HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-02-28 - Minutes•
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF
TECHNICAL PLAT REVIEW
A regular meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee was held on Wednesday, February 28,
2001 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain, Fayetteville,
Arkansas.
ITEMS CONSIDERED ACTION TAKEN
LSD 01-3.00: Large Scale Development
(City of Fayetteville Drake Field, pp 834 & 835)
Page 2 Forwarded
LSD 00-36.00:Large Scale Development
(J.D. China, pp 520)
Page 5
PP 01-2.00: Preliminary Plat (Mcllroy, pp 439)
Page 17
LSD 01-4.00: Large Scale Development
(Fayetteville Youth Center, pp 439)
Page 24
LSD 01-5.00: Large Scale Development
• Page 43
•
(Allied Storage, LTD, pp 601)
STAFF PRESENT
Sam Edwards
Perry Franklin
Chuck Rutherford
Kim Hesse
Kim Rogers
Jim Beavers
Keith Shreve
Tim Conklin
UTILITIES PRESENT
Mike Phipps, Ozark Electric
Bill Smith, Southwestern Bell
Glen Newman, SWEPCO
Johney Boles, AR Western Gas
Forwarded
Forwarded
Forwarded
Forwarded
STAFF ABSENT
Cheryl Zotti
Ron Petrie
Mickey Jackson
UTILITIES ABSENT
Kevin Lefler, Cox Communications
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 2
LSD 01-3.00: Large Scale Development (City of Fayetteville Drake Field, pp 834,835) was
submitted by Arnold D. Rankins of McClelland Consulting Engineers, Inc. on behalf of The City of
Fayetteville for property located at 4500 S. School Avenue. The property is zoned I-1, Heavy
Commercial/Light Industrial, C-1, Neighborhood Commercial and C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and
contains approximately 512.28 acres The request is to build 14 hangars.
Conklin: Good morning. We are going to start the meeting of the Technical Plat Review
Committee, Wednesday, February 28, 2001, at 9:00 a.m. The first item of business is
a Large Scale Development 01-3.00 for City of Fayetteville Drake Field, submitted by
Arnold D. Rankins of McClelland Consulting Engineers, Inc. on behalf of The City of
Fayetteville for property located at 4500 S. School Avenue. The property is zoned I-
1, Heavy Commercial/Light Industrial, C-1, Neighborhood Commercial and C-2,
Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 512.28 acres. The request is to
build 14 hangars. Good morning Mr. Rankin. We will get started with Sara Edwards,
our Development Coordinator at Planning and this process is where we collect all the
comments from City divisions and we will go over those at this time.
Chuck Rutherford - Sidewalk & Trails Coordinator
Rutherford: We have assessed a contribution to be given to the sidewalk fund at the airport. Keith,
did you find out the information?
Shreve: No. I haven't been able to get a hold of the foreman. I tried to contact Steve Bailey
and he was unavailable yesterday afternoon and this morning. I don't have anything.
Mickey Jackson - Fire Chief
Jackson: I believe the water line you are showing running between these hangars actually exist
over here.
Rankin: No. There is a four inch waterline running between the hangars that was put in to serve
the hangars and they have since put the waterline over there with the fire hydrant for fire
service. There is one in both places.
Jackson: There is no hydrant available to serve these hangars on the end. You need to add one
within a 300 foot radius and one added to serve these new hangars as well.
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 3
Sara Edwards - Associate Planner
Edwards -
Conklin:
I do want you to add plat page 834 and 835 somewhere near your title block. You do
not have a floodplain reference. That needs to reference a map number and date.
That's all that I have.
I just have one comment. I would like you to contact the chairman of the Airport
Board and provide a letter that the Airport Board has reviewed this large scale
development plan and agrees with this design. I know I've asked the question several
times, I would like something in writing for my file on that.
Jim Beavers - City Engineer
Beavers.
Arnold, if you would just verify the water and sewer lines and label them a little better.
Our atlas isn't very clear with what's out at Drake Field. You have written comments
from me. That's all I have.
Glen Newman - SWEPCO
Newman:
Rankins:
Newman:
Rankins:
Newman:
Bill Smith
Smith:
I assume all of this will have to be underground?
Yes.
I just have to agree to a transformer location and underground facilities location or will I
need easements? Are these individually owned hangars?
No. They will be owned by the airport and leased to the individual.
Okay.
- Southwestern Bell
The only thing I would require is, if they require a phone service, a conduit out. That
will be determined when they build them to where it's going to go. I'm not sure. We
have many phones working in any of these hangars. A lot of them use their cell phones.
At that time, we just have to determine what direction to run a conduit. That's all.
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 4
Johnev Boles - Arkansas Western Gas
Boles: Are you going to be needing natural gas in any of these hangars for heat?
Rankins: I don't believe so. If we do we'll contact you.
Boles: Okay, I have no other comment.
Edwards: Kevin Lefler from Cox Communications was unavailable. Your revisions are due
March 7, 2001, at 10:00 a.m.
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 5
LSD 00-36.00: Large Scale Development (J.D. China, pp 520) was submitted by Andy Feinstein
of Engineering Design Associates on behalf of Jennifer Lee for property located at 1740 W. 6th Street.
The property is zoned C -2/R-2, Thoroughfare Commercial/Medium Density Residential and contains
1 86 acres. The request is for a restaurant.
Conklin: The next item on the agenda is a Large Scale Development 00-36.00, J.D. China
submitted by Andy Feinstein of Engineering Design Associates on behalf of Jennifer Lee
for property located at 1740 W. 6th Street. The property is zoned C -2/R-2,
Thoroughfare Commercial/Medium Density Residential and contains 1.86 acres. The
request is for a restaurant at this location. Good morning Andy.
Feinstein: Good morning.
Conklin: We'll start with Sara Edwards and she'll go over staff comments.
Kim Hesse - Landscape Administrator
Hesse:
You need to refer to the Planning Department and me to establish language for the tree
easement. I can get that to you. Your parking lot landscape is adequate. I request a
couple of trees be placed near the employee parking area. Is that an expansion area?
Feinstein: I don't think so. At one time we had sketched another little retail in there and we are
parked to handle some more retail for our parking count. The last I heard from the
client was, "Don't bother at this point". Your concern is that if they did expand the
trees are for not?
Hesse: Yes. They are meeting the requirement, just to get more shade on the west side.
Feinstein: Right. I can tuck them off to the side like between the dumpster and the building and
off to the side so that any expansion wouldn't be a conflict.
Hesse:
If off-site grading is required, tree protection fencing must be indicated to protect trees
on adjacent property. If rare trees are within the off-site construction, those trees shall
be located and included on the plan. Along those lines, I have submitted for our City
Attorney to look at the Bill of Assurance and the judgement on that and make sure that
is something we should not enforce as the Judge has said. The reason for that is, they
didn't mention us in this. I'm just going to get his opinion, I don't know how it's going
to come out right now.
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 6
Conklin: We sent that up to our interim City Attorney. That's something I've never seen before
where a Bill of Assurance made at the City can be ruled that it's no longer valid by
some property owner suing another property owner or potential buyer or whatever to
get rid of it. I just want to make sure Kit Williams is comfortable with that idea.
Feinstein: Do you have any idea when they'll have an opinion for us?
Conklin: Well, Kit starts tomorrow.
Feinstein: Oh great.
Conklin: I will be more than happy to try to get with him and encourage him to look at it. Maybe
I can get my foot in the door before anybody else.
Edwards: Do you have anything to add on that subject?
Kim Hesse - Landscape Administrator
Hesse:
What's that building 60% of the trees, 8 inches or
larger on the size. We may be doing that, I don't know. The in back,
without looking at each tree, I don't know. That's what it would come down to. You
may not be violating that. It doesn't talk about canopy, it talks about no Targe trees. It
may not be an issue. I'm just saying if it is an issue, it still may not be problem because
you have the required 60%.
Feinstein: The canopy survey for that rear portion, we did not specifically go in and measure
diameters. You think perhaps we should have measured those?
Hesse:
It's based on what you are willing to save. Based on the condition, we might have to
do that. Just to clarify for your client, that's what we are dealing with. It's the number
of trees, not the canopy but actually the percentage of the number of trees 8 inches and
larger.
Feinstein: I think the theme of the pulling of that was predicated on the assumption that because
the City did not have a tree preservation ordinance in place at the time and now that
they do, let's use that rule. I hear you saying "Let's perhaps go back to the Bill of
Assurance rule."
Hesse: I don't know if we can ask for a Bill of Assurance.
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 7
Conklin: That's why we are going to the City Attorney. I'm not an attorney, Kim is not an
attorney and you, outside of telling the City you are doing this, you went to court and
you had a Judge throw out a Bill of Assurance that was made in the City of Fayetteville.
No one told us until it was all said and done. We just want to make sure the City
Attomey is going to say the Bill of Assurance, ignore it and you don't have to look at it.
People get excited when you violate Bill of Assurance's in the City of Fayetteville. I
want to make sure we are not violating one.
Chuck Rutherford - Sidewalk & Trails Coordinator
Rutherford: 6th Street is a principal arterial which requires 6 foot sidewalk with a minimum 10 foot
greenspace. You can tie the new sidewalk to the existing sidewalk on the east side of
the property. It should be continuous through the driveway, you just need to remove
the lines on either side.
Feinstein: I do have a power pole in the way at that tie in point. The property to our west is
under contract for development. I think I need to get with Mr. Rutherford and talk
about just leaving it as shown until that other project comes in.
Rutherford: I think that will do. Our concern was tying to the property to the east which does exist,
because you've shown that on your drawing here, there is no problem there.
Feinstein: I thought the comment was on the west.
Edwards: No.
Rutherford: We'll work with you on the power pole.
Perry Franklin - Traffic Superintendent
Franklin: If there is not a street light along there, you need one every 300 feet. Apparently they
weren't called out. Where is the entrance to the building exactly and is there more than
one?
Feinstein: The main entrance is in front. There is an emergency exit, I think, just past the dnve
through window to the south.
Franklin: Would there be a problem moving those ADA spaces toward the front of the building?
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 8
Feinstein: I've got some grade issues right there but let me look at that again. Your concern is
how far along the sidewalk they have to travel?
Franklin: ADA regulations are they have to have the shortest route to the entrance to the building.
I know it's in your footprint, that door there in front really goes through a dining room
that's closed off. It's like someone could, on the side entrance there, someone could
have that dining room reserved for parties and that ADA person would have to go
through.
Feinstein: Our intention was to bring everybody in the front door.
Franklin: It's possible those spaces need to be moved up to the first space.
Sara Edwards - Associate Planner
Edwards. You submitted elevations but they weren't in color.
Feinstein: They were resubmitted in color.
Edwards: Let me look. I didn't see them in the file. Did you show both sides?
Feinstein: Yes and the sign.
Edwards: I had a question that your refrigeration unit and freezer that is incorporated in the
building?
Feinstein: Yes.
Conklin: Your periput is high enough to cover each unit?
Feinstein: Yes.
Edwards: I did want you to dimension the right-of-way from centerline. We are doing an
additional 15?
Feinstein: That was covered in the lot split.
Edwards. When you turn in your easement plat, you'll just need to make sure it says 55. Unless I
• missed it, I didn't see a requested variance for the 18 foot aisle width.
•
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 9
Feinstein: We are exceeding that.
Edwards: It's not a minimum or maximum, it's a standard.
Feinstein: So, this is a variance request?
Conklin: Yes. The Planning Commission and staff are concerned about the amount of pavement
people have on their commercial developments. You have to justify why you need
more pavement. More impervious surfaces causes more heat and more runoff. If you
have tractor trailer rigs coming in there to drop off food or whatever and you've got to
make that turn and you need 18 feet, that's something you can bring up and we can
consider. If it's needed for an engineering or design consideration, you can have it
typically. If it's just to have extra pavement, no.
Feinstein: The requirement is 13?
Edwards: 12. You did submit a conditional use for the parking waiver, right?
Feinstein: Yes. When do those have to be mailed to the public?
Edwards: 7 days.
Conklin: Before Subdivision Committee. There are actually a couple methods. Publication in
the newspaper, I believe.
Edwards: This is a conditional use.
Conklin: On a large scale, you have the obligation requirements. On a conditional use, yes.
Franklin: Do I understand you just took that aisle width to 12 instead of 18?
Conklin: Well the ordinance talks about 12 for one way.
Franklin: 60 degree angular parking requires a minimum of 18 feet.
Edwards: Is that right?
Franklin: Whoever drew this parking lot checked and got the same numbers I did. That's why
it's 18 feet.
•
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 10
Feinstein: So it's based on your first comments then, that was a graphic sketch I think.
Conklin: Scratch that variance request out if it's 60 degree angle parking. It should match IT.
We'll check it. There is a 12 foot aisle in there, I think that's at 45 degrees for tire
angle. We'll make it work.
Feinstein: Should I just get with Janet later to figure out?
Conklin: Yes. I'll look it up for you because you probably don't have a separate conditional use
request. Do they have one? You've already submitted the labels?
Feinstein: Yes. You have the labels and we mailed them once but we missed the date so I guess
we have to re -mail them. -
Conklin: We go over and beyond what the code requires and send notice too through those
labels, put a sign up and a display ad in the newspaper so we can make sure
everybody's aware of what's going on. You should if you submitted your conditional
use application, notification will be met through the mailing.
Edwards: That's all that I have.
Jim Beavers - City Engineer
Beavers: Some of these refer to the construction plans which we can talk about that later, you
don't need to do this for Subdivision Committee. If you'll turn back to the checklist for
the preliminary grading plan, there are a couple of things that we need. I did not
receive an application with the original signature on the preliminary grading permit.
Edwards: All we have is a faxed copy.
Beavers. These are on the next page where it says "see notes". One thing you will need is a
variance request to the Planning Commission. The grading ordinance limits the lengths
of cuts to 100 feet, I think it will be a pretty simple thing. To have the cuts you have in
your parking lot, you'll have to have a waiver from the Planning Commission.
Feinstein: I studied that paragraph in depth yesterday and the context that 1 saw it in, it was
describing length with the slope. That wasn't the intention your saying? It's the length
of the retaining wall that's limited to 100 feet?
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 11
Beavers: No, it's the length around the ??? of the ground. It's Just the ??? Mr. Schaefer put in
after Lindsey built the apartments over there above the Junior High. The length of cut
and fill slopes.
Feinstein: Is that more than 100 feet across the length of the parking lot?
Beavers: Actually from 6th Street to the back end.
Conklin: That's probably about 300 feet.
Beavers. The ordinances says you have to have terraces in there and I don't think you want
terraces so, you'll need to ask for a variance.
Feinstein: I'm trying to figure in my mind how you terrace something in that direction. I can see if
you are coming down the slope. How would you terrace something in that long
dimension?
Beavers: I don't think you would want to for a parking lot but you could.
Conklin: I think the idea was not to cut the hillsides back 300 feet. In this situation, you've got a
restaurant and parking lot and it probably doesn't make a lot of sense to terrace a
parking lot.
Beavers. There are a few other things missing from the plan. I won't bother to read them all,
you've got it there in writing. There are 5 or 6 things you need to add. The other
comments refer to construction plans. This reminds me, you submitted a retaining wall
designed by Jim Tonio? They will need to be designed and sealed by a P E The
drainage report, it was labeled as a preliminary report and was reviewed as such. I
want to make it clear, that's not a final report, that's not including information required
on a final report. Before you prepare your final report, you can get with me. There are
some input values in there that are different than our manuals. We probably need to go
over that.
Feinstein: You did see the revision that shows the underground detention?
Beavers: Yes.
Feinstein: Any problems with that?
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 12
Beavers: Probably not. Maintenance is going to be an issue but that will be up to the private
property owner. Just to remind you too, the drainage goes on to the Highway
Department, they have to approve the drainage report also.
Feinstein: This notification for the variance can go in the same letter as the conditional use?
Conklin: The variance on the walls?
Beavers: The length of the cut, that's just a letter to the Planning Commission requesting a
variance.
Feinstein: The word "variance" jumped in my head and I thought this was a full blown variance
request but it's just a letter requesting a variance?
Edwards. A waiver.
Conklin: We need to make the Planning Commission aware of all ordinances that are not being
• met so they can properly approve the project and not have public find something that
we were supposed to make you do.
Feinstein: Anybody have a feel on how they'll view that? Any problems with getting an
affirmative?
Conklin: Things are changing. The Planning Commission always tries to work with the
applicants.
Feinstein: Tim, we've been communicating with these people looking at this tract to the east, we
can probably reduce some of this wall between us depending on what their plans show.
Edwards: Utilities?
Wayne Newman - SWEPCO
Newman: It will be underground and 6th Street it looks like the only ??? we have right now is one
in the southwest comer. From that pole you need to cut a ditch, conduit for the
transformer location. I think it's probably in the back. You'll need to provide an area
for the pad with 5 feet ???.
• Feinstein: Do you have a preference on where the transformer should be located out there? Do
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 13
you want to put a dot on this near the dumpster?
Newman: You can. It's really not critical that we have a location right now. What we would
probably work out better if we could see it there on the site.
Conklin:
Newman:
It needs to be put in a location where it's not visible from the street or screened.
We start trying to tuck it in too tight, we come in from this location and we make 90
degree, there may be a manhole or box requirement to terminate it. Your limited to the
number of 90 degree....?
Feinstein: Maybe I can angle it to the parking and do a wide sweep so we can time that.
Newman: We've done that before.
Conklin: Your meter will be on the back of the building?
• Newman: It will probably be on a freestanding meter right there at the edge of the transformer
pad.
•
Conklin: Do you know what size line this is?
Newman: I know there is a 12 KV line on the south side of 6th Street. I don't know what size
that it that comes across that highway. Since it's residential, there is a good possibility
that it's 7200. We may have to upgrade it across the street to 12 in order to provide
the three phase service.
Conklin: Bring that issue up when this develops to the west. If that's under 12 KV, it will have
to be underground. Since this crosses two property lines, I don't know how to make
you put it underground at this point but it would be nice. If you are coming off of that
pole up along 62, are you going to dip underground from that pole?
Newman: That would be the dip pole to the restaurant and probably to this property over here.
Conklin: You are not going to put additional lines on this over to here to make that 12 KV and
then I can't get it underground?
Newman: No.
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 14
Conklin: That sounds good.
Newman: The dip pole will be out at the driveway.
Conklin: Great.
Bill Smith - Southwestern Bell
Smith:
You show a conduit under the dry vit, I want you to carry that conduit all the way into
the building near the entrance or wherever you are going to have the telephone service.
That's my only comment.
Johney Boles - Arkansas Western Gas
Boles:
Andy, if I'm looking at this correctly, you are showing two gas services presently on
this property or is one existing and one proposed? You have a note to relocate existing
water and gas meters down along the southwest corner? Then along the southeast
corner, you show another gas meter.
Feinstein: That could be an existing service this vacant residence. I don't really know who serves
from what but I was suggesting we put another meter or Just a new box in the southeast
corner.
Boles: So this is a suggestion?
Feinstein: Yes. That's proposed.
Boles: I'll need to get with you on a future date on load information on this building. There will
be a charge to retire that other service and relocate it if there is an existing service on
that property. The estimated relocation cost will be $250.
Feinstein: If we just use the existing service, Just leave it there?
Boles: There won't be any charge.
Feinstein: Just leave it where it is. Do we need to figure out which one is hot?
Boles: I can go by and take a look. I thought you told me one is existing and one was
• proposed?
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 15
Feinstein: I'm trying to see if I have another.
Boles: Let me go by and take a look at it.
Conklin: Where is that Andy, the gas meter
Feinstein: I'm seeing one about in the center. I've got a note that says "relocate existing water
and gas meters and there is one right on the west line. There is gas here which may
serve this but it might be difficult to determine. If this one is hot, we will just keep using
it.
Boles: You are also showing another one here.
Feinstein: That one is proposed.
Boles: I'll go by and take a look Andy. Just give me a call.
• Conklin: So you want to leave that gas meter out in front of your building?
Feinstein: Yes. If there is some grading in there, could we just hide the box?
Boles: We can work out those issues. It's not a problem.
Kevin Lefler - Cox Communications
Lefler:
Aerial cables runs on poles along 6' Street. Any cost to relocate or place underground
would be at the developer's expense. We are requesting the same easements and
considerations the electric company for future video or grabber service. Are we not
getting a new easement, is that what it sounds like? That's existing right?
Feinstein: Per the lot split yes.
Edwards. So we are not getting any right-of-way or easement? We are not going to get an
easement plat.
Conklin: Unless there is a new easement you are showing.
Feinstein: This survey does include it, it should show it all there. That was prepared for this tract.
• It shows an additional 15 feet of right-of-way to the City and it shows an existing 25
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 16
UE Do you want a full 25 from the new right-of-way?
Boles: Yes.
Feinstein: I'll make sure. You probably will want a plat?
Edwards. Yes. Revisions are due March 7, 2001, by 10:00 a.m.
•
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 17
PP 01-2.00: Preliminary Plat (Mcllroy, pp 439) was submitted by Mike Anderson of Engineering
Design Associates on behalf Hayden Mcllroy for property located south of Hwy 16 and east of Rupple
Road. The property is zoned A -1/R -1.5/C -1/R -2/R-1, Agricultural/Moderate Density
Residential/Neighborhood Commercial/Medium Density Residential/Low Density Residential and
contains approximately 90 acres.
Conklin: Item number four is a preliminary plat 01-2.00 submitted by Mike Anderson of
Engineering Design Associates on behalf Hayden McIlroy for property located south of
Hwy 16 and east of Rupple Road. The property is zoned A -1/R -1.5/0 -1/R -2/R-1,
Agricultural/Moderate Density Residential/Neighborhood Commercial/Medium Density
Residential/Low Density Residential and contains approximately 90 acres This is a
preliminary plat. I requested that a preliminary plat be submitted to the City of
Fayetteville in order to be able to split the property and have the City of Fayetteville
acquire land for the new Fayetteville Boys and Girls Club. My authority for lot splits, I
can only create 3 new lots from one parent tract of land, so that's a total of 4 lots.
When we start researching this, getting it ready to bring this forward for the Fayetteville
Boys and Girls Club, staff discovered that there was actually more than 4 lots that have
been created so I did request that they bring this preliminary plat to the City. With the
understanding that what we are trying to do at this point is create the lots The only
thing that they are going to be creating to the City of Fayetteville is the right-of-way as
required by the Master Street Plan. There were some agreements that were made last
year with regard to what the City would do with regard to water, sewer and street
construction. At this time the only thing that we are looking at in the City of Fayetteville
is for this developer to dedicate, where possible, 90 feet of right-of-way for Rupple
Road and 35 feet of right-of-way for the future extension of Persimmon Street on the
south boundary line. This is a little unusual. Two weeks from now, we should have a
final plat since there is no improvements that are being requested by the City.
Whatever easements the utility companies need at this time, you can ask for them and
we'll have a final plat in a couple weeks. I'll start with Sara Edwards and she'll go
over staff comments.
Sara Edwards - Associate Planner
Edwards: My understanding is, the City will be building the sidewalk. The sidewalk is 6 feet with
a 10 foot greenspace. Is that not right?
Anderson: That's not what I've been told. Shouldn't that comment really be for the large scale?
• Conklin: As a City Planner, I kind of outlined, we are asking for right-of-way. That's all we are
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 18
asking for at this point in time with the understanding that the City is going to build
Rupple Road subject to the approval of City Council funding that project which will
create frontage for the lots and allow these lots to be transferred. Do you have anything
Jim?
Jim Beavers - City Engineer
Beavers: When will tract 5 be granted to the Parks?
Conklin: I don't know. We are going to have to go through final plat and get it approved and
then there will be a deed that will be tract 5 of the WHM Land Investments
Subdivision.
Anderson: I think it will happen in the near future.
Conklin: We will need the City of Fayetteville to be listed as a property owner. Put City of
Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Division on there.
McLain: Until the deed is received it will hold up the lease agreement process.
Conklin: The other comment was, with regard to Rupple Road and Persimmon Street we will
have a condition of approval for the final plat that when those tracts do develop that
they will be required to meet the ordinance requirement for the street construction. On
Rupple Road since the City is building two lanes, we'll be asking for the developer to
build the other two lanes. I think that is what was agreed to. When tract 3, 7, 1 and 2
come through that those two additional lanes on each side, the east and west, would be
the responsibility of the developer. With regard to tract 7 and Persimmon Street, they
will be required to build that street according to ordinances when that comes under
development. Under tract 5 and 6, tract 6 is currently owned by the City of
Fayetteville and tract 5 will be owned by the City of Fayetteville, the City is not asking
for any improvements on Persimmon Street as part of this preliminary plat or will be
asking for any improvements as part of the large scale development based on the past
agreements.
Edwards: I do not show that the $200 fee has not been paid for this preliminary plat. Unless you
know something otherwise. I don't have a receipt.
Anderson: I think we submitted an $800 check for preliminary plat.
•
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 19
Edwards: I got that for the large scale and we were going to need $800 for the large scale, $200
for this and I far as the conditional use, I don't process that.
Conklin: It's $100 fee for a conditional use. If you believe you've paid it, we'll check our
records and make sure. If not, we will make sure we inform you and take care of that.
Edwards: I need you to add the adjacent zoning. Add plat page 439.
McLain: On the check, I think what happened is, the bank returned the check back. Originally
we submitted and then we pulled off, I think that's what happened. We will reissue a
check.
Conklin: Okay. Thank you.
Edwards: The flood zone certification is referencing an old map, a 1999 map and we need to fix
that and fix your boundaries. I do want to you call out the right-of-way as 90 feet of
right-of-way to be dedicated to the City.. We are kind of in question of whether the 60
foot exists with an easement or what that is. We just want to clear it up with the whole
90 feet right now.
Conklin: We would like the property boundaries to end at that 90 foot edge. What's shown on
your plat is a 90 foot right-of-way. The same with the 35 feet on Persimmon. I just
have one question, did you ever get with Marinoni and work that out with that right-of-
way dedication?
Anderson: We talked, we met with Paula and I think internally we all decided to leave it where it's
at.
Conklin: Okay.
Edwards. We are to Jim now and I think we've taken care of all of Jim's comments but I'll let him
speak for himself.
Beavers: I'm sorry. I asked that question about tract 5, when we get to large scale you'll see
what that is.
Anderson: I would imagine that we can but from what I understand Hayden is difficult to get with.
I don't know how quick that will happen.
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 20
Edwards: Utilities?
Mike Phipps - Ozark Electric
Phipps: Is that 20 foot easement go all the way around tract 7? It comes down the west side of
Rupple.
Anderson: I would think that we would be... I don't see where it's labeled.
Phipps: Maybe I can address this comment on the large scale. I just wondered. For utilities,
we'll need a 20 foot easement all the way down the east side of Rupple, 2 per 7. What
you have shown on here, you just got it there. We'll need 20 foot through there.
Anderson: Right. I think that's the intent along Rupple that a 20 foot utility easement either side of
the new 90 foot right-of-way.
Phipps: I guess the north side of Persimmon on tract 5 and tract 6, a 20 foot easement.
Anderson: That's a problem.
Conklin: Is that going to interfere with your channelization9
Anderson: Yes. That's a problem.
Beavers: So you'll move the channel?
Anderson: I have nowhere we can move the channel. We need to back the easement off if there is
any way we can do that.
Conklin: Do you understand Mike, on the large scale development plan, the next item, there is a
channelization of that creek? Can you be in on the top of that bank or on the side of
that bank?
Phipps: No.
Anderson: Can we have to take 5 feet off of that easement line with regards to the service?
Phipps: Yes, it depends on what I have in there. If it's just underground and no above ground
bolts or switches in there. We can go on the south side. At some point we are going to
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 21
Boles:
Phipps:
Conklin:
Anderson:
Phipps:
• Bill Smith -
Smith:
Anderson:
Smith:
Conklin:
Smith:
Conklin:
Smith:
need a utility easement through there to access all this land Marinoni has in the future.
What about installing casings across that?
Yes. I was wanting to address that on the large scale for the Youth Center.
Why don't we just move ahead and when we get to the large scale in a few minutes we
can see what we can figure out.
Right now it's up in the air. I don't think we have a problem getting in on tract 7
because that creek moves to the south away from everything if that ever is re -
channelized, there is plenty of room to do it. On tract 5 and 6, which is owned by the
City of Fayetteville right now, that would be highly problematic for us on the large
scale.
I have no other comments.
Southwestern Bell
I would agree with Ozarks that we need that 20 foot easement around tract 7. Is there
any idea what this tract 7 is going to develop?
It's zoned R-1.5 already, I would imagine it would be housing.
We'll deal with those easements when it does develop.
Keep in mind these large tracts will be coming back through and at that time it will be
better to plan the easements.
Up on Wedington it's probably 20 feet across the north end of both tract 1 and 2.
General utility easement?
Yes. That's all my comments.
Johney Boles - Arkansas Western Gas
Boles:
The easement requested on tract 7 would be adequate for me also. We'll probably be
• serving this area coming out of the Meadowlands, probably off of lot 69 in that general
•
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 22
area of the subdivision, going east. That's all I have.
Anderson: In relation to this easement along the western boundary up tract 7, we have an existing
sewer easement. Are we requesting 20 feet in addition to that or a total of 20 feet?
Conklin: That's a question for the utilities.
Phipps: Where Johney is talking about lot 69, from 69 to tract 7 on the south side of that
property line on tract 7 and Darrell and Betty.
Anderson: I understand that one. We are just doing a 20 foot easement there. I'm talking about
on the far western boundary we have an existing sewer easement. Are we requesting
20 feet total from the property line?
Smith: What is the width of that easement now?
Anderson: I don't see that dimensioned on here. It looks like either 15 or 20 feet.
Beavers. If you are asking if there is room for everybody in that 20 feet, the answer is no.
Phipps: We need more.
Conklin: What do you need?
Phipps: Probably 15.
Smith: That would be adequate.
Anderson: That will work.
Edwards: Do you have any idea what the right-of-way on Wedington is?
Anderson. No.
Edwards: That's on our Master Street Plan.
Conklin: That is a principal arterial. Ordinance does require us to get 55 feet from centerline. I
know I haven't brought that up until just now, I apologize for that. One other condition,
Sara if you could take this down, once we do the final plat, we are going to have 90
•
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 23
Anderson:
Boles:
Anderson.
Conklin:
feet of right-of-way for Rupple Road. I think it's important to put a condition on this
subdivision that tract 3 and tract 7 not use that right-of-way until the street is built. I
don't want a development occurring down here with truck traffic and everything else
interfering with the City of Fayetteville trying to construct a street. With regard to tract
1 and 2, if they have access off of Wedington, I think that's fine but we need to limit
access until that street is built to that south property line. They will be able to sell,
within a month, all these tracts to individual property owners and we very well could
have large scale development and subdivisions coming in at the same time as City of
Fayetteville trying to build a street and youth center under construction. That would be
a lot of conflict out there and cause a lot of problems. We'll make that a condition and
if you could let Mr. McIlroy know that.
I think we could put a note on here.
Tim, I would like to make note that if the additional right-of-way dedication is required
on tract 1 and 2 that our utility easement be outside of that newly dedicated right-of-
way.
Right.
That's something we have required on all development with principal arterials, to have
10 foot greenspace and then your 6 foot sidewalk. If you look at Walgreen's, that's
what you get with 55 feet of right-of-way dedication.
Cox Communications
Edwards:
Conklin:
Cox Communications is requesting an easement and conduits and the same
considerations as the electric company.
Anybody else?
•
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 24
LSD 01-4.00: Large Scale Development (Fayetteville Youth Center, pp 439) was submitted by
Mike Anderson of Engineering Design Associates on behalf of Fayetteville Youth Center Inc. DBA The
Boys & Girls Club of Fayetteville Inc. for property located south Hwy 16 and east of Rupple Road.
The property is zoned A -1/R-2, Agricultural/Medium Density Residential and contains approximately
15 acres. The request is for a recreation facility.
Conklin: Moving along to the large scale development now for the Fayetteville Boys and Girls
Club submitted by Mike Anderson of Engineering Design Associates on behalf of
Fayetteville Youth Center Inc. DBA The Boys & Girls Club of Fayetteville Inc. for
property located south Hwy 16 and east of Rupple Road. The property is zoned A -
1/R -2, Agricultural/Medium Density Residential and contains approximately 15 acres.
The request is for a recreation facility. We'll start with Sara.
Kim Rogers - Parks Operations Coordinator
Rogers: The Parks and Recreations Division is going to leave the existing Meadowlands
Subdivision park land dedication acreage to the Fayetteville Youth Center. This part of
the property was received on March 30, 1995, in the amount of 3.08 acres through the
park land ordinance for the Meadowlands Subdivision development. The Parks and
Recreation Division, at this point, has not received the deed for the additional 6 acres to
be banked for future development in the southwest quadrant of Fayetteville by WHN
Land Investments. This issue has been discussed with Deborah Sexton, Attorney at
Law, representing said developer. She has included that letter. The Parks and
Recreation Division will also require a copy of the wetland determination report along
with the location and acreage of the wetland. Mike Anderson of EDA has been
contracted by the Fayetteville Youth Center to apply for the Conditional Letter of Map
Revision., 404, and grading permits. The Parks and Recreation Division is requiring
copies of the permits, applications and reports thereof. Also, a copy of the letter of
map revision is required. Where are we on the map revision, have you applied for that?
Anderson:
Beavers:
Anderson:
Edwards:
No. I think we won't until we get final grading approval.
You are not going to get final approval until we see what you are doing with the
CLOMR permit.
It's goes hand in hand and we obviously haven't applied until we work out all the
drainage issues. It is probably a month or two away before that happens.
You can submit that to me for a signature.
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 25
Beavers:
Anderson:
McLain:
When they want to begin construction?
Hanna can answer that.
We tentatively would like to at least begin grading and construction the first of July and
probably try to dig it out.
Beavers: I think you are already behind that if you are talking about the CLOMR hasn't even
been submitted. What's the turnaround on those?
Anderson: Probably 60 days at least. The Corps has determined that is ephemeral stream which
helps us somewhat. We are not for sure exactly if the process is the same or not.
Conklin: We are trying to mix them together, the Corps of Engineers and FEMA. FEMA is a
separate process and you are dealing with both. The City of Fayetteville will have to
sign off on that CLOMR.
Anderson: All the work will actually be on City property.
Beavers: When we get to comments I have some questions about that.
Conklin: There is a community acknowledgment form you have to sign before you submit that to
FEMA. Just keep on bringing it up and want to make sure that everybody is aware
that you are dealing with two federal agencies that you have to get approval from
before you can move ahead.
Edwards: Jim are you alright with the City building and sidewalks or is that not going to be?
Beavers: I was told that it was a different width, at least 8 maybe 10 feet was all.
Conklin: Your division is designing it, right Jim?
Beavers: Correct. I guess it's up in the air whether we are all the way to the property line or Just
to the driveway. I think we should come all the way to the property line. Persimmon
will be like any other developer will be. There was some discussion in previous
meetings to stop at this entrance, which would be to scale that is 100 or 150 feet short
but I think you might as well go to the property line like everybody else has to.
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 26
Conklin:
Anderson:
Beavers:
Anderson:
Beavers:
Anderson:
I think that would be a good idea. That way, when this develops down this area, we
are not going back to City Council asking for more money to get a connection made.
We are going to have a cul-de-sac.
You think that would be the 10 foot along north side?
I think so. There is a letter from Mayor Hanna and it said we would build a two lane
road and I think it said an 8 foot trail. I question that because the standard is 10 foot.
Maybe we'll build a 10 foot trail, I think it said on the east side of the road. Again, I
don't have that Rupple file with me. I can't remember.
There was some discussion of a trail north of here on the west side or the plan for it
was
It was on one side of it, whatever side it ends up on.
Right.
• Danny Farrar - Assistant Fire Marshal
Edwards.
You need to add a fire hydrant near this south entrance.
Perry Franklin - Traffic Superintendent
Edwards
Franklin:
Anderson:
Franklin -
•
The ADA requirements for passenger loading zones and parking I'll let Perry go over
it.
I've attached the ADA requirements. I'm assuming that there is short term parking as
unloading and loading zone? The ADA regulations say at least one of those has to be
ADA accessible. I've attached a couple of examples how to do that. What it really
affects is the sidewalk. You need to be able to pull off and fold out the wheelchair lift
and unload it there and let somebody off and leave There are some examples attached
to that sheet there. I'm assuming that access is at the front door, is that correct?
Yes.
One of those 8 can be one of this right here. You can have 7 over there and 1 up front
here. You can look that over.
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 27
Anderson: We'll probably leave the 8 there.
Franklin: If you have any questions give me a call.
Anderson: Or we could drop all these.
Franklin: You could. You know that some of them do that anyway. As long as it's not a
designated striped signed loading and unloading zone you probably could just skirt that.
Anderson: We'll see how much problem it would cause to do it.
Sara Edwards - Associate Planner
Edwards: Have you submitted the 12 color elevations on this one?
McLain: No, I have not.
Edwards: I need those. Are you going to put a sign out on Rupple?
McLain: We have discussed it, it hasn't been determined.
Edwards. Add plat page 439. On this one, unless I missed, I didn't see the floodplain reference.
Anderson: I don't think there is because when you said something like that, it went through my
head that there is probably not one on here.
Conklin: Just for the record, our Subdivision Committee members read these minutes to help
familiarize themselves with these projects. The idea with this floodplain is, the 100
floodplain/floodway will all be contained based on ultimate buildout within this channel?
Anderson: Correct.
Conklin: So what we are showing as floodplain/floodway up in these areas, will be relocated
through the channel. Thanks.
Edwards: With regards to parking, I don't think we have any issues, you just didn't put the ratio
that you used on there. I don't know if you pulled them out of our...
• Anderson: There was a bunch of discussion about what to do and we land of would like your
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 28
direction in how we should work that.
Conklin: Your firms, professionals out there, they can't do any research to tell me. We've got
our youth center planner here, is there any research you can give me and the
Commission to help us out here to know how much you need? It seems like all these
recreational facilities never have enough parking. Surely there is a national organization
you may have? There has to be some conference you've been to?
?:
I think one problem you run into, one thing that really happens that causes big problem
like on the football field over here. There is always the changeover. The people here,
their game is about over but it's 10 minutes from over and then another game will start
10 minutes after that. Those people have to be here. There is a period there for a
couple of hours when you will double the parking going on there. After that you can
probably handle it.
Anderson: What we have done internally is, as you are aware now, we'll have I guess the peak of
our time as a football season, one game on Harmon and two games down below and
the changeover period. I think the max that we had counted there in the last year or so
was like 260 to 280 but I'm not sure that's a factor. That's all that can get down there.
I don't know how many spaces their really are. We've done a lot of research in the
last year or two and asked a lot of questions. When you go through your daily activity,
95% of the kids are under 16. Hopefully what will happen here is we'll have the ability
to do and understand that spacing. I know with the girls softball field, we try to use the
software and trip generation to figure out how many spaces we needed out there, it still
comes out not enough.
Conklin: It doesn't work. I was wondering if you considered looking at the Jones Center and
how much they have in square footage. The location of this, the adults programming,
they are going to be driving to the facility and there will be parking needs. The Jones
Center is kind of a similar situation. It's not midtown or downtown. Maybe look at the
Jones Center and see what kind of parking they have. I've been at the Jones Center
and their lots have been almost completely filled up too.
Rogers: I think they have some information like studies like the grandmothers that come,
parents, brothers and those who drive, everyone is coming from a different direction of
town and then plus the parents. Then you have one team that has 13 players and there
is 13 more players coming and all their families and they are trying to get in and out.
• ?: It's the same problem we had over at Lewis with our Parks & Rec trying to decide
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 29
how many spaces we need over there for the soccer programs. If you have a 5:00
o'clock game, one child could mean four cars.
Anderson: We looked at the City requirements and we were all over the board from like 200 to
800 spaces required. I would assume not say we need 800 spaces.
Conklin: I'll do our part here at the City and we'll look at our regulations and see what we think
the number is. I want to make sure everybody has enough parking out here because
you don't want to get off the road out in this area We don't want people parking like
at Gary Hansen on the side of Salem Road out there. We've got to figure out how
much parking we really need.
Anderson: Let's plan for the future development, I think eventually they are talking about another
piece of a building. We don't have much room to add additional parking.
Conklin: If you can look at the Jones Center and maybe come up with those numbers for square
footage. Compare the Jones Center to this and what they have for parking. Planning
Commission and staff, we always want to make sure we are not building too much. If
you can show what is really needed.
Anderson: I would be concerned that we are building too little. I think that we'll probably not over
build.
Conklin: Are you going to have the Youth Center buses stored out here too?
Anderson: From what we understand right now, buses are not stored here.
Edwards: We've got a standard for a driveway width, it's 24 feet. We are showing 30 on the
south driveway. You need a waiver requested if you need that. I can support 27 feet,
but I can't support 30.
Anderson: We just felt that was the main entrance and we would like that.
Edwards: It would be wider than the road. That's all that I have.
Conklin: If you have a need for left and right out, we have a standard for that too that you can
do. If you want to do some type of nice boulevard entry or something, we encourage
you to do that too, a nice landscaped entry into there.
•
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 30
Jim Beavers - Staff Engineer
Beavers: I you will follow with mine, I won't read all of them, just the general comments. This is
a review for plat review, not for construction plans. We reserve the right to review
everything again when you submit your construction documents. I'm going to skip
down to water and sewer. It's my understanding that we at the City have some money
in the budget to extend water to the site. We plan to come from the Meadowlands to
this corner and that's all we plan on doing This waterline you are showing extending
south to Mcllroy and McBride, we are not going to put it in and I don't know if you
were volunteering for the Youth Center to put it in. You show a fire hydrant by the City
down on the corner.
Anderson:
Beavers:
Anderson:
Beavers:
Anderson:
Beavers:
Without us talking about it, what the City was doing down there but if that's not the
intent, that's fine.
We don't have the money in the budget. On the water and sewer, we spoke at a
previous meeting that the City does have the money in there to bring water to the site
and to pay for this short sewer extension in the southwest corner but we never clarified
who was going to design that. When we met with the architects we talked about EDA
designing both of those, where are we at on that?
I think they will design that. I guess we have to work out the details of how.
Again, the water will come from Meadowlands and we'll need either, I guess I should
have brought this up, it may be better with the subdivision comments, we'll need an
easement for that waterline to bring it from Meadowlands to this site. You may want to
show that on the subdivision.
What we had told Mr. Mcllroy, we had given him a plan saying we needed to know
what he was doing there and that we would require an easement. We also need an
access easement because we are planning on our construction corning through here.
On the grading, I'll start with the application. I received a copy of an application, I'll
need an original but the real problem we have is you have multiple owners. All the
owners on these properties are going to have to sign that application. That appears to
be a minimum of the Boys and Girls Club, Mctlroy and the City. We'll have to have
that. We'll need all of those people to sign the application and Engineering will need an
original. This goes back, we are not trying to pick on the Youth Center but, you
remember Steele Crossing and the argument who owns the property Argus Federal
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 31
Conklin:
McLain:
Beavers:
Conklin:
Edwards.
Beavers:
Conklin:
Anderson:
Conklin:
Beavers:
Anderson:
Beavers:
Conklin:
Beavers:
Exchange and the trial we had and everything?
And the hawks?
Does that have to be signed all the same sheet or can we use separate sheets?
I don't care if they are three separate sheets and they are stapled together as long as
it's made clear. That ties into the CLOMR you are talking about moving the channel
from Mcllroy's property to the City's property and that's fine with me but somebody
from the City will have to sign that application.
I would say the Mayor.
I've got the same problem on your large scale.
When you submit the CLOMR we would like a copy of that too, to compare with the
drainage calculations.
It is kind of odd. You are doing a CLOMR on City property when we don't have a
lease, can't plan until we get the subdivision.
That is very interesting.
I just had to comment on that. We'll need to make sure we go upstairs and get the
Mayor's signature on this grading application and CLOMR application and every other
application that involves City property.
This is preliminary not final, final requires more. On a preliminary grading there are
some additional erosion control methods and details are needed but it's okay with me if
we wait until the final plans for that. I wouldn't try to do that by next Tuesday. The
channel, we talked about efforts to make the channel softer, more natural.
We have not done that.
Subdivision Committee members may or may not ask you to do that.
The City is asking them to do that.
The drainage manual recommends it but it doesn't require it. I'm going to recommend
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 32
it but I'm not going to tell you you have to do it.
Conklin: We are encouraging you to do that.
Anderson: It's our intent to do that but we have not done that.
Beavers: Setbacks, the grading ordinance requires setbacks from property lines, you are showing
grading on Mr. Mcllroy to the north and Ozarks Electric to the east. Those will require
either a combined permit application or separate application. If you are going to
combine it with this, there is a four signature you are going to have to get for your
grading permit, from Ozarks Electric.
?: Can we do that signature on the permit application or just an easement?
Beavers: On the application. I apologize, I didn't look that close yesterday but you are grading
at the end of the channel on Marinoni, we'll need a separate permit or combined permit
with him too Anywhere you are grading, you'll need to include those people on your
overall permit or as a separate permit. Then there are some minor things, add to the
plan, read section 169 there is a laundry list of things. One thing that has to be on the
plan is the acreage and zoning, even though you have it on another sheet, it has to be on
the grading plan too. You'll need to add that. It looks like we have some rock check
dams on the channel and they are not labeled, if you don't mind labeling that or add it to
your legend. It looks like a real good idea.
Anderson. It may not be all of them but at least one of them. On the site plan they are not labeled.
Beavers: For the final, we'll need it. Talking about erosion control, you've got a few methods.
In particular, I'll point out that I think you have a note that says "a contractor shall
provide whatever is needed", our ordinance says "the engineer shall design all
temporary or permanent erosion control". You cannot pass that off on the contractor.
The drainage report was labeled as a preliminary report and was reviewed as such.
Before you prepare the final report, I have a few questions if you or Steve can come in
and see me. We have some input data that's a little bit different from our manual. I
don't think it's an issue. As a matter of fact, for a 24 hour storm you have some higher
numbers than we require. Then there is, again this is preliminary not final so I
appreciate that, we'll also need to address the velocities there onto the Mannon
McBride property in the final report. Here is another variance, it's one of these things
that staff does not have the authority to approve but, your channel bends are too tight
and you'll need Planning Commission to grant you a waiver of 9.2.2.4 of the drainage
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 33
Anderson:
Edwards:
Beavers:
Conklin:
Anderson:
•
Conklin:
Anderson:
McLain:
Conklin:
Anderson:
Conklin:
Beavers:
•
manual. The required radius is 10 times the bottom width.
We saw that would be 300 feet, would be basically back to the old line.
Are you in support of that variance?
No comment. That's the only way you can make the property work. I guess I am. I
hadn't thought about it. I guess I am because we copied our manual, there is probably
one big drainage manual written in Austin or something and everybody's copied it. You
can probably submit with 4 foot channels not 30 foot channels. We would like a copy
of the wetlands determination when you have that and a copy of the CLOMR.
Have the wetlands been delineated?
What we've heard is we had a study done by FTN out of Little Rock and they did a
determination and sent that to the Corps. The Corps since has responded back that
they agree with their delineation. I talked to them late yesterday and they will get me a
letter from the Corps. I think we have a copy with us today of the auxiliary report to
the Corps. I think it's a done deal that you all need.
Where is that located?
Andy's got a map. I think we are actually both on the Boys and Girls Club side.
There's one on the Boys and Girls Club side and one on what we are giving to parks.
None of the stream bed or creek was wetlands?
No.
Educating myself here on wetlands.
As far as Rupple Road goes, it's not in the budget but we all know it will be added into
the budget but City Council still has to approve it. Staff doesn't have the power to fund
that. We are going to design it this year and construct it in late 2002 or 2003. During
construction of Rupple, we'll need the adjacent property owners and the people
building the Youth Center to stay out of our contractors way. That gets back to the
haul road, are you looking at coming from Meadowlands?
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 34
Anderson: What our intent, like we talked about earlier, was to come from Meadowlands and
cross over Rupple Road and then run along the area that the trail would be, if the trail
was to be on the east side of Rupple Road.
Beavers. Again, just to remind you, our Budget Coordinator, Steve Davis, told us that the City
cannot spend any funds toward that haul road unless you can prove it also serves as a
multi purpose trail or something when we are through. That's all the comments I have.
Conklin: The haul road, the design of that construction, you'll need that in order to start
construction of this in July.
Beavers: We are not designing the haul road.
Anderson: We are thinking that when we come back on the final grading permit, we'll submit the
more detailed drawings.
Conklin: Okay.
. Franklin: I want to make sure, in retrospect, the comment I have on here about traffic signals.
We had conduit installed in that improvement on Highway 16 west. I know through the
Subdivision and Planning Commission, I'm sure somewhere in there it will become an
issue. I just want to make you aware that I'm going to make an effort to do some
creek generation, fire a letter off to the Highway Department. Typically we don't have
much luck with that and we'll probably have to meet some warrants before AHTD
issues a permit for the signals. I anticipate there will be a time when this thing will be
under operation and we won't have to jump on to get the signal. To say there is going
to be a signal there when this opens up unless somebody else gets involved that's a
possibility but, through the normal channels we don't have much luck in getting them
projections of traffic and getting permits.
Kim Hesse - Landscape Administrator
Hesse: I don't have any comments today but I will prepare that before agenda session.
Kim Rogers - Parks Operations Coordinator
Rogers: You were saying that the final plat might come back in a couple weeks?
• Anderson: That's what everybody's pushing for.
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 35
Conklin: That's what I'm recommending because we need to get the lots created. We need to
get it done and be able to have that deed given to the City and a lease agreement.
That's going to City Council right?
Rogers: Yes. So we have no idea when we'll get the deed?
Anderson: It's really not in my control. I would think that it would be something that will happen
fairly immediately after the final plat is done.
Conklin: We are going to make every effort once you get your final plat through to get it through
the process. You get your mylars ready for signatures with signature blocks and
hopefully we can get everybody together and get it signed off.
Rogers: We usually like to get the deed before that. Not this time.
Conklin: We violated an ordinance last time we did that, we are not going to do it this time.
Rogers: The thing about it, I wanted the land agent to take some time, the plat for Bridgeport
we are working on. Need to give me some time.
Anderson: We will make every effort to satisfy.
Edwards: You can submit a preliminary deed. Just not record it.
Conklin: The deed is going to be fairly simple. It's going to be lot number 4 of that subdivision.
It shouldn't have a metes and bounds legal description, it should just be a lot of the
subdivision.
Rogers: I'll check with Ed.
Conklin: We typically don't run these past Ed on the final plats but, yes.
Beavers: Something just caught my eye. On tract 5, we are needing an additional 15 feet of
right-of-way?
Anderson: No, we are giving 35.
Beavers: That reduces that total acreage from 6 to a little less than 6. Is that going to be an
issue?
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 36
Anderson:
Conklin:
It will be.
The deeds to go to Parks, does it say Parks and Recreation Division or is it City of
Fayetteville?
TAPE TURNED
Anderson:
Conklin:
Anderson:
Conklin:
Edwards.
If he is required later to dedicate more, we can figure that out.
We already agreed, took it to the Planning Commission based on the plat that you gave
us and I think it's a done deal. I'm not going to make an issue out of it. You may want
to talk to Connie.
I don't see how it affects us right now anyway.
I'm trying to keep my division in compliance with regulations. It just happens that park
land is part of this development.
Utilities?
Mike Phipps - Ozark Electric
Phipps:
Conklin:
Phipps:
Conklin:
Boles:
Conklin:
Phipps:
•
Tim, I have a question to ask you. Is there any possibility of running this overhead
through there?
Where, in Springdale? Overhead?
I know, they just asked me to ask you. I did ask.
Any way to run it overhead?
Can I go with you Mike?
We use gas lights? Where are you coming from?
Through this area, I've got to put in some pretty good sized underground. That
underground is going to be 5 % times higher than overhead power. What we'll do, if
we can't put it overhead, we'll figure the cost of the overhead and you'll pay the
difference between that and the underground which runs about 5 '/ times more.
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 37
Normally you can build this overhead for $2.44 a foot, to build it underground is about
$12 a foot.
Conklin: What's it going to take to power a youth center this size?
Phipps: I don't know. I don't have any electric plans for it or mechanical drawings. I need
electric load for it before I can do that.
Conklin: My question is, are you going to have to do 3 phase over 12KV lines to the facility that
will from now and ever will be left above ground once we do this?
Phipps: Yes. We would also take into consideration the load we are going to use here at the
youth center. I need something for the engineer to go by to estimate what the monthly
usage would be. He will take that consideration into what it costs to put this in here.
Normally we would like a 3 to 5 year return on our investment.
Conklin: We are going to have development occurring within the subdivision that is going to need
power which they would have been required to put it underground and the reason why
the Youth Center/Fayetteville Boys and Girls Club is getting stuck with this is because
we are down at the very bottom and there is no other development that has occurred. I
wonder if your client would be willing to pick up some of that cost. It would add value
to the land once power is there. We are a small portion of that.
Phipps: Basically what I have is right up here at the entrance on the northwest corner. We had
a switch there similar to the one we've got at the post office on Joyce Street. It's a
large switch station there. I'll come out of that switch and go down to the transformer
for the club, where it sits. That switch, we would have to continue on down that switch
all the way down to Persimmon down here. The way this is built through here, we are
going to come out of that switch and tie everything back in over on Futrall Drive when it
all goes through.
Conklin: It could be underground?
Phipps: Yes, we can put it underground. It's going to be expensive though.
Anderson: What were those two numbers?
Phipps: $2.44 and around $12.30 for underground, 5.5 times higher.
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 38
Conklin:
Phipps:
Conklin:
Phipps:
Conklin:
Phipps:
Boles:
Conklin:
Beavers:
Anderson:
Boles:
Phipps:
Conklin:
Anderson:
Conklin:
My comment on that is, it disappoints me that in a brand new developing area we
would bring overhead. Because of the location of this, I think it needs to be
underground. I would like it to be underground.
The main line would probably be a 4 ott primary cable. I'm not sure the cost of it.
On new lines we can get them underground. On a transmission line, 166 KV or
whatever, yes those are above ground. On new service like CMN Business Park or
Colt Square, you can put them underground.
How many KV can be brought down to this switch?
14/4.
I would request that they be underground. They need to be underground. The only
reason why they wouldn't be underground because this is at the end of the subdivision
and we don't have any other development. Once we go above ground, they will be
above ground from here until the end of time.
They wanted me to ask
For the record Tim, I didn't ask
Johney, you can have yours underground.
How many feet is it down to here from Wedington?
I don't remember. It could be 2,000 feet. I'm not sure how far it is.
What kind of voltage do you have in Meadowlands Mike?
14/4. I don't have a big enough cable
What do you have at your operation center?
I guess the question is, who pays for that along Rupple Road?
Not the City. I think I would have a hard time going to City Council and trying to
• convince them to either let them overhead or we are going to pay for it to be
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 39
underground as part of this development. The development cost, maybe Mr. Mcllroy,
it's going to add value to those lots because they are going to have power there that
they would have to put in anyway. I know that's something that none of us identified
with at the beginning. I don't think Mr. Mcllroy knew that or we didn't know that
either.
Phipps: If I can get the load information, that would help a lot. This 12 inch water line is not
going to be there?
Beavers: I don't think so, we don't have that in the budget.
Phipps: Okay. I would request across this first entrance up here, I need a 8 inch conduit across
there.
Conklin: Does Ozark Electric ever work with non-profit organizations on projects like this to
make it work?
Phipps: Yes. I'll take it before them.
• Conklin: Get your name on the wall or something.
Phipps: Also, I need an 8 inch at the south entrance.
Beavers: When we build the road, we may run that waterline on down, we just don't know yet.
It's not in the budget now but it there may be some money available.
Phipps: Would it site right in the middle of the 20 foot easement?
Anderson: It's there until someone tells us to put it some place different.
Beavers. We can probably put it under the trail. We haven't designed this yet but the last three
we did in-house we put the waterline under the trail.
Phipps: Mike, an 8 inch for me crossing back over to tract 7 down at the end of Rupple and
Persimmon.
McLain: Do you need an estimate now?
Phipps: Yes. Johney, do you need those anywhere else?
•
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 40
Boles:
I think that will probably take care of mine, Mike.
Bill Smith - Southwestern Bell
Smith:
Phipps:
I want 2 4 inch where those crossings are.
42 inches deep.
Cox Communications
Edwards:
Phipps:
Conklin:
Phipps:
Conklin:
Anderson:
Phipps:
Conklin:
Phipps:
Smith:
He says he wants the same conduits as electric. I would recommend you contact him.
He said contact him for inside wiring.
There's another problem, streetlights. It's 4 ott cable, I can't put a transformer. It's a
live 4 ott so I have to run a 1 ott cable in with it and set a transformer underground
somewhere along Rupple to feed the lights.
The City is doing the street. Get with Jim to coordinate that because I think we need
these street lights. There was conversation at the City that we might not need them but
I think we do.
Another thing to go underground you might have to trench the transformer all the way
back up to 16`s by the trench 42 inches deep.
I got a question. To start construction they need power out there, by July. Is that how
that works, you have to have construction power?
Yes. I think they will need that fairly soon.
If I could put an overhead line temporarily.
I would be willing to look at something for temporary power. We know what
temporary means.
I have no other comments.
You show running 2 4 -inch conduits to the west and I can go in the same easement
across the north property line and coining that way too. Unless you are going to have
telephone equipment running in front?
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 41
Anderson. I think that's where they come from. That's what we were directed by mechanical, is
to show it there.
Smith: It can go in either place. Is that where your phone room is going to be, in front?
McLain: It's not in front, it's about mid -way through but we may look at that.
Smith: I can go the other way. One thing, when you do this 90 on either location, I would like
those turned up. I11 put a closure out there to make it easier for them. Can you do that
over here too?
Anderson: Yes. I'll probably have to get with the contractor on what we need as far as sleeves
Would it suffice if we just coordinate that with him?
Smith: Yes.
Phipps: This may be something where we supply the conduit.
• Smith: The same crossings as requested by Ozarks. That's my only comments.
•
Johney Boles - Arkansas Western Gas
Boles:
I'll need 1 4 -inch casing at all three of those crossings that were requested. I have
already received the load information so we'll need to calculate a rate of return to see if
there will be any charges assessed for this development. That's all I have.
Phipps: Will there be lighting on this football field?
Anderson: Not at this point in time. I'm not going to say that it will never happen but the answer is
no for right now. We skirted the issue on the easement on the south side.
Conklin: We did, didn't we?
Phipps: We can go on the south side.
Anderson: We can give you whatever we can there.
Phipps: We just need a crossing to get over there.
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 42
Anderson: Persimmon is not getting built at this time.
Edwards: Do you need it now?
Conklin: I was going to say, we can't give you that because it's private property. If you are
comfortable that when Marinoni sells or develops.
Phipps: Yes.
Conklin: Okay. Anybody else?
Beavers: Tim showed me something that I missed. On your grading plan, you show your
signalized entrances coming off Rupple Road.
Anderson: The only reason I'm showing those is, I don't know what is going to come first.
Beavers. Rupple will be last.
Anderson: If you guys happy to get paid when we are still constructing and we haven't paid,
obviously we'll need to have those. That was the only reason I showed them It may
be that we don't need it. Is that it?
Edwards: That's it.
Anderson: Thank you.
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 43
LSD 01-5.00: Large Scale Development (Allied Storage, LTD, pp 601) was submitted by
McClelland Consulting Engineers, Inc. on behalf of Randy Salsbury of Allied Storage, LTD. for
property located at 85 W. 15`s Street. The request is to add additional storage buildings.
Conklin: The next item is a large scale development, Allied Storage submitted by McClelland
Consulting Engineers, Inc. on behalf of Randy Salsbury of Allied Storage, LTD. for
property located at 85 W. 15th Street. The request is to add additional storage
buildings. Sara, go ahead.
Chuck Rutherford - Sidewalk and Trails Coordinator
Rutherford: The sidewalk along 15`^ is fine. We are not asking for any improvements on that.
Sara Edwards - Associate Planner
Edwards: I'll need for you to add the adjacent zoning, plat page, building setbacks and site
coverage note. 15th Street is a principal arterial which requires 55 feet from centerline.
It looks like only 50 is shown. I need an additional 5 feet dedicated. That's all I have.
Anybody else have any comments?
Jones: You Just want me to add the zoning and building setbacks and plat page?
Edwards: Yes. Jim included his comments, we might just come back to him if he's got anything
on this. Electric?
Glen Newman - SWEPCO
Newman: As I understand it, in visiting with the owner, there is no electrical for the storage
buildings, just the area lighting. He called me the other day and it's all to the buildings.
I don't have any comment.
Jim Beavers - Staff Engineer
Beavers: My first comment Mr. Quinn, I thought you could have done a better job of getting
number 1 and 6 pulled together so you could have left earlier. You have my written
comments and they are pretty minor. Basically, the drainage was checked as
preliminary. On the grading, with the checklist you find enclosed, I did not find an
application form. I'll need an original with a signature. There are a few notes that are
required by the ordinance that weren't on the plan. This is real picky but it is an
•
•
•
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 44
ordinance and we have citizens who look for us to call it black and white, you've got a
proposed contour showed as a dash line and the ordinance says it has to be a solid line
in between the buildings.
Jones: I told the drafting people that. Make all the proposed contours solid.
Beavers: There are a few other things I see on the checklist like we need the soil type. If it's
there, I didn't find it.
Jones: I submitted that with the drainage. I'll put it on here.
Beavers: The ordinance requires it to be on this plan.
Jones: Also, you said that you did not get the application and fee, I submitted that as well. We
did a storm water grading drainage and there is a copy.
Edwards: It looks like it's an original to me.
Jones: He paid with one check.
Edwards. It's paid.
Beavers: On a previous water line from a previous phase and previous engineer, the easement
was wrong. There is a corrected easement. If you can get with a lady named Jill
Goddard at our office, we need to get this executed and back to her.
Jones: Jim, is that on this site?
Beavers: Yes, that's a previous phase.
Jones: You mean this waterline right here?
Beavers: Yes, backwards to that fire hydrant.
Jones: The easement is not correct?
Beavers: It says, "Please get Crafton and Tull to have this document signed." No further
comments.
Plat Review Minutes
February 28, 2001
Page 45
Conklin: Everybody done? Anybody else? That's it. Thank you.
•
