No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-11-15 - Minutes• MINUTES OF A MEETING OF TECHNICAL PLAT REVIEW A regular meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee was held on Wednesday, November 15, 2000 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS CONSIDERED LS 00-41.00: Lot Split (Lot 5 Wedington Place, pp 401) Page 2 LS 00-42.00: Lot Split (Fazoli's, pp 213) Page 5 LSD 00-34.00: Large Scale Development (Fazoli's, pp 213) Page 5 LSD 00-35.00: Large Scale Development (Hooker, pp 209) Page 14 STAFF PRESENT • Tim Conklin Sam Edwards Ron Petrie Chuck Rutherford Kim Hesse Perry Franklin • UTILITIES PRESENT Johney Boles, Ar Western Gas Mike Phipps, Ozark Electric Bill Smith, Southwestern Bell Jim Sargent, SWEPCO ACTION TAKEN Forwarded Forwarded Forwarded Forwarded STAFF ABSENT Mickey Jackson Cheryl Zotti Kim Rogers UTILITIES ABSENT Kevin Lefler, Cox Communications • • • Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 2 LS 00-41.00: Lot Split (Lot 5 Wedington Place, pp 401) was submitted by Robert Brown of Development Consultants, Inc., on behalf of Steve Clary, Clary Development Corp. for property located at Lot 5 Wedington Place. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 2.8 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 1.801 acres and 1.023 acres. Conklin: Why don't we go ahead and get started. This is the meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee, Wednesday, November 15, 2000. There are four items of business this morning. The first item is a lot split Wedington Place, lot number five. The request is to split the property into two tracts of 1.801 acres and 1.023 acres. Good morning Rob Brown. Brown: Good morning Tim and company. Conklin: We will begin with Sara Edwards our Development Coordinator and she will go over the Planning comments and other divisions and then we will have Ron Petrie our Staff Engineer go over engineering. Sara Edwards - Development Coordinator Edwards: At the time of development existing sections of the six foot sidewalk will need to be replaced. I need you to add plat page 401. Add project owner and developer. I did want to give you notice that the County will not record anything bigger than 18 by 24. I don't know if they got the Steven's project recorded or not. Brown: Yes. Edwards: Okay. Your revisions are due in November 22, 2000 by 10:00 a.m. Brown: Steve Clary is still the owner. We listed them as owner on the certificate. I don't know who the developer is going to be. There is a buyer for 5A who is a hotel. Two or three guys have a partnership to do a hotel. Edwards: That's fine. On the driveway, about here is where the grocery store is, 200 feet apart would be here. Conklin: We were concerned about the Overlay District and the requirement for the separation and curb cuts. I had Sara take a look at with the Large Scale Development for the grocery store and I'll have a more defined recommendation at Subdivision Committee with what we are looking at on these two lots. I'm not sure. One possibility I looked • • • Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 3 at was a shared curb -cut but then again I want to look at where those curb -cuts are for the grocery store. Just to put you on notice that we will be looking at that and make a final recommendation. Brown: Okay. I'll go ahead and kind of place those allowable areas as we subdivide. Conklin: Yes, I want some planning. Brown: I'll do the large scale Conklin: I would like to put the individuals on notice that we will be looking at the curb -cuts with regard to the Overlay District and trying to line those up. Brown: Let us know where you think the allowable areas will be if you want me to show them on the plat. Ron Petne - Staff Engineer Petrie: My only comment has to do with the sewer line. I guess since you guys will be selling this lot out to a different owner than lot 5B we'll need to get that sewer extended across 5A. Brown: I saw that. I don't think I showed it though. Petrie: That's my only comment. Brown: You want me to show the extension on there? Petrie: Yes. Conklin: What size line is that Ron? Petrie: 8 inch. Brown: It's on there at other parts an 8 inch. Conklin: Do they have to have another manhole at the end of lot 5B? Petrie: Yes. That's all the comment I have. • Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 4 Edwards: Any other staff comments? Utilities. Jim Sargent - SWEPCO Sargent - We don't have any comments on that. Bill Smith - Southwestern Bell Smith: No comment. Johney Boles - Arkansas Western Gas Boles: No comment. Conklin: Give me a couple of minutes I will think of something else Robert. Brown: I'll get out of your way. Conklin: Thank you. Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 5 LS 00-42 00• Lot Split (Fazoli's, pp 213) was submitted by Dave Jorgensen of Jorgensen and Associates on behalf of Geoffrey Brown for property located at 3035 North College. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 1.30 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 0.79 acres and 0.51 acres. LSD 00-34.00: Large Scale Development (Fazoli's, pp 213) was submitted by Dave Jorgensen of Jorgensen and Associates on behalf of Geoffrey Brown for property located at 3035 North College. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 0.79 acres. The request is to build a Fazoli's restaurant. Conklin: Next item on the agenda is Lot Split 00-42.00 and Large Scale Development 00-34.00 submitted by Dave Jorgensen of Jorgensen and Associates on behalf of Geoffrey Brown for property located at 3035 North College. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 1.30 acres The request is to split into two tracts of 0.79 acres and 0.51 acres. Good moming. I'll start with Sara Edwards our Development Coordinator. Kim Hesse - Landscape Administrator Hesse: Two street trees exist within the right-of-way of Highway 71B. Tree protection fencing shall be required for these trees during construction. Please indicate on the grading plan and provide tree protection fencing detail. I'm doing both at the same time. Conklin: So you are doing Large Scale Development comments? Hesse: Yes. Conklin: That's LSD 00-34.00 for Fazoli's Restaurant. Hesse: I'II separate them out at Subdivision but for right now since I had one plat. Brackett. That's fine. Hesse: A final landscape plan will be required pnor to building permit approval. Review off- street parking lot landscape requirements for specific design and plan requirements. Chuck Rutherford - Sidewalk & Trails Coordinator • Rutherford: College Avenue is a principal arterial. This requires a minimum six foot sidewalk with a • • • Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 6 minimum ten foot greenspace between the curb and sidewalk at the time of development. Is there any reason that the sidewalk can't be pushed back to be adjacent to the right-of-way line? Brackett: I don't know of one. We just put it there. Rutherford: I think we would really like to see it pushed back to that right-of-way line. Brackett: Okay. - Petrie: — - - One conflict Chuck. The storm drainage is there on the south. Brackett: That is why I showed it there I remember but I can have it curve around right there at the end. Rutherford: That would be better. That gives us a bigger greenspace to College Avenue. Brackett: That's fine. Perry Franklin - Traffic Superintendent Franklin: ADA spaces are okay as shown. We do want you to check with Cheryl Zotti about the dumpster location. She didn't make any comments but call her about that. Sara Edwards - Development Coordinator Edwards: Chris I didn't get any color elevations on this. We'II need those including the signage proposed. Conklin: We will need elevations of at least the north, south and east elevations. If there is any freezer in the back that needs to be architecturally incorporated in the building not just set the freezer down and leave it there. It's in the wall back periput wall. Edwards: I would like for you to dimension a 15 foot landscaped area between the property line and the parking lot. This isn't dimensioned. I did show you requested a waiver for 29 additional parking spaces, that will have to be heard by the Planning Commission in order to get that. Now, I'm looking at the City's property records, I'm showing the property differently than you have it. Our records show it goes, takes a flag all the way up here. The County shows it only takes the flag about half way. The black lines are Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 7 the property lines. We would like you to shed some light on how that happened. Brackett. On our property or are you talking about the Goldie's property? Edwards: I'm talking about it's showing this property line all the way up here including part of Goldie's. Conklin: If you have an abstract or deeds that you can provide us Brackett. Yes, I don't know. We didn't do the survey ourselves but I can check on that. Edwards: I need you to locate if there will be a freestanding sign. Do you know if there will be one? Brackett: I do not know of one. Conklin: That will not be allowed in the future unless you get it approved now. Make sure they understand that. Edwards: I didn't see you showing the overhead utility lines, did you check on that? Brackett: There is only one pole on our property so we will be lowering the utility lines on the west property line. Edwards: Revisions are due 10:00 a.m., November 22, 2000. Mickey Jackson - Fire Chief Jackson: I want a hydrant on the west side of North College for this project. Feel free to call me. We weren't sure if he wanted it near the street or Just the one back here. Conklin: Ron is going to go over it with the requirements for the water and sewer. Are you ready Ron? It's all yours. Ron Petrie - Staff Engineer Petrie: We'll start of with that. Chris make sure you got this memo and it should have a map. What's in pink is an existing line that will be directly under this building. And that, as best as we could determine, only feeds the service building for the Superior Mitsubishi. • • Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 8 So, Jergens discussed it with the Fire Chief and it is my understanding that he wanted the fire hydrant back in the corner which would require this 8" line on the south side of these lots. So you may want to get some clarification of exactly where that fire hydrant needs to be. I'm going through about 3 different people and I don't know. Brackett: Do we normally install fire hydrants for lot splits? Petrie: Yes. Brackett: Okay. I was really confused about the lot line. Is the blue a lot line also? Petrie: Yes. Brackett:: What's the size of the lines or do you know? Petrie: Which one? The blue one is 6". Brackett:: How about the pink one? Petrie: 2 inch. Brackett: You are going to want us to extend the waterline to feed this Superior Nissan abandoned the ones under the building? Petrie: Right and depending on where the fire hydrant needs to be that would determine the size of the line needed. Brackett: Okay. If the fire hydrant could be at the front could we bring a 2"? Petrie: Is there a reason why the meter can't be relocated? Isn't there one property owner for all this? Brackett: Well, no on the lot split. Petrie: I know it's a lot split but I'm saying the building and the service building are all one. Brackett. I don't know that. • Petrie. That's what I mean is if you run a 2" I would assume that the meter would be up on Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 9 College that would be at the service line. Brackett: I see what you are saying. Petrie: If the meter can be relocated. Is the owner of this and the owner of these lots the same owner? Brackett: Yes. Petrie: Something can probably get worked out to make it a little simpler but the key to it is the Fire Chief's request. I'll let you read that memo but it basically just states that the City is going to have to do some work on the east side of College to make it work too. For grading, I want you to know I reviewed the grading and drainage as final so there is probably a little more comments than usual. I really don't see much need in going every one of these comments, it's standard review comments. You can call me if you have any questions. One other thing is we would like to have a drainage easement only on tract one at this time for that storm pipe that drains to College twenty feet from that storm pipe. Only on track one. Brackett: Petrie: 20 feet? 20 feet from the pipe. Depending upon where this waterline is going to be we may need more easement on this south side of track 2. Brackett: I assume you are going to want a UE and drainage easement combined? Petrie: _ __ _ _ Yes. If you would let me know what the Chief says and I'll talk to him myself if I get a chance. Conklin: Any other staff? Kim, do they have a tree preservation plan on this? Brackett: There's some scrub trees in the back. I live right across the street from it and I've never seen the trees in the front. Hesse: They are on the right-of-way so, in my opinion, part of the development and the notes on there cover that but I do want a note for tree preservation on the grading plan on those two front trees. Brackett. Where are they? Are they in front of Fazoli's or are they on the other side? Plat Review Minutes • November 15, 2000 Page 10 • • Hesse: They are right in front of Fazoli's right, underneath that down hanging line. Conklin: In the right-of-way? Hesse: They are in the right-of-way. Conklin: Where are the trees shown on this plan? Hesse: They are, I'd have to call them scrub trees they're really not even trees. Brackett: Big weeds. Conklin: So your tree preservation notes are really weed tree notes or whatever. We really don't have 1.91% canopy on site, we have 0 in your opinion? I just want to put it in the staff report correctly. I would rather get it off the plan and revise it and say that there are no trees on the site and or. Kim, you're the Landscape Administrator, Dust want the record to be accurate. Hesse: I would reduce that amount because there is one tree on there that has been chopped off and tumed into a shrub and is a quarter of the canopy there is probably one fourth that amount. Conklin: Okay so revise that and then their plan. Then you recommend that they can remove all of the canopy? Hesse: Yes. Conklin: Therefore, we won't have a plan that states the tree preservation plan on it. Hesse: Right but we do need to keep that note include those trees that are in the right-of-way for protection and then on the grading plan to include those trees on it. Conklin: Any other staff members? Jim Sargent - SWEPCO Sargent: I would like to request a 15 foot utility easement across the east edge to the lots along 71 are marked 15 foot. Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 11 Brackett: You want 15 foot? Sargent: Yes. Conklin: A 15 foot utility easement along College? Sargent Yes. Also, an easement starting from the southwest corner of the property 20 feet in width and about 120 feet in length going up towards where the building will be on tract one. 20 feet in width and about 120 feet long. Brackett: North of the south property line? Sargent: Yes. We will anticipate that that will be where the service for that deal is on that easement. Conklin: Why 120 feet? Sargent: Well it gets it closer over here close to the corner of the building. We couldn't extend 20 feet all the way through and get into the building. Conklin: This is underground service you are providing? Brackett: We'll have to lower those lines in the back on the west side. Conklin: Anything under 12KV has to be put underground and the new service has to be underground. Sargent: Right. We will have underground service. Typically what we expect the developer pay the difference in the overhead and underground costs. Anticipate possibly a tad mount transformer in that easement. Brackett: If we can get an estimate on the lowering of those lines. Sargent: What kind of lowering do you need exactly? Why do you need to lower the lines? Conklin: Our ordinance requires that lines under 12KV on site to be put underground. When we say lowering, we are talking about the facilities will be placed underground. Sargent: Okay. There is, if I remember right, there is 122 40 volt that serves the flood lights • • Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 12 Conklin: Sargent Conklin: Sargent: Brackett: Sargent: Conklin: Sargent: Bill Smith - around there and I believe all those will probably come out. If that's the case, that will have to come out. The three phase overhead line is a 12,000 volt line. On the west property line? Yes on the west property line. There is some secondary there that serves the lights. But the actual lines on the pole are 12KV and above? Yes. I guess we will have to hook up the service? Yes. Yes but the service in that 20 foot easement all 120 feet needs to be underground and dropped down off that pole. Yes That's correct. We will anticipate that. We will need load information when that comes available, voltage and that sort of thing. A final note, the location of the dumpsters, make sure you keep those off of the utility easement where you are showing them there. We do have those 12KV lines overhead. Southwestern Bell Smith: This 20 foot easement, I would like to extend out to 71B. I'm going to feed it from the front. You can reduce it down to where you are going. Probably go 115 or whatever you need. I want a conduit from the building right to the front. I'm extending down a sidewalk. If you want it to the property line take it past the sidewalk. Johney Boles - Arkansas Western Gas Boles: Brackett: Boles: Chris, this concrete swale that you are going to construct on the west property line, how wide is that, about five feet? Yes. Can we have about an additional ten foot utility easement outside of this drainage easement? • • Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 13 Conklin: It will be going through the parking lot? Boles: Just east outside of that drainage. Brackett: Just for tract one correct? Boles: Yes. Kevin Lefler - Cox Communications Edwards: Kevin Lefler did fax in his comments which you have a copy of. He will request the same easements and consideration as the electric company. Any relocation would be at the owner's expense. Also request one two inch conduit from the mechanical room to the same pole the electric company is coming from, for future cable or data services. Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 14 LSD 00-35.00: Large Scale Development (Hooker, pp 209) was submitted by Neal Albright, P E on behalf of J.M. Hooker Construction, Inc. for property located at Highway 112 North. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 1.36 acres. The request is to build 4,200 square foot structure for office, storage and work space. Conklin: The next item on the agenda is a Large Scale Development submitted by Neal Albright, P E on behalf of J.M. Hooker Construction, Inc. for property located at Highway 112 North. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 1 36 acres. The request is to build 4,200 square foot structure for office, storage and work space. This will require a Conditional Use from the Planning Commission for a warehousing storage use in an C-2 zoning district. Good morning Mr. Albright. Albright: Good morning. Conklin: We'll start with Sara Edwards our Development Coordinator. Kim Hesse - Landscape Administrator Hesse: Screening will be required along the north and east property lines. Along the east please provide for a tall evergreen planted screen, along the north either provide a wooden fence and/or evergreen plantings that will provide six foot of screening within two years of installation. A final landscape plan will be required prior to building permit approval, review off-street parking lot landscape requirements for specific design and plan requirements. Please indicate on your plans that no tree canopy exists on the site including no rare or landmark trees. Albright: That's all we have is a fence for all this and a hedge growing. Hesse: It's really almost on the adjacent property so if you Just write down that there is no canopy there, that covers it. Put a note on there and that way there is no question. We can say that there were no trees. Albright: Okay. Key: My name is James Key and I'm working on the project in coordination with Mr. Albright and I've got a tree ordinance fee waiver that we received from Kim and processed and handed to her to sign off on for filing. Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 15 Edwards: Have we already charged for that? Key: It has not been charged for. We coordinated with Janet and we were submitting it and said we would be submitting this and she said it would be find to bring it today. I'm not sure the procedure on this if it's supposed to be given to the Landscape Coordinator to sign off on or if I just need to submit it to you, Sara? Hesse: Key: I'll just initial it and then it goes to Planning. I've also got a copy of certified letter receipts from adjacent property owners. We have not received from the Highway Commission and do not anticipate that we will. Chuck Rutherford - Sidewalk and Trails Coordinator Rutherford: Highway 112 is a principal arterial street. This requires a minimum six foot sidewalk with a minimum ten foot greenspace. That needs to be shown on the plan. It will need to be shown continuous through the driveway. Edwards: He just wants you to draw it on there across the driveway with no curb lines here: Key: Is that on the expanded right-of-way line? Rutherford: Yes. It will be at the 55 feet. Albright: It will be within the right-of-way? Edwards: Right. Rutherford: Up against the property line. Perry Franklin - Traffic Superintendent Franklin: Perry did have a comment that the ADA spaces should be located at the nearest route to the front door but I think we resolved that since we figured out where the front door was so that's fine. Sara Edwards - Development Coordinator Edwards: We do require a project disk to be submitted showing the parking and building where it • Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 16 Key: is on the property line and I'm not going to require that until they apply for a permit but they will need that. The disk? When we had submitted this we talked with Janet about requesting a waiver on the requirement for a digital copy to be filed because it has not been production of these documents have not been put on digital format. Edwards: I'll get back to you on that. Are you going to have any freestanding signs? Key: We have not shown one and not anticipating at present having any signage other than a wall mounted sign on the building however, in discussions with the owner, we have talked about the possibility of a future monument sign in the green area to the east apartment to the west and on the north side of the drive and wondered if we could show it as a future monument sign and of course the sign permitting process, maybe a year or two years. Edwards: I would suggest that, just because you put in on the plan you don't have to build it but if you want it you better show it. You need a ten foot setback. Albright: A ten foot setback? Edwards: From the right-of-way. Petrie. Keep in mind there is a waterline there so you need to be 5 or 10 feet off of that waterline. Albright: Did you say 5 or 10 feet off the waterline? Petrie: Yes. Edwards: You need to add adjacent zoning and I've written it down here so you can add them over here if you want to. Key: Everything except the one across the street is C-2. Edwards: Right. I also need to add the plat page number somewhere down here. Put plat page 209. Albright: 209? Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 17 Edwards: Yes. You need to put a flood plain reference. I did check and this property did not have any flood plain on it but you need to say "This property is not affected by the 100 year flood plain" by map number and I'm not sure what the number is. I need you to dimension the right-of-way from centerline and you need to have something here that says 55 feet from centerline. Is this the building setback? Albright: Yes 50 foot. Edwards- Go ahead and write BSB for building setback variance and then you need to add over here too, it's just 20. Key: I think it was called out as a 50 foot on the front. Albright: I don't have it labeled but I have it up here in the legend. Edwards: We do require a warranty deed for the additional right-of-way dedication and that is a requirement of the Arkansas Highway Department. You have to dedicate this right-of- way to us by warranty deed. Albright: Okay. Key: Is that actually to the City or the Highway Department? Edwards: To the City. Is it my understanding that you do know that per the property line adjustment done in 1997 that this project was limited to no new curb -cuts and would have to use the existing driveway to the north and you guys are requesting a variance from that? Key: In the discussions with Tim and with Janet, it wasn't certain if it actually needs to be an actual variance document or waiver of the request because the documentation. We do understand there was a confined access easement established at the time the lot split was done. It's my understanding there were comments on the record from the minutes of that meeting addressing the limitations from the future curb -cuts on this property because of the long width. We are asking for a curb -cut and if it needs to be a physical waiver that we need to process a variance application for we can do that. It wasn't certain at the time we processed it that it was necessary. The adjacent property owners have asked that we pursue trying to get a separate drive and they have a letter that we submitted. You should have had it when we resubmit the plans on Wednesday stating that they would prefer that the access be separated due to the nature of the Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 18 businesses and the hours of operation and that type of thing. If again something the Planning Commission always can consider if it's not allowed than we will have to look at rearranging our drive. • Edwards: Submit a letter to me requesting that and include their letter also. Since we are showing it this way, I do want cross access shown. That is a requirement in the Overlay District. Key: You want cross access on the easement? Edwards: Yes. As far as the parking goes you are required to have ten and I see you've got five and five but then these are parking spaces, they just keep on going. Key: Those were not intended to be striped and everything to the east of that chain link fence is intended to be yard storage area. Edwards- Why don't you just take them off? We do have a requirement limiting the curb -cut to twenty-four feet across in width and that is dimensioned a little more, I believe. Albright: That's 30 feet. Edwards: You can do one of two thing, you can reduce it to 24, which is what we would prefer, or again you have to ask for a waiver from the Planning Commission. I can't remember if we did that, did we do a waiver in the last one? Key: We had discussed the possibility of trying to consider widening it for truck maneuvering and access but Mr. Hooker who is here in the audience today has said that 24 foot would be acceptable and we will go ahead and reduce it. Albright: That would be better for making that turn. Edwards. I want you to show the Design Overlay District boundary. I know that the Planning Commissioners will be interested, I've kind of drawn it on here, it goes right around there. You need to show it on here as well as on your vicinity map. They'll request it. Key: How has that been determined, you eventually scaled it off? Edwards. Yes. It's 660 feet from the right-of-way. Key: It's our intent not to do any development in that area other than some general grading. Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 19 Edwards: Are there any overhead utility lines on this property? Key: There is overhead electric along the west property within the right-of-way that's shown. It's not actually on our property. Edwards. Tim did want me to say, we don't allow chain link fence, it needs to be wood board or as Kim said, if it can be screened by evergreens we can look at that. We are talking screened on. Key: Because of the Overlay District requirements, that's required to be screened outside of the fence? Edwards. Not just the design overlay, it's Commercial Design Standards also. Key: That technically is not a property line that's adjacent to the street right-of-way. Obviously, we've got a parking lot to our north and I had discussed with Kim the possibility of doing evergreen planting. It was our initial intent that we would do it inside of our fence line. We would be willing to pull the fence line in and plant the evergreen planting to the exterior. We've also considered doing a wood fence along the north. I think that tree planting for a landscape screening will be perfect. Hesse: It's fine with me. Do you prefer to have a chain link fence? Key: We do prefer to have a chain link fence for security reasons. Edwards: You want the trees inside the fence? Key: We prefer the tree grow inside it for maintenance purposes and for security. Keeps people climbing up the trees and jumping over the fence was the thought in terms of putting the trees outside the fence. Hesse: It was more of a land use thing. Key: The tree planting inside the fence would be acceptable and as stated earlier there seems to be some of it will establish a six foot visual barrier in a two year time frame. Hesse: Yes. Edwards: I want you to show these trees on here. • Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 20 Key: We will. Also along the east would be screened from the interstate primarily and the adjacent property to the east In terms of what we proposed in additional landscaping, some shrubbery in front of the little bit of fencing that does not have parking in front of it, it's facing the street to the west, I would assume that's acceptable. We are basically showing a little bit ofshrubbery-andsome greenspace right in front of the fence to the west and a majority of our landscaping on the north side. A majority of our landscaping obviously is at the street. Edwards: Can we do some on the south side of that driveway there where it meets the fence? Hooker: Where we took out that parking space. Key: We could put some shrubbery there as well. We'll discuss this. Hooker: The fence to the south is the Highway Departments. Edwards- There is not a point of doing much there, we know. Hesse: Just get with me on this because I would rather go with a fast growing pine and not worry so much about the two year thing on the east side. Something that will grow up fast. It won't screen the bottom half but you are screening really for up high so they will grow faster. Edward: I don't see a dumpster location on here unless I'm missing it. Do you have a dumpster? Key: It's our intent to use small individual 90 gallon containers. Edwards: Roll out to the curb? Key: Yes. Edwards: Okay. That's fine. All mechanical and utility equipment must be screened. It doesn't look like you intend to but if you do intend to put anything on the roof it has to be architecturally incorporated in All your revisions are due November 22, 2000, by 10:00 a.m. I guess I will go ahead and talk about Commercial Design Standards at this point. As you know in the Commercial Design Standards we have a requirement, metal siding that does not dominate the main facade. I don't think we can say that about this building. Again, it is up to the Planning Commission and you are welcome to request, like you have done before. • Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 21 Hooker. What does dominate mean? Edwards. In the past we have interpreted it by half, 50%. Key: Percentages? Edwards: Yes. Key: We've actually made a slight adjustment to the submittal that we submitted. We are looking at adding some wood elements, a wood canopy as opposed to metal to it and the desire and hopefully the canopy and awnings will dominate the facade. We have looked at increasing the amount of concrete that's being used as the cast masonry for the base material but still I think right at the edge of 50%, half and half. We would like to discuss with the Subdivision Committee and Planning Commission and see. It is our intent to use a galvanized finished panel product. Edwards: The same grade and color? • Key: Yes. Edwards. Go ahead and get a materials board again. I don't know if we gave that back to you. Key: Is it possible to get the materials board that we submitted before? Edwards: Yes. I was thinking I may have that. Let me look. As far as this concrete, is that just a regular concrete block? Key: It's going to be cast in place concrete. Edwards: Is it going to be a raised panel? Hooker. Like a tilt -up. Key: Like a tilt -up panel similar in appearance perhaps to what you see at University of Arkansas, Community Design Center in a natural finish. Edwards: This bottom will be painted concrete? • Key: Well we proposed since the submittal and the discussions on painting we had actually • Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 22 intended to leave it natural and not paint it. Again, not thinking that the painted color would be anything that would compliment the natural material itself. Color wasn't needed for the sake of being colored. We were hoping that the natural wood products for the canopies would provide the contrast and the accent to the natural concrete metal panel product. Edwards: I do have elements to avoid or minimize unpainted concrete, precision block walls. Key: It's not a precision block concrete wall. It's a natural concrete masonry in our proposal. Edwards: Like I said bring in the materials board and we'll look at it. Key: I'll try to get that back to you, I'll talk with you after the meeting today. If you've got it. We've got a variation of that board that we submitted in the process before but it's got different products on it. If I could get that one back it's got the panel and trim. Edwards: I think its fair to tell you our recommendation will probably not be favorable. Then • again, you can request whatever you like. That's it for me. Petrie: Is there any comments from the Fire Chief? Edwards: No. Ron Petrie - Staff Engineer Petrie: Will this building be sprinklered? Key: No. Petrie: We would request a 25 foot utility easement on the east side of the property. There is an existing sewer line there and we would request that any trees planted on that, be setback 10 feet from the sewer line. We would request a 20 foot utility easement on the west side, on the new right-of-way. There is an existing waterline. 20 foot along the west. Albright: We got 15 now. • Key: The documentation we had on the lot split on the previous survey of the property did • Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 23 show there was a 15 foot utility easement on that west property line right now. Petrie: I'm not sure about the other utilities but 15 is okay with me. Johney Boles - Arkansas Western Gas Boles: Probably going to need 20 outside of the newly dedicated right-of-way. Petrie: That's what I assumed when I made my comment. Albright: The plat shows 15 but you need 20? Boles: Yes. Petrie: I have included the standard copy of the grading plan checklist. Would you like for me to go over these comments? The minor comments just need to be added to the grading plan. You should have that in your packet. • Albright: Your comments? Key: Petrie: Unless there is anything specifically, Ron, that you think we need to address, we could probably review it and make sure we include those items on the documents and if there is any question we could contact you before Wednesday's re -submittal. There shouldn't be a problem with that. That's what I would prefer anyway. Only other comments was, as you probably know, you'll have to get approval for that driveway and culvert from the Highway Department. Albright: And the curb cut? Petrie: It's a driveway permit. I don't think there is actually a curb there. Albright: No there's no curb there, driveway permit. Yes. Petrie: That's all I have. Any other staff comments? Utilities? Mike Phipps - Ozark Electric • Phipps: We have an existing overhead power pole to the southwest corner of the property. • • • • Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 24 That will be the point of service so the electrical contractor will have to bring it out of that building to the pole. Also, that power line is on the existing right-of-way now and we have an existing 15 foot easement on the east side of that power line and we won't vacate that easement until this line has to be moved for the expansion of 112 if they ever do it. That's all we were getting that right-of-way is for future expansion. It could be 10 or 15 years, who knows when it will be moved but we will not move that power line until then. It still does have an existing 15 foot easement on the east side of it. Key: On the east side of the actual right-of-way? Phipps: Yes. The old right-of-way. Key: Okay. It was our intent for 200 amp service to actually use the pole not a transformer to come down and go around to the building for service. Phipps: You don't think you will need a three phase? It's probably single phase there? Hooker. Yes. Phipps: Well we've got it available if they need it. You have yard storage area back here. If anything ever developed back there that would need power, we would need an easement to get back to that. Key: The only thing we've anticipated is that this building itself may be expanded to the east as we documented on there for perhaps expanded office to the front or a warehouse or there may be something would have to be addressed in the future but a separate lease office up front and a new office built right behind this warehouse for possibly two tenants in this one building. I think if that ever occurred it would probably be a combined single service with the land we are taking care of with a panel to another tenant or service would have to be coordinated on the north side of the building. That's all speculative at this point. Phipps: The property to the south, is that where the Highway Department is constructing? Key: Yes. The Highway Department is currently constructing. Phipps: Can they get an easement on this? Boles: They do their own thing. Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 25 Key: They've already got their site prepped and they are building a standard to be set pretty much in line with facade of our building, about 20 feet south of the property line. They also have a Targe shop building further back on their property to the south side further east. We notified them of the development, we have not received return receipt on the certified -mail -and we've been instructed that we probably won't. Phipps: Lighting at this entrance, Perry is not here but I think it will be alright to light if off of the existing power pole. I don't want to have to sit another pole in there and then have to move everything later. Maybe ten feet is all we are looking at. Edwards: If we were to relocate, expand the right-of-way and relocate all the lines then you probably would put a pole there? Phipps: Yes. It would have to be on the new right-of-way that we are taking. Bill Smith - Southwestern Bell. Smith. All I require is a minimum three inch conduit out to the front property line, pretty close to the power pole. We'll feed it from the same direction there. We'll either put an exterior thermal on or an interior, depending on where you guys want it. If you have any utilities on the site and you can put a conduit inside, we'll go there. Key: We are likely looking at I believe a closet in the new office and bringing in the utilities and having electrical panel inside the office area in a closet, probably internal. Smith: Then just run the conduit through the slab out adjacent to that pole. Johney Boles - Arkansas Western Gas Boles: Key: Boles: Key: I notice you are showing a gas line in your legend but I don't see it shown here. We do have an existing line across this property. I have talked with Sullivan. It would be on our side of the property until it got a little further south. I do know it's very difficult to locate for some reason from this point to tie into the services up here at the old restaurant. Is it known whether it's actually in, it's probably in the 15 foot easement on old right- •" • Plat Review Minutes November 15, 2000 Page 26 Boles: of -way or is it uncertain at this point? I think it's uncertain. I'm not really sure. The point of service will be right off of that line, it will set up there. Just need to get with me on the Toad information at a future date. Kevin Lefler - Cox Communications Edwards- Lefler from Cox requested the same easements and considerations as the electric company. He does recommend conduits be placed for future cable and data service. Contact him for exact placement. Normally, just follow the electric company in. We do have cable along Highway 112 so there is no problem to feed. Any relocation of these facilities would be at the owner's expense. Key: I spoke with the gentlemen at Cox. He did tell me he was pretty sure we could have service along that same right-of-way. Edwards: That's all.