sign spec's. Conklin: I'd say 6 foot high, 75 square foot monument sign is probably what you need to • get. Especially when we looked at this additional right-of-way dedication, you are not going to be able to achieve the setback that you need. • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 20 Bill: If that's the case then can we get a monument sign on Mall Avenue too? Conklin: That's something you can ask. Brown: Does your ordinance allow that? Conklin: It will be a variance. It's not in the overlay district. Edwards: Which brings me to another point, it looks like at the last McDonalds we may be having some difficulties with the sign permits from what I understand. So I would like to make the comment that just because you are showing these signs on your building does not mean that that will be allowed when it gets to the permit stage. I would like to encourage you to meet with our sign inspector, Mike McKimmey in our Inspections Division, and talk to him about what is allowed and what isn't. He was supposed to write something and bring it by but I don't see it. You will be required to meet our sign ordinances and I just wanted to say that because it's shown on here doesn't mean that it's approved. Brown: Okay. Edwards: We need to add plat page 134 to the title block. As far as the vicinity map goes, Mall Avenue is supposed to continue down and it's not lining up quite right so that needs to be fixed. I also need a floodplain reference added. I need you to change the county in the title block. It is in Washington County. We already talked about the sidewalk dedication. Once again, you are over the maximum number of parking spaces and that will need to be requested in writing. I would also like for you to provide how many seats will be in the restaurant and the number of employees per shift at the greatest shift. Conklin: Our ordinance is going to City Council next Wednesday, July 5, 2000 to increase the maximum number of parking. The Planning Commission approved that. It's one space per four seats plus one space per employee for the maximum shift. 1 will be interested to see how that ratio works. I know on some of these it's one per 3. I looked at some national standards from other cities and those ranges are all over the place This was kind of in-between. It will be interesting to see how close you get to that. Brown: We will look at that and compare it to what our corporate guidelines are as far for this facility running that type of business how many parking spaces do we need to take care of our customers. One of the issues with dealing with the play places, the stay time goes up rather than just a typical restaurant. So, as we compare the • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 21 parking needs, there are similar volumes without a play place, it will be different. Edwards. Again, we need in writing requests for variances for the aisle widths. I know we have discussed the trucks and drop offs and drive-thru and all of that. Same documentation of why you need those. I talked to Ben about this, but over where you've got the parking space dimensions, they seem to be correct on the plan but they are not correct over here. Brown: Okay. Edwards: Also, we want you to eliminate this driveway. Conklin: We were talking with other staff yesterday and typically we try to eliminate as many driveways as we can. I know we've talked about this before. Is there a reason you need this one at this location? Fullerton: Yes. To allow our drive-thru access in and out. Brown: So the drive-thru customer exiting the drive-thru going back to the mall. Either they can exit and make a right turn out fairly easily. Even if the car stops here they see oncoming traffic because of the light, rather than having to circle all the way back around the site and go again. That's the purpose for it. Conklin: We are just looking at how to eliminate as many curb cuts to not have as many traffic conflicts. With this island here, this is something we probably should discuss at Subdivision Committee. Do you think Paul could look at this? Petrie: Yes. I can show it to him. Conklin: Show it to him. I'll have our staff look at it. Bill: If we could get an entrance, that would be really important for flow because if Steele Cross is developed down there and Wal-Mart, these people will be coming up here so they could enter the parking lot and flow around into the drive-thru. Conklin: Without turning here. Bill: Without turning here and trying to get across. It's going to be tough for cars to get across going this direction on Joyce Boulevard to enter our parking lot. Conklin: Okay. • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 22 Edwards: I made a note that all the dumpsters need to be screened. Revisions are due Wednesday July 5, 2000 by 10:00 a.m. Conklin: I guess the only thing I'm looking at with this curb cut, once this additional lane is widened it's going to be very close to this intersection. Brown: This shows, actually, the lane widened. The existing curb is shown out beyond here. This is the existing street curb here. Conklin: Okay. Brown: So this is the new curb location. Conklin: Did you already go over Kim's? Edwards: Yes. Conklin: Kim, if you could come up here for a second. I want to point a couple of things • out. With regard to this painted surface right here, I don't know what you think about landscaping that. I'd rather have some type of curb and landscape at that location. Increase your exit lane for cars stacking to get out. If that could be done. Then we already went over that they need additional landscaping in the island. This is 14. They are okay on this one. That's 14. • Hesse: That's why I'm kind of requesting you need shade trees along here. Brown: Shade trees. Hesse: The entire requirement of trees is large shade trees. Conklin: Okay. So you have 14 parking spaces on the west row parking and we want a larger tree. Hesse: Large shade trees. Brown: Is there a particular tree that you're aiming for? Hesse: I can give you a list. That's required before Subdivision Committee. Brown: So I have to show all of that on the revision right? For Subdivision? • • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 23 Hesse: Fullerton: Brown: Conklin: Fullerton: Petrie: Brown: Conklin: Fullerton: Conklin: Petrie: Brown: Petrie: Brown: Yes. Let me fax it to you. What's your fax number? 405-945-9243, attention Kris. And so the other thing that we are talking about looking at this island that goes in- between the parking drives as far as putting the island in it's entirety behind the sidewalk. Much like the bank did. Because then the two little bitty pieces that we really aren't going to do a whole lot with. They are just going to get run over. That way you don't have an encumbrance. They actually ran the curb up here and kind of flattened it out at the walk and it curves back around. We have a standard. We can take a look at that. And we just noticed this on the aerial. I think it works better especially in a situation such as this. You don't have anybody turning left. That's a one way in your parking lot. Everybody will be going straight. The other possibility is that people would be turning left off of Joyce, they are going to get a little bit better arc going into that narrower road and they won't be jumping over or running over that curb and busting it up. Do you know who is purchasing this property? No. They are negotiating with someone right now. I'm not sure who it is. A lot of times we try to look at shared drives. It would probably be difficult to make extreme movements with your trucks. Ron? I'll read through this but feel free to stop me if you have any questions. For water and sewer I believe the Fire Chief is okay with where everything was. No additional hydrants. It's not going to be sprinkled, is that correct? That's correct. One thing that was required at the lot split was that sewer line will have to be extended over to this other lot back to the east. That's the sanitary? • • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 24 Petrie. Yes. Brown: It shows a manhole on the far property line. Petrie: It shows a manhole but if you can show the line. Brown: The line is there too. It connects the existing manhole along the sidewalk. Just a line that is proposed sanitary sewer up in the parking lot just before the curb. Petrie: It's actually not shown on mine. It's shown on another sheet. Brown: It's on sheet C3. Petrie. What I'm getting to is we will need additional easement because of that line. Brown: How wide an easement? Petrie: It needs to be 10 feet from the sewer line. The other reason I'd like for it to have been shown is there is a conflict with your sign and that sewer line. That sign needs to be setback off that sewer line. Brown: Is it possible to set it back and the sewer lines be a straight connected dots or do we have to put in another manhole? Petrie: Right. Brown: Because if we did that we could keep it within the 25 foot easement. Petrie: That's the thing. If you want to put in another manhole. Brown: Okay. Petrie: Will that sewer be a part of this construction or are you guys expecting that to be done by Nelson? I'm trying to get an idea of how this is going to work. Brown: As far as I'm concerned that will be part of our construction. Fullerton: Anything on our property. Petrie: There was a condition on the lot split. As long as I know to look for that when these plans come in. For grading, I did not have any revisions that are requested • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 25 and it is acceptable as a preliminary. We will review it as a final. The rest of my comments are with regards to drainage and streets. As you probably know, all drainage outside of the right-of-way we will consider that privately owned and maintained. Brown: Okay. Petrie: One of the things that I know you guys are aware of is the widening of Joyce. Of course, we have a situation where we will recommend to Planning Commission that this development widen Joyce in front of the, in the frontage along Joyce. What we will have is a gap, 200 feet gap, where it's not widened. What we will request to the Planning Commission is that the City cost share. When your contractor is out there and has it all messed up, he can finish this gap and the City will reimburse you for those costs. Brown: Is there any way to have them contract directly with the city? Petrie: The problem with that is we could not have that done. Brown: It's a bid process. You would have to put out the bid notification on it? Petrie: Right. Timing wise it would just never work. Fullerton: Do you all have a document or agreement or would our attorneys draw up that agreement? Brown: Just a document stating the City will reimburse those costs. Or would we have to submit the cost to you? Petrie: What we would do is, once the cost is established, of course this has to be agreed upon by Planning Commission and also City Council, but once we get that cost then the engineering department will prepare an agreement. That agreement we will send to you. That agreement states all of the terms. It's a standard agreement. It will be paid, I believe, within 30 days of receiving the invoices. Once we get that signed we will take that to the City Council. They will have to approve the money going to this project. So, it's, not even doing it this way, it's not an easy process. Brown: Is there something we can do in conjunction with all of this so that we can stay on the same schedule? Going to the City Council meeting then we go through the final approvals of this that we can have that at the same time? • • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 26 Conklin: Petrie: Fullerton: Brown: Petrie: Conklin: Brown: Petrie: Conklin: Fullerton: Conklin: Brown: Petrie: This is not going to go to City Council. Once the Planning Commission makes that recommendation I'll take that to City Council and get them to either say yes we want to do it or no we don't want to do it. I know your concern is the time. We only have so much time to get permits. There is the permit fees and also just the timing of the actual construction activity itself, whereas a general contractor may come in get part of it done, then have to come back to finish the rest of it. We want to try to keep the cost down for everybody involved. I believe how it will probably work, they are going to have to start on this while we get all of this worked out. We will work with you. The worst case is it goes to City Council and it either gets approved or not approved. If it's not approved the work doesn't get done. If it is approved then we just move forward and fairly shortly after that the Council Meeting it will. Right. And it's possible we could go ahead and permit the facility itself and you could start that before then. You say you have to get your permits, you still need to do your detailed grading, drainage, construction drawings. All of that will be done before we get our permits. Right. But I'm saying typically after Planning Commission you have another six to eight weeks to get those drawings submitted and reviewed at the city. Right. And we need to have all those working drawings completed as well. If we are going to do the whole extension drawings then we need a contract with some numbers to it. If we wait until the cost is approved by the city, then timing, before we start the engineering, because we have engineering fees as well, associated with that portion. If we can get a good cost estimate that we all feel comfortable with we can take it on to the City Council. We can put in a 10 percent contingency or something to • • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 27 that effect. Of course, if we go over that with the actual bid price then we'll have to go back to Council. Brown: Basically we know what street specks are and we could probably at least get some preliminary numbers put together. Petrie: Just keep in mind that no matter what, even if we weren't looking at this gap, we would make the recommendation to the Planning Commission that you widen your portion of Joyce. Bill: I assume the City would jump on it. It's a mess out there right now. I think they ought to welcome the widening. Petrie: And I don't anticipate any problems at all. But they have to approve any money going out for projects. Brown: I guess the other question would be on our submittal, for instance, right now we just show the drive cut going out to the curb, we actually need to show a transition going back out or just show the curb going straight over? Like right here? Conklin: Things like that can be worked out. Let's say that City Council decided not to then we would just have a transition, you would just revise the construction drawings to show that transition back. Would it be on this property or would it be back off of it? Brown: It would be back off of it. Conklin: Then you would have the transition back onto this property to the east. Petrie: It would be a complete waste of money if they didn't approve it. Brown: Exactly. Petrie: But keep in mind there is also an issue of the storm pipe. The very large storm pipe that needs to be extended in conjunction with this widening. Brown: Will we be able to get any specific information on, like it shows this 4 inch pipe going into it, where is that coming from? Petrie: I couldn't tell you. • • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 28 Brown: Petrie: Brown: Petrie: Brown: Petrie: Conklin: Petrie: Conklin: Petrie: Fullerton: Petrie: Brown: Petrie: How easy will it be to tie into? I guess you all didn't have complete information on how exactly that fit together. There was some discussion about that. I've got all the other projects, so I wouldn't say I don't have the information. I guess the concern is, I don't know if it's flowing this way? Yes. So the 18 is going into the 24 across the street. And how these curb elements tie into it? So it's just a matter of this line having to go that way and nothing at all from here to the corner. I hadn't really read through my comments yet. We had a fairly extensive study done by one of the engineers on a project upstream here and they have some specific recommendations of what to do and where to run the pipe. We have a pretty good idea of what size pipes we want and where those pipes need to go. I've included a copy of their recommendations and also a copy of a schematic of what's out there now. So we have a pretty good idea to get a basis of a cost estimate. I may be out of line, but they are going to have to come across Joyce Boulevard? Joyce and Mall. And that is going to mean physically cutting the street? During Thanksgiving and Christmas? Another option here would be a detention pond for this. Something has to be done. Of course, the city is not completely at fault and McDonalds is not completely at fault but you are increasing the flows, not enough to require this, that's why we will cost share. Is it okay like it is right now? On the front page of the newspaper, we could show you the water sitting in here a foot deep. And again, you could be putting in a big detention pond too. In addition to the storm drain? Not in addition, no. • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 29 Brown: Okay. We will have to look at that scenario and see. Fullerton: Tim, you are saying widening the road is not feasible. Conklin: No, I was Just saying we will have to work on timing. I don't think you would want to close the road down and lanes down during the holidays. I'm not sure what your time frame is on this. Petrie: We are talking about putting in one pipe. Conklin: So it wouldn't close it down that long. Petrie: You would close one lane at a time to do that. In my report I explained what the cost share would be. And, believe me, I understand this is not easy. It's a messy situation right here with the way things are. I really don't see any other way around this. Conklin: Can you go diagonal across this intersection? • Petrie: We will be paying a great deal of the engineering fees to design this too. Conklin: And this will also going to the City Council, the cost share is. Petrie: If that is what the Planning Commission wants. • Brown: Just so I understand clearly, if we go back and look at our site and say I want to do the detention pond method and we create space to do that, at a cost of some parking spaces obviously, then this is totally then a city project? Petrie: The storm pipe is. Keep in mind we would have to see your studies, what it says retention is. You have to match downstream capacities. Not pre equals post. That's what our manual states. I don't know if that's feasible. It may not be. Bill: What about the person next to us on that properties development? Do they have to pay for any of this? Petrie: Yes. These costs will go directly through. If that's what the City Council wants. That's what we will recommend they require. So what we need before Subdivision is, as you will see on my comments item 2, a cost estimate to do A, B and C. That way we can determine who would be responsible for what and we can have that out on the table before Planning Commission. • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 30 Brown: Petrie: Brown: Petrie: Fullerton: Petrie: • Conklin: Petrie. Brown: Petrie: Brown: • Petrie: Do we have, I know you have the diagram in here as far as the way the system works out, do we have anything that actually shows the actual length of the sections of pipe that we are having to replace and the depth? Just a general idea of manhole depths and pipe depths so if we need to work up some preliminary numbers we need that. I can get that for you. It's not in there. We will probably have to go through a few projects. Kind of piece it together? Yes. I've given your engineer quite a bit of information on this along Joyce but he didn't ask for any information here along the intersection. Is this information we need to have back on Wednesday as well? Before Subdivision. Before Subdivision Committee. So that will give you another week. I don't guess we need it before Subdivision since it will have to go to Planning Commission for some other issues. It would be a good time to shoot for. If we need to discuss this. I'm sure there will be further discussion. It would be good to have at Subdivision but I'm not going to say it has to be here. As far as the downstream capacity, is that information available to our engineer to see if in fact the detention solution on our site would be able to comply with that? He's welcome to look at what we have submitted on these other projects. He can either agree with that or disagree with that. But we need him to make that decision. It's his design. Bill: Do you have any idea of what the participation rate would be for the city on something like this or is that all up in the air? We would really need to know how much this is going to cost us. Are they going to pay half of it? Petrie: If you are talking about the widening and all that it's larger. If we are talking just about the storm sewer then I would think the percentage would be more than half • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 31 because of just a storm sewer. We are looking for a proposal here. Brown: We can get numbers put together once we have the criteria set. Then it's just a matter from our side seeing how that fits in with all of our construction budgets and returns and things of that nature. That's why we need to know exactly what kind of contribution rates we are talking about. • Petrie: Again, we are looking for a proposal. Bill: We want to help you fix the problem. I think you know we all want to be here long term and we don't want our customers sitting in a foot and a half of water on Joyce Boulevard either. Petrie: We will work with you on the timing. It's not an easy solution, I realize. Feel free to call me and we can discuss it more. Fullerton: Tim, what about the curb cut along Mall Avenue? • Conklin: I'm going to have engineering take a look at it and Ron will make a determination if it's unsafe. The Planning Commission does try to limit the number of curb cuts. I'll bring that information to them and I'll let you make your case and Staff will make our case and see what they have to say about that curb cut right there. I just want to make sure that you understand and it's clear to you, with this additional right-of-way on Joyce and Mall, you probably know this already, it's going to shift your project substantially to the east and to the north. • Brown: We are okay on the south side because we already have that shown. Conklin: No. Brown: This is the existing curb right there. Conklin: But what Chuck Rutherford is saying is that he would like, okay, okay, I see. Brown: You have 16 feet there. Conklin: Okay. 16 feet there. Brown: To the back of the sidewalk and 10 feet from there to our parking. Edwards: So this is the new curb? • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 32 Brown: Conklin: Brown: Conklin: Brown: • Conklin: Brown: Conklin: Brown: Conklin: • Brown: Conklin: Brown: Yes. It actually shows the property now, I guess the question is this, and once you brought it before us as far as the right-of-way dedication across the front, actually moving the property boundary itself to that 16 foot off the curb location. Just like we were talking about on Mall Boulevard, having the 12 feet of right-of-way from the curb to the back side of the walk, you need 16 feet. That property line would move to here. So the sidewalk is in the city right-of-way. Same thing on this side and the only thing we would have to look at is how would that shift the building setback? You already have 16 feet. You would just have to shift the sidewalk back down. We can push this this way but it shows the property boundary though out at the back of the curb so to that point that property boundary would need to be moved. Okay. You just move the sidewalk to the other side of the line. We have to have 16 feet there. I understand. What size is the lane? It's 62 feet total. Okay. So we will have our 15 feet of landscaping. Almost 15. It's within a foot. You would get your 15 foot of landscaping up front. This one, 10 on this one because we are going to end up getting 12 more feet of right-of-way on there plus 10 feet between the parking lot there. It's really going to push everything to the east. That's more than what we would normally have on a local street. So we are looking for a 6 foot greenspace, 6 foot sidewalk and then a 10 foot greenspace before parking. So that's 22 feet? Yes. From curb to curb. That's a lot of area. In the front we've got 26 feet from curb to curb. You should have enough room to move everything over. That will be a 12 foot dedication so we are getting the 6 foot greenspace and 6 foot sidewalk and 10 foot greenspace. That will also shift this driveway back to the east also. Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 33 Conklin: Yes. Brown: Which won't hurt your feelings, Tim. Conklin: No, it's not going to hurt my feelings at all. Edwards: Just to mention, you have to have 5 feet of landscaping between the parking lot and this side, but I don't think isn't a problem. I just want to mention it. Conklin: Utilities ready? Smith: I need an entrance conduit going out to the property line. You will probably want to come from the rear. Brown: We show it going off to the rear Smith: Do you have those located? Brown: I'll show you. Smith: Is there a phone cable back there? I don't show it on record. Brown: We show a telephone going back to here so I guess the survey showed a phone line in this utility easement line across the back of this property. You'll be able to pull it off the back and run a 2 inch conduit into the building. Smith: Yes. Brown: It could come off this side. Smith: You are going to shift that and eat this easement up so I really want to come from that back corner. Brown: Okay. Smith: The northeast. Brown: A 2 inch conduit you said? Smith: Yes. That's all I have. • • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 34 Phipps: I didn't have the electric drawings. Where is the transformer going to sit? Brown: Do you have overhead lines back there? Phipps: It's underground. Brown: Where would you, we are responsible for bringing everything from the transformer to the building? Phipps: Yes. What I have underground is in the northeast corner of the property. I'm going to bring an above ground vault in that area. Now what I need to do is bring three 2 inch conduit from the transformer where it's going to be located to that vault. We need a 15 foot easement between them. Brown: Okay. Phipps: And on your general notes, it says the contractor will coordinate the filling out these to determine electrical entrances, sizes and locations. Brown: We take everything from the transformer in. Phipps: I'll supply the wire from the vault to the transformer. • Brown: Okay. We just have to supply conduit? Phipps: A conduit and trench 42 inches deep. Brown: And that's three 2 inch? Phipps: Yes. Brown: This is still under 1200 amp service. Phipps: See, we don't have any of the McDonalds on our service. As far as screening that transformer, it could be over that 3 foot height required by the city so if you have to screen around it that will be 6 foot plants on all sides of it. Brown: What do you have to screen it with? Conklin: Typically it's fenced. • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 35 Phipps: But I won't know the size of the transformer until I get the electrical load. We won't size by the 1200 amps. We want the breakdown of everything. Brown: I might have that out in the car. Phipps: But what we would really like to have is the electrical plan and a panel breakdown. Brown: We can overnight you the electrical panel sheet. It will show all of that. I know we have to have at least 1000 amp service there. Once we do that we are at 1200 amp frames. Phipps: I understand that. We will take the existing and we will size our transformer to it so we don't oversize the transformer. Brown: I guess the other question was, as far as that's concerned, if you have underground vault here and we set a pad and transformer back here in that transformer that would be used to serve this lot and that one. Or it could be. Conklin: They are trying to split this property out, this rectangle. Brown: Possibly. Phipps: I could come out of that vault again for another transformer, that's no problem. They would have to have the same voltage to do that. That transformer needs to be at least 15 feet from the building. Conklin: Your setback on that lot is going to be 25 feet. Fullerton. Off of the back road? Conklin: Is Georgetown a private drive? Brown: It's my understanding it is. Phipps: This little piece here? Fullerton: So it's 25 foot off of here? • Conklin: I'm not sure about that. I think it's private. This would be a side 0, 0 and 20 on this side. • • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 36' Petrie: So when you buy this lot that little piece won't be a part of it? Fullerton: We are purchasing that but in the future we would like to split that off and sell it for another use. Petrie: What we are looking at today though, we should assume that line is not there? Fullerton: Right. Petrie: Just making sure. You show a lot of grading on that little piece. Fullerton: This is 50? Conklin: We can reduce it to 25 if you want to put the building up here and landscape around it. There are some incentives in Fayetteville that we give. Phipps: We would like 6 weeks notice before they begin construction so we can locate and get some temporary power there. But that transformer location is crucial. I need to see where that's going to be. Brown: I tell you what, we can Fed Ex over a utility sheet and mark the transformer locations as well as the load sheet so you will have all of that. Phipps: And the screening around that transformer? Conklin: I was Just going to mention that. All utilities have to be screened with vegetation or a fence. Phipps: Over 3 feet? Conklin: Yes. Including utilities on top of the building. Brown: We will do that. Except from the back street. They are 80 foot above us Conklin: I understand that. Phipps: Screening of that transformer, I need 6 foot around all sides of it so we can walk between it and whatever screening you put around it. The pad is usually a 7x8 foot pad then another 6 foot away from that. You are looking at a pretty good area the transformer has to sit on. Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 37 Conklin: How big a transformer are we looking at? Phipps: I won't know until I get the load It could be 5 foot high. Conklin: Green? Phipps: Yes. That's all. Boles: You are showing a gas line on your drawing I believe is not there. Brown: That's good. Boles: I believe the line is gone. I won't be the one to talk to about this. The gentleman's name is James Boyd at (501)582-8652. I think there is a testing easement as part of the plat at subdivision. Brown: It shows the lines. Boles: I think that's continuous. We will be able to tie on at that point. The meter will be located up in this area by the vault. We could supply medium pressure through the meter if the load requires it. Brown: I guess the other question is can the meter be set by the building? The reason I say that is as far as from a screening standpoint, depending on what goes on on this lot, I don't want to put the gas meter too close to the electrical stuff. So if I put the gas meter down here I have to screen it. If I put the gas meter right on the back of the building, there will be landscaping in the back at the drive-thru anyway and we could screen it there. Boles: The way our tariffs are filed with the Public Service Commission we are required to bring it to the property line and no further. So if we have to put it at the building there will be cost involved for you. Conklin: I think it would be a great idea to put it at the back of the building. I try to get Johney to put all the meters back along the houses and get them off of the front of the streets. Brown: Aren't the other stores meters at the back? Boles: Some are that way and some are not. • • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 38 Conklin: In some other areas of the nation they do put meters up against buildings but we don't do that in Arkansas. Boles: It's $2.75 a foot. That's not too bad. Fullerton: If you put that at the back of the building you would for sure get that cut up front. Conklin: No. Anything else? Commercial Design Standards. What color is that? Fullerton: I don't know why they did that color. Bill: This is the block, brick and roof samples. Conklin: That's fine. That will work. Fullerton. Okay. Brown: That's the tan and these are the same colors that are going on the Hwy 16 lot. Conklin: And these members? What's proposed here? I thought we talked about keeping them the same color? Brown: They will be the same color as the roof. Conklin: And unlighted? Brown: Unlighted. Conklin: Sounds good. Fullerton: There is a sign here approved for the Mall that's 6 feet tall. Brown: Oh man. Conklin: There is a sign there that you need to be aware of. I did tell the Committee that you were concerned about that sign going there. Brown: Especially coming from this direction it's like right smack in front of this and there's no way to get around it. Conklin: So, something that you need to bring up In that Planning Commission meeting I • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 39 said I have worked with McDonalds and they have agreed to do a monument sign and I really don't want this to be used as an excuse or issue to not have one. Brown: Well, a similar issue came up when we were doing the sign at Crossover because of the fence rail that we had to put up and there again if it's a matter of this sign is 6 feet tall and 75 square feet. Conklin: See if Mike McKimmey is available. Maybe we can look at that. They are all big signs. I'm not sure if it was exactly 6 feet. Brown: What we ended up doing at Crossover was using that particular sign there. The red part wasn't necessarily visible down the street because you couldn't read it anyway but the arches would be visible over the obstruction. Bill: I drew this sign at Crossover. Brown: That's the elevation we used. It's the same basic sign that we have at Rogers too. • Conklin: Mike is not there. See if Mike keeps the sign permit info or do they have it so they can get that information. Brown: If that's the case then that sign needs to move down here. • Bill: We won't have any visibility there. Brown: It will have to sit right here for visibility around that sign from this side of the street. But then you don't have any ID sign at all on the side street. Fullerton: We were proposing to put an additional sign over there. Brown: Can that be put in the landscape? Conklin: It has to be, the setback is 10 feet from the property line. Fullerton: But it can go within the landscaping? Conklin: Yes. Brown: The thing of it is say the property line is at the back of the sidewalk, you have a 10 foot buffer right here, the sign can not be within that 10 feet? • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 40 Conklin: Brown: Conklin: You would probably have to put it in that island or something. You could set it back here on this side of the island. We were talking about the possibility, If I put the sign on the corner where I really want to put it, this sign totally obstructs it. It may or it may not. It was staked out there a month ago. I don't know if it still is. Bill: I was surprised, I saw the stakes. I was surprised it was so close to that corner. I thought there would be a visibility issue. I think they are going to put it up and find it's really in the way. Fullerton: Conklin: Brown: Conklin: Edwards: Bill: Conklin: Brown: Conklin: Bill: Conklin: Fullerton: Conklin: You can't see in and out. Well, our traffic superintendent looked at it, I asked him to take a look at it. With the widened road? If he worked off the existing street I could see that but with the curb back here you are really cutting this close. I'll make a note and call Perry. They can't find it? No. She says the sign is six feet tall and 50 square feet. How far does it have to be off the side setback? It's off the front property line. Is this the front or is this? I really think they are going to know this is a McDonalds. I know. We talk about this all the time, but I really think when they are driving by they are going to recognize your building. But it doesn't look like our building anymore. The one at 6'h Street has a brown shake shingle roof on it and stuff. They aren't bright red. • • • Plat Review Minutes June 28, 2000 Page 41 Brown: But they have a pole sign too. Conklin: I don't think you are going to have a problem. Anything else? We are adjourned. Meeting adjourned at 10:45