The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2001-05-30 - Minutes• • • MINUTES OF A MEETING OF TECHNICAL PLAT REVIEW A regular meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee was held on Wednesday, May 30, 2001 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS CONSIDERED LSP 01-20.00: Page 2 LSP 01-21.00: Page 4 FP 01-5.00: Page 8 LSD 01-11.00: Page 21 LSD 01-18.00: Page 28 LSD 01-19.00: Page 30 STAFF PRESENT Sara Edwards Ron Petrie Keith Shreve Kim Hesse Perry Franklin Kim Rogers Tim Conklin Eric Schuldt ACTION TAKEN Lot Split (Hannan, pp 529) Forwarded Lot Split (Habitat for Humanity, pp 561) Forwarded Final Plat (Stonewood Subdivision, pp 60) Forwarded Large Scale Development (Elder Apt., pp 403) Forwarded Large Scale Development (City of Fayetteville, Skate Park, pp 562) Forwarded Large Scale Development (Hometown Developments, pp 524) Forwarded UTILITIES PRESENT Glen Newman, SWEPCO Kevin Lefler, Cox Communications Sue Clouser, Southwestern Bell Johney Boles, AR Western Gas STAFF ABSENT Cheryl Zotti Kim Rogers Fire Chief UTILITIES ABSENT Mike Phipps, Ozark Electric • • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 2 LSP 01-20.00: Lot Split (Hannan, pp 529) was submitted by Patrick Hannan for property located at 382 Jarnagan Street. The property is in the Planning Growth Area and contains approximately 11 %2 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 9 'A acres and 2 acres. Sara Edwards - Associate Planner Edwards. Welcome to the Wednesday, May 30, 2001, meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee. The first item is a lot split for Hannan submitted by Patrick Hannan for property located at 382 Jarnagan Street. The property is in the Planning Growth Area and contains approximately 111/4 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 9 '/ acres and 2 acres. I go over revisions that need to be made to your surveyin order to approve the lot split. That's what I'm going to do. First of all, let me say that we've got a Master Street Plan that runs along the side of the property. We have to -take right-of-way along the property line and what we need is 45 feet along the east side. That Just needs to be dedicated. We have a requirement that all lots have to have at least 75 feet of street frontage. I'm not sure where your pavement ends here but that's what I need your surveyor to tell me. It's paved all the way? Okay. You intend to have this on one lot on both sides of the street. I did want him to add plat page 529 and he just needs to stick it down here and then add a Master Street Plan to this vicinity map, showing where that is. After you get approved here, you do need to go to the County and get their approval. Celia, do you have any comments on this one? Scott-Silkwood: We can do this administratively, in the office. I'll give you a card, you just need to call. Hannan, Ms.: When you say Master Road is that right-of-way or what does that mean exactly? I don't understand. Edwards. Hannan, Ms.: Edwards: Hannan, Ms.: What we do is we plan streets throughout the City which sometimes don't exist but we can provide connectivity. These are streets that we plan to build at some time and yet they may go through a house. They still need some fine tuning done. We are required to get the right-of-way when lot splits come through so that's what we are looking for. That part of the land won't be ours so, what do we need to do? Who owns this now? My father. • • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 3 Edwards. That is the only way that we can approve the lot split. He will have to do it in order to split this land off. Also, we need 50 feet of right-of-way which is required for a County road and there is only 30 feet existing now. Ron Petrie - Staff Engineer Petrie: Is this the only house? Hannan, Ms.: Yes. Petrie: Is this house on City water? Hannan, Mrs:: No. Petrie: That takes care of that. That's all I've got. Johney Boles - Arkansas Western Gas Boles: The only request that I would have, at the beginning of the southwest corner of tract D, paralleling that property line going straight to the north, I would like to request a 20 foot utility easement for future potential use. Of course that would be outside of the newly dedicated right-of-way line that the City's is going to require you to dedicate. Edwards: Is that just on tract D? Boles: Starting on the south and going all the way north of the north property line of tract A. It would just parallel the east side of that street right-of-way. Sue Clouser - Southwestern Bell Clouser: I agree with that. Edwards: What you need to do is go back to Mr. Blew and tell him you need these revisions made. Hannan, Mrs.: Can we just give you a copy of this with the changes on it? Edwards: Yes. Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 4 LSP 01-21.00: Lot Split (Habitat for Humanity, pp 561) was submitted by Patsy Brewer on behalf of Habitat for Humanity for property owned by Arnold & Margaret Christie located at the northwest comer of Hill Avenue and Eleventh Street. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential and contains approximately 1.09 acres. The request is to split into three tracts of 0.33 acres, 0.30 acres & 0 41 acres. Edwards: The next item on our agenda is a lot split for Habitat for Humanity submitted by Patsy Brewer on behalf of Habitat for Humanity for property owned by Arnold & Margaret Christie located at the northwest corner of Hill Avenue and Eleventh Street. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential and contains approximately 1.09 acres. The request is to split into three tracts of 0.33 acres, 0 30 acres & 0.41 acres. McWethy: Max McWethy, I volunteer for Habitat. Edwards. Did you hear my explanation before of how you go through this? McWethy: I think I understand. • Chuck Rutherford - Sidewalk and Trails Coordinator • Rutherford: A sidewalk does exist along Hill Avenue. Repair to damaged areas will be required. If existing curb cut (tract 1) is not used for a driveway, remove and replace sidewalk. Sidewalk through new drives shall be continuous and meet ADA requirements. Sara Edwards - Associate Planner Edwards: You haven't paid your fees and we are taking an ordinance to City Council to to exempt Habitat from the fees. What we are going to do is make it a condition and if that ordinance does not pass, the fees will be required. McWethy: Planning Commission is June 25th? Edwards: Yes. McWethy: The City Council meeting is before that? Edwards. I don't think it will make it. There is about a 6 week process to get on a Council agenda and I know the City Attomey is working on it but I'm not sure that it's made it on an agenda yet. The setback is wrong on tracts 1 and 2, they need to be 20 feet and Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 5 they've got it dimensioned as an 8 foot. It's right on tract 3 but not tract 1 and 2. They have regular rear setbacks. Ron Petrie - Staff Engineer Petrie: McWethy: Petrie: McWethy: Petrie: • McWethy: Petrie: • McWethy: Petrie: McWethy: Petrie: Are there any existing houses on these tracts? No. My only other comment is, there is a sewer line on the north side of tract 1. We would request an additional easement 10 feet from that sewer line to meet our current regulations. I haven't seen the drawing but our engineer was instructed to put a 25 foot easement centered on the sewer line. They are just showing an existing 12'/: foot sewer easement. You want another 10? 1 want 10 from the sewer line. It's probably only 6 or 7 feet from the easement. The intent was to give you 25 feet. My requirement is just 10 from the sewer so it probably doesn't even have to have that great of an easement. We tried to find out from Clyde on what easement, he could find no record of anything. Sometimes they fail to get recorded. That's why at this process we try to bring everything up to current regulations. Glen Newman - SWEPCO Newman: Is that easement going to run the entire length of the north property line of tract 1? McWethy: The sewer easement? Newman: Yes. Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 6 McWethy: Newman: Petrie: Newman: It is my belief that it will not. The sewer takes off about midway. I would like to have a 20 foot easement along the north property line. That will give me access to that property to the west. Just make it a general 20 foot utility easement instead of a sewer easement. That will let us all get in there. That's all I have. Johney Boles - Arkansas Western Gas Boles: If you would, I would like for you to show a 20 foot utility easement paralleling the street right-of-way on 11"' Street and Hill Street. Around this area here which would be within your building setback area. Sue Clouser - Southwestern Bell Clouser: Edwards: Clouser: Edwards: Clouser: McWethy: Petrie: Edwards: Conklin: I could use, if nobody else is going back here, if you could get me a 10 foot utility easement back here so I can get to the middle. That's a centerline of the creek. I don't know if that bothers you. No. Is the property line on the centerline? Yes. I guess we'll go in with gas in the front. Thank you. We don't have any problem with any easements required by any utility unless we start to shoot ourselves in the foot on the buildable area requested. Your comments from utilities will not be included in the written information. You can write it down or we can give you a copy of the minutes. With regard to these lots, I'm little concerned about the floodplain. That does change over time. We do want to make sure that when they build the houses, that they build the houses as close to Hill Street as possible in order to stay away from that area. It looks pretty flat out there, when I went out there. You have a 1 foot rise in the flood • • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 7 elevation, that floodplain could be extended further to the east. At this point there may or may not be a requirement for flood insurance for the people that buy those homes but based on the lending institution that you use, some lending institutions do require flood insurance. McWethy: Habitat finances it. We will build the home mindful of the floodplain. I'm not in the position to say that we will move to the east side of that because I think that's properly part of the building permit process. If they are not, I will see that the foundation is raised up enough so that the floodplain is not a problem. Conklin: I'm going to check with the Corps and see if they have updated data on this. It's 2 feet above base flood elevation. Your flood insurance rates go down the higher up you are. Say it becomes a floodplain, the next year or two years from now, if you are two feet above it's going to be a lot cheaper than 1 inch above. I'm just concerned about the homeowner's because it's Habitat for Humanity. McWethy: That's a valid concern. I just think that is addressed deeply by raising the foundation as an alternative to moving to the east. Conklin: If you are in this area... McWethy: No, we won't be back that far. Conklin: That's all I have. • • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 8 FP 01-5.00: Final Plat (Stonewood Subdivision, pp 60) was submitted by Glenn Carter of Carter & Associates, PA on behalf of Dunnerstock Development for property located at 4786 N. Crossover Road. The property is zoned R -0/R-1, Residential Office/Low Density Residential and contains approximately 57.23 acres with 119 lots proposed. Edwards: The next item is a final plat for Stonewood Subdivision submitted by Glenn Carter of Carter & Associates, PA on behalf of Dunnerstock Development for property located at 4786 N. Crossover Road. The property is zoned R -0/R-1, Residential Office/Low Density Residential and contains approximately 57.23 acres with 119 lots proposed. Perry Franklin - Street Superintendent Franklin: I would like for you to show all the street names. I agree there are some streets in here that just don't have the names labeled. Carter: We were told that these names were not acceptable and we've been trying to get new ones and so far we haven't been able to. Edwards: It's not a problem with Jim Johnson, it's a problem naming of streets? Carter: Right, it's a problem with our client coming up with the names. Edwards: As you are aware, final plats can be approved at Subdivision. If you get the street names and meet all our comments, we also need addresses on there so if you can get that by the next revision they can approve it there. Franklin: Show the street lights at Shadow Wood and Hearthstone, Shadow Wood and Grey Stone, in the cul-de-sac between lots 68 and 67 and at the cul-de-sac on the north end of Ivey Dale. Many of the streetlight locations are hard to read. Chuck Rutherford - Sidewalk and Trails Coordinator Rutherford: Add a note to the plat that all retaining walls be setback a minimum of 2 feet from the right-of-way. All retaining wall construction shall be on the building permit and have the approval of the City Engineer. Add sidewalk symbol to the legend. We need the sidewalk line type changed. What I would like to see, for permitting purposes, if this is where they are going, for it to just be shaded so we can clearly tell where the sidewalks are. • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 9 Jim Johnson - 911 Coordinator Johnson: Still need the street names, contact me for those. Sara Edwards - Associate Planner Edwards. You've got your adjacent zoning incorrect. All along this side, this is in the County, the first two property owners is zoned R-1 and then the bottom is in the County so there is no zoning there. Your floodplain reference, you are referencing the wrong map, 101D is our new revision. Conklin: With regard to floodplain, you did that study to set the elevations, a more detailed study? Where are we at with that? Carter: We have the study and as I understand it from your comments, what we need to do is to submit that study to City Council. Do you want me to give you another copy? I'm ready to do that. • Conklin: It has changed the 100 year floodplain boundary? Carter Yes. Conklin: You also need to submit it to FEMA with a conditional letter map revision. We talked about the impaction of the soil and remove those lots so you have that 1 acre minimum of 6,000 square feet outside and that needs to be done also. There is two things, by ordinance your subdivision is large enough that you had to do on that zone A to determine the base flood elevations, which you have one, which I would like to have shown. If your flood boundary is moving, I would like to have that shown also. Right now this doesn't meet our ordinance requirements. If you don't want to do that, you can go buy these lots into an acre and bring it through that way. Then once it's all worked out, we can look at lots going out there. Carter: It's my understanding when we brought the preliminary plat was that we do a drainage study to determine what elevation would need to be on those lots to get 6,000 square feet out of the floodplain. That's what we need to do, we build those lots up, we get a floodplain development permit to get those lots up, so that's what we did. I wasn't with the understanding that we needed to submit anything to FEMA. • Conklin: I looked at the minutes. It said to submit to FEMA from what I recall. That's the only Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 10 Carter: Conklin: way we can handle that. Why don't you give me two things, another plat with this area showing the revised floodplain boundary based on your detailed study with elevations and then the actual study itself. You mean like cross sections that show base flood elevations? Contours and then the base flood elevation and the 100 year floodplain and floodway lines based on those elevations. Basically, you should be able to map that study out, draw it out on your plat to show how it impacts those lots. I would like to look at that. There is that compaction density requirement that FEMA has when you do remove land out of the floodplain, I think it's like 95, you just can't fill it and not compact the soil underneath the houses. Carter: We'll find out what that compaction is from FEMA. Petrie: If you look at the grading plan, we took care of this when I approved the construction plan. It clearly shows on your grading plan what that requirement was. • Edwards. What's your opinion on signing the final plat until we get that amended? Conklin: Let me take a look and see what you have. We might have to do something different. Petrie: On this plat that he's going to take to Subdivision, he needs to show his revised floodplain and floodway. Conklin: I would like to see it but it's not official either. Anybody that buys a lot over here, keep this line on here and then show what your revised is per your study. Petrie: Provide a note that explains that for the future. Conklin: If someone buys lot 114, they build a house then come get a loan, their bank is going to hire a company that is going to determine the floodplain and they are going to say "Yes it is" and they are going to require flood insurance and they are not going to be very happy if they don't know that. Plus, when the get a building permit they are going to have to elevate it. Those require grading permits too? Petrie: Until they are removed from the floodplain. • Conklin: They require grading permits, any lot in the floodplain. • • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 11 Carter: Can that be done by the City Council accepting the study or does it have to be through FEMA. Conklin: FEMA is the only one that can officially change the map, the City can't change the map. The map does need to be changed. Carter. We don't know yet if we can get approval of the final plat until this is done? Conklin: Yes. FEMA is going to review your calculations and everything. The Planning Division is not qualified to review your engineering calculations. We'll let FEMA review those and see if it's been done correctly. Edwards: It's kind of hard to tell the width of the street and greenspace. What I would like to see is a table street name, street width, sidewalk width and greenspace width. That way it's going to be much clearer. Conklin: Under the zoning, R-0 and R-1, if you can list the number of lots, the lot numbers. I'm not sure which ones are zoned R-0 on this. Is it 1 through 14? Carter: Yes. Conklin: If you dust have R-0 for lots 1 through 14 and R-1 for the remainder. Are they still planning on building that wall behind the R-0 lots? Carter: Yes. Conklin: That's outside the easement or on the easement? Carter: It's right outside the lot line and there is going to be easement on both sides. Boles: What type of wall will that be? Carter: It's going to be a concrete wall. Conklin: Like a split face concrete block wall? Carter: I think it's going to be similar to what he's got off of Skillern Road there for Savannah, that wall there. I think that's exactly what it's going to look like because we've already staked the wall out and put in foundations for the columns. • • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 12 Conklin: That goes all the way around the R-0 lots? Carter: Right. It starts up here and comes all the way down up behind the lift station. Edwards. I need the right-of-way dimension on Crossover. I need it dimensioned specifically at the narrowest point. I need to double check that we've got our 55 feet from centerline. I think we probably do but it needs to be shown. Like I said before, you need to add all the addresses you plan on having. Conklin: On your greenspace, open space needs to be maintained by the POA, a note. Edwards: That was a specific condition of the preliminary plat and the drainage structures. Conklin: Access to lots 1 and 14 shall be prohibited from Highway 265/Crossover Road. Carter: Do you have a note on that? Edwards: I don't. Conklin: Where does this lot 14 end at this cul-de-sac? Carter: You can't hardly see it but right where that drainage pipe is. There is a lot line right across there. The pipe is on the lot. Conklin: I just wanted to make sure that ended right there. Carter: What did you say about the greenspace? Conklin: It needs to be maintained by the property owner's association or homeowner's association or however he plans on maintaining it. Petrie: They need to be labeled specifically where they are, common area. Carter: We dedicate greenspace to the City but we still own it? Conklin: You are not dedicating this to the City. This is owned by the development. Carter: It's just set aside as greenspace. • • • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 13 Conklin: That's what you guys wanted. I want to make sure we don't have to maintain that. Petrie: On each one of these, list what they are, common area, common area, common area. You've got this whole 100 foot wide easement over here, it's got to be owned by somebody and it's not by the City, that's a common area Label it that and put a note on the plat that says who is maintaining it. Conklin: That they are unbuildable areas, no development shall occur. We'll put that as a condition. I had a situation five or six years ago where they took the greenspace for a lift station and then they did a property line adjustment to create another lot out of it and the whole neighborhood came unglued. I don't want, all of a sudden, someone building over here. Make sure Mr. Foster is aware of that. Kim Rogers - Parks Operations Coordinator Rogers: Parks fees have been paid in the amount of $55,930. Ron Petrie - Staff Engineer Petrie: I'll go right down the list. I think you are aware that we'll have to have that final inspection before we go to Subdivision. If you are not ready by the next Subdivision we will table it. Number two, this was a requirement at preliminary plat, add that note that has to do with the drainage. Number three, there is a payment in the amount of $4,300 for the SCADA system for the lift station. You should be aware of that from previous notes. You need to add all the signature blocks to the plat. Carter: I need to get an updated signature block from you guys. Edwards. No problem. Petrie: For clarity, if you can remove the water meters shown on the plat, call -outs on those water meters, service lines, water and sewer service lines, those are items not typically shown on a final plat so it will clarify some things. Streets, this is an issue that we discussed on the construction plans. On these 40 foot wide right-of-ways, is the street centered in those right-of-ways? Carter: Petrie: No. I need you add some dimensions to clearly show how it's offset. • • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 14 Conklin: Why weren't they centered? Petrie: Your Master Street Plan doesn't have it centered. Carter: They've got a sidewalk on one side and the street is off center to the right-of-way. Conklin: Are the lots all staked? Carter. Yes. There is a few that aren't up in the north end. Edwards: Maybe we should dimension them all from centerline. Petrie: On the 45 foot wide right-of-ways, jlust so those are clearly shown and the offsets. I'm going to go on to some of the easements. Our general requirement is a 10 foot utility easements on both sides of water, sewer and drainage pipes. There is a lot of places in the plat where that is not shown. I've looked at some but I doubt if I caught all of them. In most of the constructions plans it shows your building setbacks to be combined with the utility easements, you don't show that on the plat. If that's not the case then go back and add utility easements to all these road frontages to meet that general requirement. I assume that's what you will probably do except maybe in these 50 foot setbacks in your R-0 zoned lots, you may want to add separate easements in those areas. Carter: You need a 20 foot easement? Petrie: I need it to be 10 feet from the utility. Some of them say that. If the waterline is 5 feet inside the right-of-way, then I only need a 15 foot utility easement. Carter: Whatever gets you 10 feet? Petrie: Right. That's the requirement. Most people just make the building setback the utility easement. Carter: Just change the note to setback and utility easement? Petrie: Right. There are some places in these common areas adjacent to the highway where we've got sewer lines and water lines that you need to add easements for those through the common area. The easement between lots 116 and 117 should be a drainage easement, it's not labeled what it is. The easement to the south of lots 110 and 116 • • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 15 should be a drainage easement. That's probably an area where the utilities are going to want an easement too. Our general requirement is we separate the drainage and utility easements wherever possible. In that area in the back of those lots, where you've got this large storm pipe, if that storm pipe is 10 feet off the property line, you probably go with a 15 foot drainage easement adjacent to a 20 foot utility easement. The drainage easement across lot 1, I assume this storm pipe location was revised. You show a storm pipe that goes pretty far into that lot. Carter: We'll have to check that and see. It doesn't look right. Petrie: If it is right, we'll need 10 feet on both sides of that pipe. I've listed a whole group of different easements where we are squeezing several things in and that is to the west of lot 62, 67, 71 and 76, to the south of lots 48 and 55 and to the west of lots 93 and 87. These easements need to be labeled widths, I don't see any call -outs on those widths and they need to be separate utility and drainage easements. Again, they need to meet the requirement of 10 feet from the utility except to an open ditch, we can go to the edge of an open swale. Separate the drainage and utility easements to the west of lots 69, 70 and 77. You've got concrete ditch in that easement along the fence. We are not going to get any utilities in that area so we need a separate drainage easement. For the 100 foot common area that's also a utility easement, we are asking you to go ahead and label that as a drainage easement too. You've got some open ditches in here, concrete swales and everything else. Just label the whole thing drainage easement. For the off-site easement for the force main, typically what we see on that is a call out what that easement width is, what it is and give the instrument number, show it on the plat. The lift station, where you've got that area shown, that needs to be deeded to the City. We need a warranty deed for that. Conklin: Where it says greenspace, we are not going to maintain that, we are? Petrie: That will be ours. I certainly don't care if you reduce it down and add some of that to the adjacent lots, we don't need all that property. You've got that force main going through there so we need to make sure that's covered if you reduce that. Conklin: Does Engineering require those facilities to be fenced? Petrie: Yes. Conklin: Is that an existing location? • • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 16 Petrie: It's one they built. Conklin: Do we have a wood board fence instead of chain link with barbed wire on top like on Old Wire and 265? Petrie: There has to be a fence. Carter: I thought we already went through this thing with a chain link fence? Petrie: Is it already built? Carter: It's not built yet. I don't know if he cares Conklin: That's going to make the development look better. Every time I drive past Old Wire and 265 and look at that location, I wonder why you wouldn't want to put up wood privacy fence around it so you don't have to look at it. Petrie: I need an additional drainage easement to the north and west side of lot 36. It's not in a drainage easement, it's real close to the easement. We need 10 feet from that for these drainage easements to cover that pipe. Also, to the south of lot 14. Drainage, I've listed a whole list of lots where you need to add the minimum finished floor elevations. You can do that in an table. Also, you need to add the 100 year water surface elevations that you computed and show those on the plat. I've already mentioned the sidewalks. On the line types for your sidewalks, waterlines and floodplain and all easements, they are all the same. That's what is making it difficult for us. Be creative. Add some more line types and add your line types to your legend. To the west of lot 37, you call that out as a 50 foot building setback. I think it's just a typo. Next is just a general comment that several of your lot dimensions and bearings, they overlap other line types and other wording, if you can spend a little bit more time and try to prevent some of those. I noticed several are dust written on top of each other and you can't read them. The last item is our standard list of items that we need to be completed before we can sign the final plat. Look at those, just so you are aware of what we need. That's all I've got. Edwards: Our standard condition is that we either need a copy of the streetlight installation plan or a receipt. That's just prior to signing the final plat. Conklin: Are the streetlights in? • • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 17 Carter: Conklin: Carter: Conklin: Edwards: Carter Conklin: Carter: Conklin: Carter: Edwards: Conklin: Carter: No. That's how we've been guaranteeing the streetlights is to have a copy of the contract that shows proof of payment. Is this Ozark? Yes. A copy of the streetlight contract? Yes. Some type of proof that we know that the money has been paid. Your setbacks along lots 1, 2 and 3 are going to be 30 or 50 and it looks like you are showing 30. Up along 14, the side on Crossover, that also should be 30. Do you know if all this right-of-way exists along Crossover? It exists. It's kind of a weird deal when I did the survey and I figured out that the boundary line doesn't go all the way to the right-of-way. When you take 5 more feet to get your 55 feet, I think it still doesn't come all the way to the boundary line there. There is a stip of land there that we've established this line by survey and we've gone our deeded distance and there is still property between us and the right-of-way. Technical it would belong to the property owner across the highway. Which is the park? Some of it. I guess that belongs to the City anyway. If you want to show all of that as right-of-way, I can dimension over to our property line and call it all right-of-way. I think we did that on the earlier plat and for some reason I don't see the numbers on here, it was something strange like 58.68 feet. I would like that shown. We could move that over to the 55 and show more greenspace but at this point it's kind of pointless. Why don't you put a streetlight symbol in your legend and then you can take all the SL's off. I was wondering, I thought Gary Brandon purchased this property in Copper Creek. That was current. • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 18 Johney Boles - Arkansas Western Gas Boles: Can you tell me how wide that wall is going to be? Carter: Let me get some information on that and call you because I'm not sure. Boles: I'm concerned about us having adequate width on both sides of that wall. Carter: There is going to be block-outs, I think he's going to have columns. He's already put foundations in some of them. It's going to have columns and then the wall is going to span between and there is going to be notched out places for the water to drain. If we wouldn't have done that, we would have had to put a swale on both sides of the wall down here. As it is, we ended up putting one concrete swale and put the wall beside it and the water from this side will flow under the wall into the swale. There is going to be holes in it. Boles: Carter: It's a concrete swale in the easement also? It will be in the drainage easement on the west side. You are wanting to go across the wall? Boles: I'm going to have to run all the way up that easement and then run services underneath that wall. Carter: I guess you'll have to go underneath the swale in certain places or just run it down the side the swale over here and find one place to go under. Boles: I apologize, I guess I didn't catch up to this wall across, south of this street, did you say there is also a wall proposed down here? Carter: Yes. Boles: Which property lines would that run on? Carter: That runs down the west side of lot 78 across the east side of lot 2 and that's it. Boles: Down to this south end of lot 2? Carter: Yes. We need to show that wall on there. • • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 19 Boles: Lots 106 through 109 down the southeast comer of the plat, you are showing a concrete swale there also, I would like 20 foot of useable area outside of where that swale is going to be. Carter: It should be already there. The swale is built in an 100 foot utility easement. Boles: It is off-site? The 20 is dimension right in the center of the swale if I'm looking at it correctly. Carter: You need 20 feet from the edge of the swale. What I think happened is they actually built the edge of the swale on the edge of the property line which is not exactly how we wanted it but it works okay and we'll just come from that and give you 20 feet. Boles: I have several easements that I think we are going to need that are not shown. The first ones that I want to address will be 20 foot utility easements, side lot easements. Starting on the southeast corner of the plat working north, between 108 and 109, 20 feet in width, 10 off of each property line. The same between lot 43 and 44, between 28 and 29, side lot easement between 15 and 16 except for the northwest corner, 20 foot easement in width running north and south rear lot easements between 13 and 18 down south to 10 and 15, beginning at the southwest corner of lot 61 going east all the way to the street from lots 64 and 65, beginning at the southwest comer of lot 70 and going east to the southwest corner of 73, a 20 foot rear lot easement between those lots, where you are also showing that quad. I notice you are showing a streetlight between 84 and 85 but there is no side lot easement provided from the rear of that lot to get power out to that light. You might just check all those streetlight locations because he is going to need an easement from the rear of the property to get out to the front. Sue Clouser - Southwestern Bell Clouser: I agree with Johney on those easements and I would like those to continue down along the west side of 78, 79 and 80. You might as well put it behind 81 too, a 20 foot utility easement. I'm kind of having a problem with the wall What's the difference in height going to be from one side of the wall to the other? Carter: Clouser: None. Is it just decorative? • • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 20 Carter: Clouser: Conklin: Carter Conklin: Clouser: Carter: Clouser: Carter: Boles: Carter: Boles: Yes, it's just a barrier between this R-0 zoning and the residential zoning. It's just going to be a high wall. How high? If you look at Savannah. If you go down Skillern Road and look at Savannah. You can't miss it. We are going to have to run the drops to each place unless I go on both sides of the wall. The swale doesn't go all the way up here. It comes up to about this lot line. So you can get around to the end of the swale there. There should be those punch outs along the wall for water to drain through. They should continue down so, if you needed to get under where the swale is, it's not a real deep swale, I think you could go under that or through one of those punch -outs. For the drops to the individual lots we really don't put conduit in for this. We just bury under. Let me check with that and give you a call with the specifics about that wall. What's the depth of the footing that's going to be required for that? That's what I want to know because I want to know how he's doing that but I don't yet. I know that we've had to set some points real close together and he's gone down there and put column spread footings under every column and they are about 10 feet apart. There may be nothing going down for support, depending on how he builds his wall. I haven't seen that yet. If he's got some kind of support beam setting on top of those footings and the wall setting on top of that, it may just be open. I just don't know. Also, you might make a note that this particular project is out of my service territory. Jamie Boyd will be the person that you'll need to contact and his number is 582-8652. • • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 21 LSD 01-11.00: Large Scale Development (Elder Apt., pp 403) was submitted by Engineering Services, Inc. on behalf of Elder Construction for property owned by Thomas & Jeannine Vernon located at Lot 5 University Acres (Lewis Avenue). The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential and contains approximately 3.97 acres with a 64 unit apartment complex proposed. Edwards. The next project is LSD 01-11.00, Elder Apartments, submitted by Engineering Services, Inc on behalf of Elder Construction for property owned by Thomas & Jeannine Vernon located at Lot 5 University Acres (Lewis Avenue). The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential and contains approximately 3 97 acres with a 64 unit apartment complex proposed. Kim Rogers - Parks Operations Coordinator Rogers: The Parks Board voted to accept money in lieu of land in the amount of $24,000. They did recommend that construction be shifted to the north if possible to increase the south buffer zone and you've done that. Kim Hesse - Landscape Administrator Hesse: As construction documents are designed, please refer to the Landscape Administrator for tree preservation during construction details. Efforts shall be made to preserve these large trees during construction as a part of the minimum percent canopy required for preservation. A complete landscape plan with species listed, notes and details for proper plant installation will be required prior to building permit approval. Please provide landscape plan directly to the Landscape Administrator. Some form of irrigation is required for interior parking lot trees. Please refer to the ordinance. Edwards: You don't want the irrigation shown right now do you? Hesse: No, that's all at building permit. Chuck Rutherford - Sidewalk and Trails Coordinator Rutherford: Lewis is a local street which requires a six foot sidewalk and a minimum of six feet greenspace, that is shown. Sidewalk shall be continuous through the driveway. Remove lines representing curbs through the sidewalk section from the drawing. You have provided the bicycle parking rack as required. Add a sidewalk symbol to the legend. • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 22 Perry Franklin - Traffic Superintendent Franklin: Each apartment building should have at least one ADA van accessible space. You should locate the space at the shortest access route to the front door. Wier: That is required? I wasn't sure if that was a requirement or not. Franklin: I've attached a copy of the fair housing requires one ADA. If you have an apartment building, then you have to provide a parking space for somebody that's visiting somebody in that building. It has to be the shortest route to the front of the building. My other comment that's not on there, your streetlight that you are showing, is that a streetlight that meets our requirement of every 300 feet? Wier. Yes. Franklin: That needs to be a minimum of 8,000, instead of 6,800. • Mickey Jackson - Fire Chief Jackson: The west hydrant should not be between the building but just behind the sidewalk. Engineering will need to render a decision whether the 6 inch waterline is adequate. • Petrie: It needs to be an 8. Sara Edwards - Associate Planner Edwards: The only comment that I had was in your vicinity map it's hard to tell, if you add the street names. I see them. That's all. I don't have any comments, it looks good. Ron Petrie - Staff Engineer Petrie: I'll have to fax you my written comments later today. I'll give you the comments I have so far. It needs to be an 8 inch waterline. The easements for the water and sewer need to be 20 foot wide, 10 feet from the line. Those are showing just 10 foot easements. It's 10 foot on both sides of the utility is the requirement. There appears to be a sewer line I guess you guys located out there. It's kind of an existing line along Lewis Street. Wier. Are you talking about the funky thing that comes down? • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 23 Petrie: Wier. Petrie: Yes. That was not on our original plan, it was left out. It doesn't match our records but if that's it, what I'm required to do is bring that up to code so we would need additional easement to cover that thing 10 feet on both sides of it. That's going to cause a little bit of a problem with the corner of that building. That building doesn't need to be closer than 10 feet from that sewer line. I haven't looked at the grading or drainage yet. I'll get that to you today, I'll fax it to your office. Wier: The grading plan on here is incomplete. The detention pond is going to be larger than it's showing here. Conklin: How much larger? Wier: Quite a bit larger. Petrie: How is that going to impact your tree preservation? Conklin: Kim, since we are talking about tree preservation, do they have a plan that says tree preservation plan on it that they submitted to you? Hesse: Yes. Conklin:: I just want to make sure they submitted one with the word tree preservation plan on it. Are they meeting that tree preservation protection ordinance? Hesse: Yes. Conklin: Do you know how much more canopy they are saving than required? Rogers: Last time I know it was 20% that they were meeting. Hesse: They are at 19.24%. Conklin: I have an idea how you might be able to save some. These buildings, can you move them around or do they have to be 8-plexes? • Wier. The client prefers 8 but they don't like a really long one. • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 24 Conklin: Wier: Conklin: Hesse: Conklin: Hesse: Wier: Conklin: Hesse: Conklin: Hesse: Conklin: I was going to say you could put a unit right here and take these two and put them down here and your parking down here. That way you could possibly save this 24 inch oak right here. Kim, let me show you something. How am I going to get my parking in here? You are not losing anything just moving the parking up front. What do you think about moving the building over here and taking two units over here to try to save the 24 inch oak? They would have to take three units. Yes, put one here and one on this end, if this canopy is shown correctly and then put two over here. If the detention pond is going to be larger, it's reducing the canopy. We'll just have to wait and see how that looks. We can bring that south too. It looks like you might be able to save that 24 inch oak just looking at it on paper. You are not losing anything by moving all this up front. They start losing parking spaces too. We did have a plan that basically saves them all. Through working it out, we lost those three Due to reasons of the client's preferences, the distances between the buildings, the number of parking spaces and grade... Are you going to be in support of this even though it's shy of 20% canopy? I bet they have 20%. What they probably did is put this line exactly as it is and this area around it, when actually this canopy comes out because there is little trees in there. I realize they are just stopping it there. You could get your 20%. I encourage you to get 20% because we required the developer up the road to give us 20%. I think it's important. Hesse: I think that you've got it. Wier: The issue that we may run into is, this is going to be bigger and we may have to put a structure in here to make it work. We may have to come into this area and adjust that • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 25 Petrie: here in order to make the detention pond fit in the final plan. When are you going to have that determined? It should have been determined before you came to this meeting? Now we are talking about moving buildings around or are we, to fit it in there? Do we have to move buildings? Wier: I'm going to try not to. Edwards: Do you have the plan done with bigger detention? Wier: Not yet. Conklin: I know you are in a hurry and we delayed you last time because of not identifying the 24 inch or larger trees. What you've done now is redesigned to save those rare landmark trees, thank you. Now Ron has an engineering issue changing the plan because of the detention pond. Petrie: It's a tree preservation issue too. Conklin: The detention pond is going to result in the tree preservation plan ordinance not being met. Petrie: Is that contrary to what you think, the increase of detention will not cause the buildings to be moved and you can still meet your 20%? Wier: Yes. That may require some adjustments on our easement line. Petrie: If you can do it, I don't see any reason why it can't be forwarded on. When we get a revised plan and if it looks a lot different than this, it's going to need to come back here. The calculations that you submitted, are those correct? Wier. Yes. Petrie: I'll fax you my comments. Johney Boles - Arkansas Western Gas Boles: Can somebody help me out with memory? Did Mike indicate whether he was going to • go in the back or the front? • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 26 Clouser: I thought he said he was going through the middle. Now you got water in here, is he going to be able to go in there, if that is indeed what he was going to do? You said we have to stay how far away from your water main? Petrie: I just need an easement 20 feet. Clouser. We can go in there then? Petrie: Sure. Boles: This 20 foot easement at the west end is going to be continuous all the way to Lewis Avenue, is that what I'm hearing? Wier: Yes. Boles: I would need an easement coming off the north side of that 20 foot easement, coming up between these two buildings here. They are not numbered. Coming off the 20 foot easement going up to here. At the west end you show a 20 foot easement between those two buildings. We would also need one to tie in from here at this location down between these two buildings. Wier: Would it help if I moved the one off this side over here? Boles: Off the west side of the southwest building? I don't think I would need it but I can't speak for the other utilities. I don't know what Mike's plans are, how he plans on connecting his system. I'm not real sure. The one that you have 20 foot shown between the buildings up at the northwest corner, that's adequate. If there is only 15 feet available, that will be fine. I need a way to get to the two buildings in the southeast corner. I guess the furthest building to the southeast, I could possibly serve that off of the east side of the building if I can stay away from those large trees on the west side of that building. Maybe just serve this second building here off of the west edge, off of the west side of it, if that makes any sense to you. Run a line from here to here to serve this building and one from here to here to serve both these buildings and then serve this building off the east side. Sue Clouser - Southwestern Bell Clouser: We are going to come in the rear easement on the north side and then I'm going to • need you to build a conduit in between here across the parking lot to pick up this Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 27 easement. I can feed these two buildings and this easement here and then bring a 4 inch conduit out to this building and I'll need 4 inch conduit out to the utility easement for each of these and then 4 inch conduit out to the east to feed this building. That's provided there is enough room within the easement. I would like to avoid going underneath the pavement because then you would be doing me 8 4 inch conduits. Conklin: This 10 foot utility easement on the north side, does that have to extend all the way out to the west boundary line? Wier. That's a mistake. Petrie: I've got another question. Clouser: Can you give me an easement along where you are going to put a conduit between these two spots? From right here, there is an easement right here but there isn't any. I want it diagonal, you can't follow the easement. We can't have those bends in the conduit. I'm going to have to bring it over on an angle. There is already a utility easement 20 foot on it, so we'll just have to meet up with that on either side. Petrie: You show a water meter up at the front by Lewis Street, is this going to be metered in one location? Wier: Petrie: I need to confirm that, now that I think about it. We may have this waterline extended further back to the west if we are going to have separate meters for every unit. You are going to want to have that. • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 28 LSD 01-18.00: Large Scale Development (City of Fayetteville, Skate Park, pp 562) was submitted by Eric Schuldt for the City of Fayetteville Parks & Recreation Division for property located in Henry Walker Park atl5th Street & S. College Avenue. The property is zoned P-1, Institutional and contains approximately 2.46 acres. The request is for a new skateboard park. Edwards: The next project is LSD 01-18.00, City of Fayetteville Skate Park, submitted by Eric Schuldt for the City of Fayetteville Parks & Recreation Division for property located in Henry Walker Park atl5th Street & S. College Avenue. The property is zoned P-1, Institutional and contains approximately 2 46 acres. The request is for a new skateboard park. Jones: Good moming, I'm Carol Jones with McClelland Engineering, Eric Schuldt with Parks and Recreation is here. Chuck Rutherford - Sidewalk and Trails Coordinator Rutherford: The existing sidewalk along Block Avenue meets requirements. • Clyde Randall - GIS • Randall: We did have a closing error in the legal. You need to get that fixed. If you can see if you can reference state plane coordinates on that. Sara Edwards - Associate Planner Edwards: No comments. Ron Petrie - Staff Engineer Petrie: No comments. Glen Newman - Ozark Electric Newman: No comments. Johney Boles - Arkansas Western Gas Boles: No comments. • • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 29 Sue Clouser - Southwestern Bell Clouser: No comments. • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 30 LSD 01-19.00: Large Scale Development (Hometown Developments, pp 524) was submitted by Robert Schmitt of Hometown Developments for property located on the southwest corner of Fletcher Avenue & Rodgers Drive. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential and contains approximately 0.50 acres with 6 dwelling units proposed. Sara Edwards - Associate Planner Edwards. The final item is LSD 01-19.00, Hometown Developments submitted by Robert Schmitt of Hometown Developments for property located on the southwest corner of Fletcher Avenue & Rodgers Drive. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential and contains approximately 0.50 acres with 6 dwelling units proposed. I guess our first comment is with regard to building of Center Street. We need a separate submittal showing that construction and that needs to be taken off of this plat. That's going to be a separate item on the agenda, we cannot put both of these on the same item. Along with that submittal for the building of Center Street, I need a letter requesting specific variances. All variances or waivers have to be in writing. I want to be sure that Bob understands he can't just get blanket waivers. Giving me a waiver to construct the streets, that's not how it works. Carter: Request a waiver for what? Edwards: Whatever, for the building of Center Street. I don't know what they are. I understand you can't meet your street standards. Carter: The things that we'll get into probably with Ron's comments. Ron Petrie - Staff Engineer Petrie: I'll fax you my comments because I don't have them prepared. I'll tell you what I see as waivers. I think you need to look at it yourself to verify what I see. I will fax you a copy of that. Edwards: What he's done is, this lot does not have street frontage. Center Street we've got existing right-of-way and he's exploring two options, one is just to build a driveway up here by Rodgers, Lighton Trail is what you've got shown. Carter: There is a sign right here that says Lighton Trail. 1111 Edwards: Right. Our maps shows Rodgers to here and then Fletcher here. • • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 31 Carter: Edwards - Carter: Edwards: Carter: Edwards: Carter: Edwards: Carter: Edwards - Petrie: Carter: I'll put it anywhere you want it, I really don't care. We've been calling it Fletcher this whole time, I think that it's should be consistent. If you run up there for a site visit or something, look at that sign. There's another street, Oklahoma Way, did you want to show that? No. He's either going to construct Center Street to have street frontage or he's going to build a driveway across the Center Street right-of-way up there to the street. He's showing both these things. I would say let's all forget about the Center Street construction being shown. If I do that, I show on this plan and it will probably be a little bit different than this, a driveway out to this street. I can do that. Does that require that we request some kind of waiver to get across this? He's been granted that. He's already gone to Planning Commission, that's been granted subject to large scale development approval That's called what? What's he been granted? You don't need a variance to build the driveway. He's been granted a variance from the street frontage but I don't think you need permission to build a driveway there. Do you Ron? All of our driveways have right-of-way. If I take this street drawing off of here and just put that on a different page and just show a driveway on here and resubmit that for Subdivision Committee, he doesn't need anymore variances requested for that, he does for the street? Right. We would make that an administrative item. It's not going to go to Subdivision, it will go straight to Planning Commission. Ron, do you agree with that, he doesn't need permission to build that, besides the curb cut permit? Yes. He's already been granted permission. What I didn't know until I found out yesterday from talking to Ron is, this little triangle right there, I didn't know who owned that. Now I found out the City does so I can probably angle this around more, closer to perpendicular. • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 32 Edwards: You want to remember that with that minimum standard between curb cuts you can't bring both the driveways together, they are going to have to have some space between them. Are there any driveways here? Carter: Right there and I probably should have labeled that as an existing driveway. He's kind of got a little bit of an encroachment problem with this guy. If you notice, this dashed line here, his neighbors driveway, the property corner falls over on that guys driveway. It may not ever be a matter of any contention because there is a slope there. Edwards: Are you saying the property line is this dashed line? Carter. No. The property line is this big heavy dash -dot -dot line, it comes up and in comers right on the corner of that guys driveway. This dash line is the guys driveway. That's his comer and there is a chiseled "X" right there. I was advising to contact that neighbor and try to be sure there is something done there to resolve any conflict that may happen. Edwards: This development has not gone to Parks Board. They are putting it on the June 4th agenda. We don't know what's going to be required land or fees. Do you know what time that meeting is? They need to be there right? Kim Rogers - Parks Operations Coordinator Rogers: Yes. You'll need to be there at 5:30 room 326 on June 4`h. Chuck Rutherford - Sidewalk & Trails Coordinator Rutherford: With regard to sidewalks, Fletcher Street is a local street which requires a 6 foot sidewalk with a minimum of 6 foot greenspace. Shreve: I don't know if that's applicable if there is no street frontage. That's kind of a unique situation there. Carter: If I take the street off this drawing, I drew a sidewalk in there, I'll take it off with it. How do you put a sidewalk in 3 feet of space, you can't. I didn't know what to do so I just showed a sidewalk, I think 3 or 4 feet off the back property line. Shreve: If you redesign it to go directly out to Fletcher Trail, you may just want to make this • section through your driveway itself because that's all your street frontage. • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 33 Carter: Come off the right-of-way of Lighton Trail and make the sidewalk down there? Edwards: That's sounds okay, Fletcher. Carter: You want me to call this Fletcher don't you? Edwards. Yes. I think it's Avenue. Just because we've been to Planning Commission and we've been calling it that, it gets confusing. Perry Franklin - Traffic Superintendent Franklin: You need to show your ADA spaces on the plan. At least one must be van accessible (8' space and 8' aisle). Carter: I thought we had done that. We are required one ADA space? We show 2 handicapped over in the text but we didn't show it on the plan. My guessing would be 1 with unit 1 and 1 with unit 2 although they are not numbered, one with the first unit and one with the second unit, keeping them as far up the hill as possible. Edwards. Is that okay with you Perry? Franklin: If we are playing like these are houses, single family residential houses, then they don't have to have any. They are not required. If we are looking at them for what they really are, multi -family covered housing then there is supposed to be one at every building. Edwards. Each building is only one unit though. Each unit is going to have control of the parking. What do you want? Franklin: Do you plan on ADA access to these buildings in any way, like thresholds and that kind of stuff? Are you paying attention if they are ADA accessible? Do you have three steps going up to the front door? If you are, what's the use of putting an ADA space there? Carter: Bob has given me a drawing and I think it showed a parking space... No he didn't, I'm wrong. I thought he showed a handicapped parking space in every one of them but he didn't. Franklin: I would imagine none of those buildings are going to be ADA accessible. If they aren't, • in my opinion, why put an ADA space in? Are they going to build ramps to the front • • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 34 door that meets that 12 to 1? Am I going to park my wheelchair there and am I going to have to have somebody haul me up three steps to get to it? Edwards: I say we do two. Franklin: If it's not flat, it doesn't meet ADA requirements anyway. I don't want to put a space in there and then somebody says "That's where I'm going to park" and they get out and the cross slope is like this and my wheelchair winds up down on Huntsville Road. If it's not ADA accessible then why put an ADA space in period? In my opinion, we should not put ADA parking spaces in that lot if those buildings are not ADA accessible. Somebody else needs to address that In my opinion, we should not tell a person to park there with a wheelchair if they are not ADA accessible buildings, if they are in harms way to do it. Edwards. Steve will tell them what the requirements are for accessible buildings and then we'll just let Inspections take care of it, whatever they require Mickey Jackson - Fire Chief Jackson: A hydrant should be installed inside the project, located so that no point on any building is more than 500 feet from the hydrant. Code may require that these units be sprinklered I have included Chapter 9 - Residential Occupancy Requirements. Carter: Within 500 feet we could put a fire hydrant right here and tap this line right there. Edwards: In R-2 we have height requirements. Every foot in height over 20 feet requires an addition 1 foot side setback. What I need, I need you to list on the plan the height of the building. What I really need to know also is if we've got gabled ends, which side they are on and probably come in here and talk to me or give me a call before you revise your plans. We'll talk about what the side setback has to be because I'm pretty sure it's going to be taller than 20 feet for these buildings. For every one foot over 20 an additional 1 foot needs to be added. If you go to moving things over, remember that you've got to have at least a 5 foot setback along the parking lot on this side. I just want to make you aware of that. You've got 8 now, which is fine, but it's got to be a minimum of 5. You have too much parking. You are allowed 24 with 20% over which is 29. You've got 31. You need to get rid of 2. I didn't have time to check on this but we've got a new bike rack ordinance. Every time you do a parking lot you've got to provide bike racks and I don't know how many, probably 1 or 2. • • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 35 Carter: We have to put in bike racks? Edwards: Yes. Carter: Does it allow any leeway in the ordinance for situations where bikes are not really feasible, this is on a very steep slope. Edwards: No. I'll let you know how many. What's going on with this dumpster? Is it going to have it's own separate driveway? Carter: We couldn't find a place for it. Edwards: Maybe if we lose a parking space we could stick it down here at the end somewhere: I don't want it to have it's own driveway. Carter: There was another thing and that was, I wasn't able to get anybody in Solid Waste to answer my question but I don't know if a garbage truck can get down this hill and back up. I didn't want to create a problem for them so I thought if we had that at the top of the hill that would be nice. Maybe we could move it over toward the driveway. Edwards: Maybe you could put it off here. Carter: I hate for it to be right in front so it's the first thing everybody sees but I would also like it to be accessible to the public. We'll study that a little more and talk to you about it. Edwards: Dumpsters have to be screened, utility equipment has to be screened so keep your utility equipment off the north side visible from the street, transformers have to be screened on the back. All utilities underground. Carter: I didn't make a note but we plan on the dumpster being screened on three sides plus a gate on the front because we don't want it to be visible. Petrie: Are you going to have one meter for all these units? Carter: I don't know. Petrie: If not, you are looking to extend that water main to provide those meters. The only thing I see, how was the centerline of Center Street determined? • • • Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 36 Carter: Petrie: Carter: Petrie: Carter: Edwards: Petrie: It was placed at the center of the right-of-way. If you show it like this we need more right-of-way, you just wiped out a unit. We need more right-of-way, we need to change your building setback. So there is a 30 foot right-of-way there now existing and if we do that, the City is going to require more right-of-way? You would be required to have 25 feet from centerline dedicated, that's a standard requirement. If the street is not constructed however, I don't think we would require it. If you are going to make another plan that shows Center Street, you need to take that into account. That changes the setback, the setback in R-2 would be 25? Yes. I'll fax you the rest of my comments. Glen Newman - SWEPCO Newman: Edwards: Newman: Carter Newman: Carter: Newman: Boles: They were going to have to provide more setback because of the height of the building? Yes. 8 feet is not enough for us if these are going to be individual we are going to have to have an easement somewhere up near the center of the back of the buildings for the transformer and pedestals. Would a 15 foot easement be enough, centered around that property line? Along the east property line? Yes. Are you going to need to in it Johney and Southwestern Bell? In this legal is lot 3 part of lot 2? Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 37 Edwards: Yes. Boles: Where is lot 2 in relation,? Edwards: There were originally three lots so lot 2 is part of this. Carter: They took half of lot 2 and put it with lot 3 and took the other half and put it with lot 1. We've got 2 lots now this size right here. There is another lot to the east of this lot which lays adjacent to it that's exactly the same size. Newman: Same owner? Carter: No but they are partners in business. Clouser: Can you get us that easement 10 foot on either side? Carter: I don't know if we can get 10 foot? It's pretty tight on one side. We may be able to get another 2 feet here and then we can get 10 feet on each side. As it is, we've got 8 feet on each side. Newman: By the time we put electric, water, gas, phone and cable tv in, it fills up in a hurry. Boles: Where would you like Ron, if you had to extend the water? Petrie. I would think in the front under the parking lot. Newman: We don't have any tree problem with that property line? Hesse: I don't think so. Newman: We'll just need to have some way to get in on that side. It's approximately 200 feet to the centerline of the southernmost building. What I would like to do is be somewhere in the middle of that with no longer than 100 foot service. The developer will need to provide a secondary cable from the building to the transformer location or pedestal in that easement. It helps them and it helps our voltage calculations drop. I just ask that you take that into consideration. Plat Review Minutes May 30, 2001 Page 38 Johney Boles - Arkansas Western Gas Boles: Will there be 4 potential tenants per building? Carter: No. It's one unit per building. It's like probably three bedroom, we listed it as four but he talked like that fourth bedroom is going to be like a study. It's not really going to be a four bedroom. We showed it that way to be sure we could get the parking. If it falls back to three, then we've got too much parking. My last instructions were to do this four bedrooms and that's what I did. Clouser: They are considered single family homes? Edwards: What he is doing in affect, he is attaching 6 single family homes because he cannot put them unattached in there. If he called this an apartment complex, he could put it in there but he would just assume not have them attached. Carter: Six units, six families, one family per unit. Boles: That's all I have. Sue Clouser - Southwestern Bell Clouser: I agree that we need the utility easement along the property line on the east. Carter: If there is no overhang, we've got to look at that height restriction and setback. Edwards: Any questions for us9 Carter: No.