No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-12-19 - Minutes• • • MINUTES OF A MEETING OF TECHNICAL PLAT REVIEW A regular meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee was held on Wednesday, December 19, 2001 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS CONSIDERED CCP 02-1.00: Concurrent Plat (Ulrich, pp 436) Page 2 LSP 02-1.00: Lot Split (Westphal/Cobb, pp 557) Page 4 LSD 02-1 00• Large Scale Development (Olive Garden, pp 212) Page 7 ACTION TAKEN Forwarded Forwarded Forwarded LSD 02-2.00: Large Scale Development (Superior Federal Bank, pp 557) Forwarded Page 30 STAFF PRESENT Sara Edwards Keith Shreve Kim Hesse Ron Petrie Trevor Bowman Renee Thomas Perry Franklin Eric Schuldt UTILITIES PRESENT Johnny Boles, Arkansas Western Gas Glen Newman, SWEPCO Jim Sargent, SWEPCO Larry Gibson, Cox Communications STAFF ABSENT Solid Waste Fire Chief UTILITIES ABSENT Sue Clauser, Southwestern Bell Mike Phipps, Ozark Electric Coop. Technical Plat Review Minutes • December 19, 2001 Page 2 • • CCP 02-1.00: Concurrent Plat (Ulrich, pp 436) was submitted by Richard Ulrich for property located on Tackett Drive. The property is zoned A-1, agricultural and contains approximately 7.95 acres with two lots proposed. Edwards. Good morning, welcome to the Wednesday, December 19, 2001 meeting ofthe Technical Plat Review Committee. We'll start with number eight on our agenda, all ofthe first seven were administrative and they didn't need easements. Number eight is a concurrent plat submitted by Richard Ulrich for property located on Tackett Drive. The property is zoned A-1 and contains approximately 7 95 acres with two lots proposed Would you like to come up? Here are your comments. From our Sidewalk Administrator, when this property develops a sidewalk will be required. It is something that will have to be done with a permit. Shreve: Under current ordinance we require you to build a sidewalk along street frontage. There is aprovision in some locations where you can pay in lieu of construction to the sidewalk fund to build a sidewalk in other places. This would probably be a good location for that. I just want you to be aware that there will be a sidewalk required. Edwards. We are looking at a new ordinance and it is going to the Planning Commission on January 28"'. It is roughly going to be $3.00 a square foot four feet wide and 70 feet long. That is what this is basically saying. We did put you on our Parks Board for January 7, 2002. Eric, is that correct? Schuldt: January 7, 2002 at 5:30 in room 326 on a Monday. Staff is going to recommend money in lieu of contribution. Your contribution would be approximately $470. The land dedication, if you were to request that, would be .25 acres. For the land dedication it will have to go to our Parks Board and you're welcome to attend. Ulrich: It's at 5:30? Schuldt: Yes Ma'am. Edwards. Our Traffic Superintendent reviewed this and he did not have any comments. From Planning, we have just got that a subdivision will be required, we've already talked about that, Dust wanted to get that on the record. We did talk about reconfiguring tract A and you had agreed to that. What we'll need is by December 26`h at 10:00 a.m. a revised survey showing that. You were going to make the lot for the tract A reduction. Ulrich: Ok. • • • Technical Plat Review Minutes December 19, 2001 Page 3 Edwards. I think 25' will be adequate. Petrie: My only comment is what Sara talked about and what we have talked about previously. If we make that 25' property to give the direct frontage then we will not have any comments. Edwards: We need the revisions by December 26th and then our next meeting is January 3`d in this room. Johnny Boles - Arkansas Western Gas Boles: No comment. Larry Gibson - Cox Communications Gibson: No comment Edwards: Do you have any questions? Ulrich: Where is that Parks Board meeting? Schuldt: It will be in room 326. Edwards: Thank you. Technical Plat Review Minutes • December 19, 2001 Page 4 • LSP 02-1.00: Lot Split (Westphal/Cobb, pp 557) was submitted by Bill McClard of Lindsey & associates on behalf of Bennie Westphal and Matthew Cobb for property located at the southwest corner of Finger Road and Hwy 62. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 82.49 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 80.95 acres and 1.38 acres. Edwards: The next item is LSP 02-1.00 submitted by Bill McClard on Lindsey & Associates on behalf of Bennie Westphal for property located south of Finger Road on Highway 62. The property is zoned C-2, thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 82.49 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 80.95 and 1.28 acres Glen, are you here for this? Carter: I was told that I didn't have to be and that someone else was doing this but that is ok. I will certainly fill in since I did do the survey. Edwards: We'll start with our Parks Division. They didn't have any comments. From Sidewalks, Highway 62 is a Principal Arterial which requires a 6' sidewalk and a minimum 10' greenspace and we're asking for that when the property develops. Finger Road is also a local street which requires a 6' sidewalk and a 6' greenspace. Nothing from Traffic. From Planning, and I didn't get GIS comments to you. 1 will get those to you. There is a 50' error in the legal description for the large tract. I have the comments on that which I will get to you. We need to get that legal description fixed. Carter: Oh. From who? Edwards. GIS, Clyde Randall. Also, you do not have a floodplain reference. There is floodplain on this lot and I need that addition. On Finger Road, I can see where it has got the 25' from centerline up at the north part but the property on both sides of Finger Road does not indicate that. Carter: Ok. It exists or I need to show it here? Edwards: You need to dedicate it. Conklin: Whatever Finger Road is on this client's property of yours, we need 50' of right of way on Finger Road. Edwards: I'm finished and I will make you a copy here. Petrie. Glen, our comment was that we have a major transmission line that runs up Finger Road • and also a waterline on the north of the property. We have a 30' utility easement that I Technical Plat Review Minutes • December 19, 2001 Page 5 • • can't tell you where, it is along Finger Road and it looks like it is centered along that waterline. Depending on where that easement exists, you may have to, depending on where the water is located on the north side, we'll want 10' of easement from that waterline. It may be ok with the 10' that you show but just making a comment that we need a minimum of 10' from that waterline. We would like to see an easement shown for the large transmission line. Carter: That's on the 30"? Petrie: Yes. Carter: What size is that? Petrie: Thirty feet. Glen Newman - SWEPCO Newman: No comments. Johnny Boles - Arkansas Western Gas Boles: Glen, I would like you to show a 20' utility easement on the south side of Hwy 62 and also a 20' on the west side of Finger Road. Carter: A twenty where? Boles: On the west side of Finger Road. Carter: Ok, is this exclusive of what is there? Boles: It is just a general adjacent to the road right of way. Carter: Ok. Petrie: Our 30' may be exclusive. Carter: Ok, so you want a 20'? Boles: Just adjacent to the right of way. Technical Plat Review Minutes • December 19, 2001 Page 6 Carter: Ok. Larry Gibson - Cox Communications Gibson: We'll go in where the utilities go. Petrie: If you want to make that a 30' general that will be fine. It will simplify the whole thing. I think you need to locate the waterlines. Carter: There is ten there, I'm not sure, we'll just make it 20' from the right of way for underground. That would be on the proposed right of way? There are 40' existing and 55' is required? Conklin: You're asking if the 55' is going to the easement? Carter: Is the 55' required along Hwy. 62 and then the utility easement would be adjacent to that? • Conklin: Yes. Carter: I understand that. Ok. • Technical Plat Review December 19, 2001 Page 7 LSD 02-1.00: Large Scale Development (Olive Garden, pp 212) was submitted by Mel Milholland of Milholland Company on behalf of Darden Restaurants for property located on the northeast comer of Mall Avenue and Shiloh Drive. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 2.35 acres with an 8,077 sq.ft. restaurant proposed. Edwards: The next item on the agenda is LSD 02-1.00 submitted by Mel Milholland on behalf of Darden Restaurants for property located on the northeast comer of Mall Ave. and Shiloh Drive. The property is zoned C-2 and contains 2.25 acres with an 8,077 sq. ft. restaurant proposed. Milholland: I would like to hand these out. This is their standard utility requirements. Maybe that would help you. Edwards We're going to start with our Sidewalks Administrator. His only comment is that we have existing sidewalks along Mall Avenue that meets our requirements. Any new sidewalks, driveway approaches and access ramps shall meet our current requirement §121.13. Driveways shall be constructed of Portland Cement Concrete. Sidewalks shall be continuous through drive with a maximum 2% slope and elevated 2% above the surface. He is requesting that you please remove lines representing curbs through the sidewalk section and the driveway. Six bicycle racks are required. I think you have those don't you? Jefcoat: Yes. Edwards: Nothing from the Parks Division. Nothing from our Traffic Superintendent. Milholland: We have our bicycle racks in there? Jefcoat: Yes. Milholland: We need six in there. Edwards: That looks ok. From our Landscape Administrator, I think her only comment is that a preliminary landscaping plan is required for Planning Commission review. A final landscape plan is required prior to the issuance ofa building permit. All additional trees are required for the interior of parking. She has got a standard list in there to go with the 8' by 17' island. There are no more parking spaces. You've got continuous parking and there are no islands here, here and here. Technical Plat Review December 19, 2001 Page 8 Milholland: There is some required here? Edwards: Jefcoat: Edwards: Conklin: Milholland: Edwards: Conklin: Edwards: Milholland: Edwards: Jefcoat: Edwards: Conklin: Yes. One per every 12 spaces. Kim wrote that you needed an additional five. You can count down 12 and put in an island, count down 12 and put another. I will talk to Kim about that. Unless you want to move some of your parking. You've got some room right here to put your parking, ifyou want to make some spaces up on the west side of the building. So what you're saying is I can start where I want to and count 12 and then go around? Yes. I think the ordinance reads that you're not supposed to have more than twelve spaces in a row. You can break it up. Probably one in each of those rows of parking, one, two, three and four. One in each row. Actually there are five. We'll have 15 spaces here. From Planning, we need twelve color elevations submitted for distribution to Planning Commission. Also, a conditional use will need to be submitted for parking. I know that you were working on that. Make sure that your numbers are adequate on that application. I still need a floodplain reference. Do you know what kind ofparking lot lighting you are going to use? Is it going to be the same as what you used in Kohl's and Target? The code is it shall be sodium light fixtures, they shall be facing downwards and no more than 35' in height. Do we need to stipulate the types of lights? Yes. All of the utility equipment must be screened and pedestrian access shall be provided to the door and it says by way of a sidewalk or a trail. The Commission is most likely going to ask ifyou are going to have air conditioning units • on the ground, where those are going to be located and make sure that you screen them. • • • Technical Plat Review December fEr 2001 Page9 la Iq o� The dumpster screening looks really nice with the rock along the side. Jefcoat: It is l i x 17 for a storage. Conklin: Our ordinance for the Overlay District, this sign is facing the east and is not facing a street technically. I think the ordinance reads one sign per street. We have granted variances in the past. Milholland: We'll have to ask for a variance for the sign on the east elevation? Conklin: Yes. Petrie: My comments should be in that list whenever you are ready. Let me correct that. Under General, the deadline, my understanding is December 26th. Our standard list that shows all ofthose deadlines is not correct. Water and sewer, I reviewed all ofthese plans as final so 1 could do this once. You might see some comments that I wouldn't typically make at Plat Review. Under the water, we have a requirement for the fire hydrant to be within 700 feet of your fire department connection. You are showing a fire hydrant at the end of this lot ifyou could Just move this back to the west to your fire line. Ifyou just move that you would need a fire hydrant at the end of the line and then you could meet that requirement. Milholland: Are you talking about moving the one at the end ofthe line back over to here? Is that what you are saying? Petrie: Right. Move that one. You can have two ifyou want. I'm lust saying that you could move this off and bring it off this line or this line right here. Milholland: Is this considered the fire line? We've got a sprinkler system down here. Petrie. Yes. It would be preferred if this is off this line. My next comment is if I could get two joints of pipe beyond the valve so it could be extended. If you would like we could do something like this and put that valve here, put it in and blow it offthere and leave a plug right here. Milholland: Would we still need a plug right here? Petrie: No, this valve you show back through there and this will be plugged. Milholland: Leave that valve closed? • • • Technical Plat Review December iq, 2001 Page 10 Petrie: Milholland: Petrie: Milholland: Petrie: Milholland: Petrie: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Petrie: Jefcoat: Conklin: Yes. Number three is provide a utility easement a minimum of 10' from the proposed waterline. I don't see one shown on your plan. Four, I ask that you move your trees a minimum of 10' from the waterline. I've got two trees here, I've got three with a 36" cover. I think you've got the wrong packet. Yes. Number three there is the utility easement for the waterline along that northern boundary. There are the trees away from the waterline. Number five is the meter size and the setup and the backflow prevention has to be approved by Don Osburn. Item number six is just to add the meter locations to the plan. Real quickly, let me comment on this that you handed out. The 1 %] meter has to be approved by Don Osburn. He will make that decision on what size. You're showing a 4" meter on that sprinkler line. That is not a requirement. We don't need a meter on that. Unless they want it? I don't know about that. If they want it it will probably have to be on the backside. The problem is if the city has to maintain that. The grading, number one is a combination, does Darden Restaurants own the property now? They will be closing as soon as everything is approved. Planning Commission approval, building permit issuance. Yes. They have a signed letter by the ladies selling. I don't have a copy of that. You should have a copy of the agreement. "Nanchar Inc., Marjorie Brooks certify by our signatures below that we hereby authorize Neil Terwilliger representing Olive Garden to act as agent regarding the site plan approval of the below property." Who do you have for signature? Darden? He has signed everything, ok. We've got Marjorie Brooks, Charlotte Steele and Nancy Rubeck, ok. • • • Technical Plat Review December iq, 2001 Page 11 Petrie: Milholland: Petrie. Milholland: • Edwards: Milholland: Petrie: Edwards: Petrie: Number two is a standard comment. You need written approval in order for you to install your erosion control devices in the driveway onto the adjacent property. We will need, I think Planning mentioned this but depending on how the street goes, we will need some sort of access easement to this driveway from the adjacent property. • From CMN, is that right? If they own that lot back there. I was thinking they documented that. That may be at closing, you are wanting a statement giving a temporary easement. Didn't they have an agreement to close this stub off and then move it, right? Right, this is temporary. Whenever this is constructed this will be closed and this will be through right here. I know that there are some documents somewhere on that. I thought it was the agreement between the two parties. I guess what I'm wanting to know is to what degree do we need to go? Is this agreement between the two enough? I'm ok with a private agreement between the two parties. We still need some approval that you can do this work on the adjacent property. He does have a letter. Number three is requesting that you show the offsite drainage. You've got some lines drawn for this proposed ditch offsite. You need to draw in your lines of what is actually being proposed. What is shown kind of splits, it goes one direction and then the other direction. We're not recommending that you go straight onto the Highway Department's right of way. Milholland: Run down to here. Petrie: Conklin: Your plans show that it is going to run this way and then that way. What we are recommending is show this grading with what you're proposing that way. If you do decide to go to the Highway Department right of way we will need some type of approval from the Highway Department. Also, on the grading plans if you could add the construction easements and spot elevations along this northern curbline. Here is what this letter states. It states that "CMN has been asked to provide this letter • • • Technical Plat Review December 1Q, 2001 Page 12 approving two issues regarding the Olive Garden Large Scale Development approval requested by GMRI, Inc. acting through Milholland Engineering Company. I write on behalfofNANCHAR, Inc. and Marjorie S. Brooks, the principals of CMN Properties, who own the property adjacent to the Olive Garden parcel. The first issue is approval by CMN, as adjacent land owner of the remainder of Lot 17, for Olive Garden to grade up to the property line. CMN approves the grading up to the property line but not onto the adjacent property owned by CMN. Reading that, it sounds like we need a different letter saying that you can do this. Petrie: Yes. Milholland: That doesn't cover that access? Conklin: No. The second issue is approval of the continuation of the storm water runoff sheet flow to the north from the Olive Garden site. CMN acknowledges that this sheet flow will continue to flow to the north from the Olive Garden lot, based on the commitment from the Olive Garden engineers that the sheet flow shall not exceed the planned developed conditions. That is all I have. Milholland: We basically need an agreement that they can grade this driveway from CMN is that right? Petrie: In your grading plan you are showing all of your erosion control is going to be sought on the adjacent property. Conklin: If I was the Olive Garden I would ask for a temporary access easement for this instead of relying on the curb cut. Milholland: Is it possible we could put this on the line? Conklin: No. Milholland: We didn't get them to write that on the letter? Jefcoat: No, we didn't address that issue. Milholland: Tim, what is the date of that letter? Conklin: December 6, 2001. • Technical Plat Review December 19, 2001 Page 13 Milholland: We'll take care of it. Petrie: Conklin: Petrie: Milholland: Conklin: • Milholland: Conklin: • Ok, under drainage. Number one, in accordance with the Milholland Company's final plat of CMN Business Park II, Phase II, "Each individual tract developer shall employ an Environmental Specialist to insure that the spirit and letter of the 404 Permit from the Corps of Engineers will be complied within the development of the lot." This information was not found in the submitted material. Ron, just one more question. Do you want signatures from NANCHAR on the grading permit for that property? I could have either one, a written letter or a signed permit. Whichever one. What we can do is get them to sign one agreement for the two buffers. That should be sufficient. I just wanted to be sure if you needed the owner's signature on both. What he is wanting is an agreement between the owners and potential buyers. I'm thinking that our grading ordinance talks about the owners signature on the grading permit and I don't want some technicality ofthis grading and driveway being built on lot 17 without the owner's signature on there. That is the reason I brought it up. Milholland: In the letter they authorized Darden to sign off on the developer's projects. Would that be sufficient for that though? That is what I was asking Ron. I was thinking it was but I'm not sure. That is ok for the onsite work. Ok, so we need a letter for the offsite work. I just wanted to clarify that. I don't want to be at Planning Commission and being questioned about that. Conklin: Milholland: Petrie: Conklin: Petrie: Number two is the storm water management plan designed by Milholland Company did not include any drainage flows from this site to drain to the west. All drainage is designed to sheet flow in a northerly direction and enter Mud Creek. Therefore a letter or additional • • • Technical Plat Review December 1q, 2001 Page 14 calculations will be needed from Tom Hecox who designed the box culverts under Shiloh Drive and Van Asche Drive and performed the hydraulic analysis on the Unnamed Tributary to Mud Creek to prove that this additional drainage area will not have an impact through this drainage system. If he feels comfortable doing it without calculations then that is fine. Number three has to do with your curbcuts. Wejust talked about sheet flow and how all of this is going to work if they actually build this street. At this time, I think when we originally discussed this I did not know that there was going to be a street there. Maybe I did, I don't know. I'm really questioning whether it is the best idea. I think you should bring it to one point and then spread it out. That way streets that connect to it can pipe it down where they want to go with it. If it remains like it is, we won't allow the parking lot to drain across the sidewalk. You'll have to pick it up in every one of these places before it gets to the sidewalk so it creates a big problem. Our recommendation is to go ahead and take to one point and then, at this time, to spread it out. Milholland: If we can drain it to here and square it out to this corner here. Go along here to one point. Rather than having three or four locations, we could have one. Petrie: Milholland: Petrie: I think that will be best for all the future type of work. There are no pipes involved? I think they have some type of agreement, I'm not positive. Once this street is built, I know that they agreed to put this part of their driveway. I'm not sure about the drainage part. I mentioned pipes, number four has to do with pipes and really putting everything out on the table. When you put this street in, again, none of this drainage was shown to go into Mall Avenue. More than likely a pipe will have to be installed under the street that will bring Olive Garden down to Mud Creek or into the existing pipe off ofMall Avenue. I'm not saying that is required now. I'mjust saying that when the street comes in, more than likely this will force that to happen. Milholland: They will have parking lot runoffand so forth too. That will pickup whatever goes into this direction. Petrie: It will be downhill from Mall Avenue at a point somewhere other than here. The plan that was approved is not taking any of this from Mall Avenue. It is all going this way. I'm just saying that some additional infrastructure will have to be built. That was not planned for it to go that way and I'm more or less stating that so everybody will know. There needs to be some type of agreement with CMN and Olive Garden with what the conditions are in the future. • • • Technical Plat Review December 1 q, 2001 Page 15 Milholland: What you're saying is that this water has to be picked up and put in across the street? Petrie: Milholland: Petrie: Milholland: Petrie: Milholland: Petrie. Milholland: Petrie: Milholland: Petrie: Something will have to be done with it because drainage was not planned along Mall Avenue. Number five, I think we've covered it. I think we'll need some affirmation after we move some of these around a little bit. The current owners of the property to the north must approve the proposed storm water plans that are being proposed for this development. This is all being discharged across their land and it may affect something in the future and we need their input. It looks like we already have that. Although, by pulling it to one point and then spreading it, it may change some things so we'll just need some more affirmation that they are ok. Ok. Number six is a letter from Ken Lyon of the Corps of Engineers states that "... the created wetlands, in conjunction with other storm water management elements, should prevent any decline of the water quality in Mud Creek..." I think what Mr. Beavers was having a problem with is added in conjunction with other storm water management elements. He believes that should include other practices and I gave you a list of items that could be added very inexpensively such as inserts for debris collection, skimmer boxes, inlet guards, oil/debris separators, etc.. . You're talking about onsite type debris collection? Yes Sir. If you have any questions about what I suggest you can make an appointment with Jim Beavers and he can give you some guidelines. I guess what I'm thinking about is this last part, what you added Ron? Sure. If they have to have debris catchers, skimmer guards and debris separators, every tract along here will have to have that is basically what you're saying. I think we need to find out what that means. There are some very minor things that have been done. Some of these things could help some of these best management practices. On Kohl's and Target, what did we do over there? You didn't do anything. • • • Technical Plat Review December 13 2001 Page 16 Milholland: We'll need some guidance on that if it is going to be anything different than what we've been doing. Petrie: That is all that I have. Edwards: Ok, utilities? Jim Sargent - SWEPCO Sargent: Mel, when this lot split came through we asked for a 20' easement on the north property line, the Olive Garden property. I don't see it on here. Edwards: Did you get a copy of that lot split Mel so you would know where the easements were going? Jefcoat: No we did not. Edwards: That is probably a good idea. Milholland: You have an easement there? Sargent: Yes. Milholland: I did not see it. When we put the road in you'll have one of your poles in there. We've got vegetation too. Trees are to be planted. We do have an easement on the south side that would parallel and your electrical goes on by there too. You can go across the street down through there. Sargent: We planned on serving you out of this cabinet back towards the creek. Milholland: From the pull box? Sargent: Not from the pull box, further to the switch gear north of the pull box. Milholland: You're telling me that you have to have conduits from down here all the way up there? We put in two or four. Conklin: Where are you coming from? • • • Technical Plat Review December 1 4, 2001 Page 17 Sargent: Right here. Milholland: You're down by the mall bridge aren't you? Sargent: Yes. Milholland: Can I ask you a question? What was the purpose of all this other underground? Sargent: You're talking about the pull box? Milholland: Yes, that pull box right there at the intersection. Sargent: This switchgear that was put here was put to service lot 17 and this pull box is for the conductors for this whole development. You could go to this pull box but we would have to put another piece of switchgear on that pull box. Milholland: Ok. Conklin: Sargent: Conklin: Milholland: Sargent: Milholland: Sargent: Milholland: Sargent: Conklin: Who pays for that? The developer pays for that. I was just curious I was thinking that it was designed to serve the whole area without additional. This up here was put in to serve this lot. Ok. You're saying that we need additional offsite electrical work to serve this? Yes. It would be offsite conduits That's another question. I'm not representing anybody over there right now, but what are you going to do for the rest of this? You're going to have to pull conduits every time we do something, all the way from down here? Yes, well, not from down there. We will pull to probably here and go along this strip. What is the extension policy? I'm just curious. Not as the City Planner but just as to the • • • Technical Plat Review December lQ 2001 Page 18 distance from the restaurant and where the facilities are. Is there a certain number of feet that you provide? Sargent: Basically what we look at is when we look at the overhead underground difference in costs on commercial development. The practice is the developer installs the conduit and SWEPCO provides the transformer, conductors and that sort of thing. When I say provide the conduit, that is installed conduit and that is what we look at. Conklin: You're only looking at the cost of putting conduit from here to there and you're going to pay for the switchgear and whatever. Sargent: Milholland: Franklin: Milholland: Franklin: Milholland: Franklin: Milholland: Sargent: Milholland: Sargent: Conklin: We're going to have the switchgear coming from here and this transformer. This pull box is at that intersection of Mall Ave. and Van Asche there. We've got stubouts going to the east out of there. Are those ever going to be used for anything? Are you talking about that intersection? Yes. That is for our traffic signal I believe. No, these run next to it. The pull box is for the signal. No, this is for SWEPCO. There is a pull box there but I'm not aware of any plans at this time for anything. If we decide that we do want to go there then we would require another switchgear. I need to have a talk with you guys then. I was under the impression that when we were spending those thousands of dollars putting this stuff underground out there that we would have service to all these lots. - We do have service. The way it was designed, service from that pull box is for lot 17. If that lot line wasn't there would they still have to be doing the conduit work and everything, if it was just one big large scale development? • • • Technical Plat Review December Iq, 2001 Page 19 Sargent: Conklin: Sargent: Conklin: Sargent: Conklin: Sargent: Conklin: Milholland: Sargent: Milholland: Sargent: Milholland: Sargent: Right. They would still have to install the conduits. Right, lets just say they brought this in as a planned unit development, say Village on the Creeks, the whole thing. Is it because the lot lines are there that they have to do more work or would they still have to do more work no matter what? Are you talking about the conduit? Yes. Typically we would let them bring it to the property line and the customer installs from that location with the transformer. Ok, so it wouldn't matter whether there was a lot line there or not? Right. What he is saying Mel is that it doesn't matter whether it is all Lot 17 together or whether it is Lot 17 A. I was just asking for you too. I wasjust thinking that the reason that they put those pull boxes in and put those extra conduits in was that you could pull from the switchbox to those other areas but what I'm hearing is that we're not going to be able to use those for that purpose. We use them to lay down. We put a point of service on each lot. The point of service for this lot is up here. We're going from this piece of switchgear to the next piece of switchgear down Van Asche. That is what that pullbox is there for. It can be used Ifyou put another piece of switchgear on. there. That is pretty expensive. 1 know. How many conduits are you talking about? Two 4". It is going to take two 4" conduits to service the Olive Garden? What will happen is it will come down here to another cabinet here and that will serve the Olive Garden and wherever the next lot is, whenever it is developed, it will come out of this cabinet to serve the next lot. • • • Technical Plat Review December 2001 Page 20 Milholland: Sargent: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Sargent: Milholland: Sargent: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Sargent: Milholland: Sargent: Milholland: We're crossing borders with whose expense it is though. I think the Olive Garden is going to say that they don't want to pay for someone else who is going to build over here. I think that is what they are going to say. That is what you're saying. Right. See, this whole street section and stubout wasn't planned. Right. Well, the whole subdivision Mel, is based on the theory that it can be subdivided. I understand where you are coming from. It is kind of like the sewer coming down through here, except the sewer we can use. We can go through this box here but then you would be looking at the cost of a switchgear. Right. Like I said, if I would have known that you would need extra conduits here to serve up in here I would have probably put four pipes in at that time to serve back in here. Of course, nobody knew at that time what this was going to look like. Ok. I can see Olive Garden willing to pay for one conduit up to here possibly but I can't see them paying for future development. How much is conduit per foot? It would be less expensive to put two in there in the long run but I don't think they are going to go for paying for somebody else's future use. That is something that we'll have to work out. Ok. You're asking for an easement to the north of that? Right, along the north property line. We've got trees in there now. The ordinance says that the utilities can't be within something like 5' of the trees, is that right? • • • Technical Plat Review December 19, 2001 Page 21 Hesse: Milholland: Hesse: Petrie: Hesse: Milholland: Edwards: Power utilities? For those trees along the north end of the site, is there anything in the ordinance that says they can't be placed within so many feet of the utilities? Not necessarily. We go by the waterline. We've talked with utilities about this at length and it is my understanding that it is up to them to handle trees being away from their utilities. A lot of landscaping goes by power. I've already asked for them to be 10' from the waterline. Right. 10' from the waterline. There is only 21' across there and if we put the trees dead center we're still going to have a problem. Where is 21'? I see 26'. Milholland: I'm sorry, you're right. We can put the trees in there between the electrical and water, the waterlines have to be 20" conduits? Yes. Also, we'll need to figure out a transformer location and where that needs to go. How big of a transformer is it going to be? It will be a good sized transformer. It will probably be comparable to the one at Kohl's. So a fairly substantial transformer. That was put in last year? Yes. It seems like ten years ago. Petrie: Sargent: Conklin: Sargent: Conklin: Sargent: Conklin: Milholland: You want it adjacent to the building? Conklin: It looks like a small shed you buy at Lowe's. Technical Plat Review • December 19, 2001 Page 22 • • Milholland: Sargent: Milholland: Sargent: Milholland: Sargent: Milholland: Sargent: Milholland: Sargent: We've got greenspace in there. We need 10' between the transformer and the building. We've got some greenspace out there on the east side. There is a room out there where the utilities are coming in. I guess we could put it out here somewhere and put some shrubs around it. Whenever we figure out where that is going to be we'll need that easement. When you say 10', are you talking about 10' from the unit itself? That will pretty well fill up the pad. Ifwe have to we can use up one of these parking spaces over here to get by the parking lot. We'll need to work that out With the transformer like that, you want an easement up to the transformer, 10'? We typically ask for 20', it depends on where we wind up at. Milholland: Ifwe wind up close to the building, do you want a 10' or a 20' to put the easement under the wall and the footing, what is realistic? What we would like is the transformer to be separate from the easement. You're telling him that he needs a different transformer? We need one. - Arkansas Western Gas Mel, where would you like your gas to be? Your closest gas is up here a few hundred feet. We came down the east side of Mall Avenue and crossed to the west side of Mall Avenue Sargent: Conklin: Sargent: Johnny Boles Boles: Milholland: Boles: Technical Plat Review • December 1�, 2001 Page 23 • • to the northwest corner of Mall and Van Asche. That is where we crossed from the east to the west side. Then we crossed from the northwest corner of Van Asche and Mall to the southwest corner of Van Asche and Mall and went west to Kohl's. Milholland: You came up the east side of Mall and you crossed over in these conduits right here. Boles: Milholland: Boles: To the northwest corner of Van Asche and then we crossed to the southwest corner and went west. We would be coming offofthe line at the northeast corner of Van Asche and Mall and extending that line south to a point and then we would come off of that and go east to the service line of the building. Well, they are wanting to put all the utilities over here on the east side of that building. I don't know if the office will allow me to do that. It is probably going to be an off service route. I will have to check into that. Milholland: Is it possible, you could keep going this way, we put an easement along the access road, is anyone going to use that easement at all? If not, then we may as well just vacate it. Boles: Well, going back to what Jim was saying. It is hard to plan when you don't know what is going in there. Milholland: You've got gas up here though. Are you not going to use that gas? Boles: Conklin: We probably would not elect to tap those transmission lines if we could utilize the intermediate lines that are already coming off those transmission lines. Where is the meter going to go? Milholland: Johnny, can you run a service line under the building? Boles: No Sir, we can not. We might could parallel, we might could go along the south side of the proposed Van Asche extension and go east to a point with the distribution and then come off of that and go south to get access on the east side of that building. Milholland: We have 13' if you go to the tree setback approximately to put water and utilities in What kind of separation do you have to have by code? Boles: It is going to be tight. Technical Plat Review • December 13 2001 Page 24 • • Conklin: Ok, we're talking about putting the meter back here, this is a private parking lot. Milholland: It could be out here though. Conklin: Then is it a private line from the meter to the building? Boles: Yes. Conklin: Can that be under the building? Milholland: That is what I asked. Conklin: Beyond the meter, that is what I was trying to clarify. Milholland: Johnny, what I was asking you earlier was is it permissible to run a private line under the building? Boles: No. The gas line has to come above ground before it gets to the building. That is against state code. Milholland: If you guys could get gas and electric down through here. If we could use this north 15' from the right of way back to the tree setback, that would give us about 5', we'll have 16' maybe a little more to get you three guys in here together. Boles: We'll do our best. I don't have any restrictions with anything to do with water, Just anything with voltage on it. I believe where we crossed the road from here to here, my records are indicating that we left a stub to the south but we could continue south here and then turn east and put the meter out there. Milholland: You will run your line out here and get it out of the way? Boles: Yes. We would run along the corner of the property line. Milholland: It would be a private gas line down here. Boles: I also want to note that depending on loads depends on the amount of pressure it would be placed on. Milholland: Is what 1 gave you is that sufficient? Technical Plat Review • December lq, 2001 Page 25 Boles: I need to look at a meter chart to see. If we put it on here how it would affect the pipe sizing downstream here. Our extension policies are based on how many feet per lot that we pick up and the balance of that footage is based on the rate of $2.75 per foot. Under this scenario I could probably have the office calculate a rate ofretum and if it falls in the percentage saying that there is a regular return then they could pipe it at no charge. Milholland: It is going to be using a lot of gas. Boles: My feeling is that there will probably be no charge, I'm not going to go on record to say that until we calculate the figures. Anything downstream of the meter is the customer's property. Conklin: You can't go under a building and come backup? Even on a house? What comes back up from the ground? You' ve got your meter out here and you've got your private line going towards your house. Boles: • Conklin: Boles: • It must come above ground before any piping goes in. I was thinking of my own house, it comes up. If there is ever any leakage in your private line it is going to fall in the ditch line. Larry Gibson - Cox Communications Gibson: Milholland: Gibson: Milholland: Gibson: At this time we have no facilities in this area. This is a future build for us I would make a recommendation to you if you want. When you establish the location of your electric transformer a 2" conduit from that point to within 2' of the electric meter turn it just to get across the parking lot when it is built in there. If there are no easements in there to get to the building when it is built in there. About 6' of space from the electrical transformer, run a conduit from that location to the building to within about 3' of the electric meter and that would just give something to get from the parking lot to the building. That will be 2"? 4", with 36" sweeps, one on each end to sweep it up. Along here, with a 36" radius? In depth with the electric meter? Yes, get within 2 or 3' of the electric, that is the state code. We bond to the electric, we • Technical Plat Review • December 19 2001 Page 26 • • Milholland: Gibson: Milholland: Gibson: Milholland: Gibson: Milholland: Gibson: have to work around the electric. Wherever you come through here, when you put your stuff in you'll follow electric? We'll get to the same location, we'll follow the same route as electric. You'll use their same? We'll boar in. This whole center out here we don't have cable to. I can't tell you when they are going to put in there. The only thing I'm telling you is that it would be a wise thing to put that 2" conduit against that parking lot because if and when it is built there. If we put the conduit in, then what happens at that point? Where is your telephone going to be? Electric is our primary route and telephone is our secondary route. Right here is where they want to put a utility room. Telephone can go here, here, anywhere they want to put it. Electric is going right along the perimeter of this and taking it from the telephone. Milholland: How do you boar? Do you just go under the trees and everything? Gibson: Milholland: Hesse: Edwards: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: We go under everything. You won't hurt her trees or anything? Is it ok for them to go under your trees? Certainly. I wanted to make a couple of comments. You've got variance number two at the bottom. We've determined that you don't need to request that variance because it is not there so you can remove that. So we are ok on that? We sat down and talked about this the other day. I'm aware of it. I changed my mind after thinking about it. So we only have one variance right? • • • Technical Plat Review December 14 2001 Page 27 Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Let me Just bring something up. Kim, I want you to listen to this. On the flyover right of way between Olive Garden and the bypass I think we need to make sure that the property owner understands that they need to maintain that. Ijust want to throw that out. Who is going to maintain that and mow it? It belongs to the city. Normally the property owners maintain the right of way. It is something to discuss. I am very concerned you are going to end up with the Olive Garden out there and you're going to have grass in July that is 5' tall. Milholland: I can't guarantee that they will do it but if I had that much of an investment, if I was a local manager I think I would get it mowed down. Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Hesse: I Just wanted to bring that issue up. I don't know how it is going to work, Just looking at the plat I am very concerned about the appearance of having a nice brand new restaurant. I think you are right about the mowing process. I don't want it to go on record saying that I'm agreeing to it for them because I can't. Ok. I would like to ask Kim a question. Can they go right here on this right of way where there are shrubs and stuff'? I would have to look at it and see what is out there. I know that if there is anything on the Highway Department's side they could but it depends on if it is on our side. How many shrubs are there? Milholland: I don't know. I think that it was Jim or somebody that asked that question. Southwestem Bell is not here. Jefcoat: They are going to want conduits. Milholland: They are going to want to boar under the trees. Conklin: Is there anything else? Technical Plat Review • December ]q, 2001 Page 28 • • Milholland: I'm finished. Newman: I may have mislead you some too. We would not directional boar the whole thing. The only thing we would directional boar is under the trees. The only reason that we do that is because everyone else is in there and so we do that and to save the trees, to avoid damaging the trees. It is not something that we just go out there and do for the heck of it. Milholland: The problem with getting all this stuff in with the trees and so forth. Do you have any problems going under the parking lot once we get those easements. We're going to put your conduits in anyway, why don't we just put them under the pavement. Conklin: Sargent: Milholland: Sargent: Milholland: Franklin: Milholland: Franklin: Milholland: Edwards- Milholland: Edwards: Mel, I bit my tongue when we were talking about that. I wouldn't suggest going under the parking lot. We don't prefer that. I don't prefer it either, it is not good practice. If we have a problem though, I'm dust asking. I believe I would recommend the conduits. Is there a streetlight going in there at Van Asche and Mall? A traffic signal? There is money in escrow for that so it could be possibly. All that we're going to do out there right now Mel is going to be at Steele and Joyce. Ok It just depends with this Gregg Street going on and Shiloh and Futrall. I think Shiloh and Futrall are more important than Joyce because that is where everyone is coming out at. That is where some of that escrow money will be. I understand. When are revisions due? The 26`h. I believe I saw a date that was an error. Yes, it said December 22nd when it should've been the 26`h. Technical Plat Review • December 19, 2001 Page 29 Milholland: Revisions on the 26th and 38 copies? Edwards: We will need 37. Petrie: Very few of my comments require any revisions. Milholland: Is that at subdivision? Petrie: Whenever you want a permit. Milholland: We'll be working on it. Edwards: 1 will get you the easements as part of that lot split. Milholland: Were there comments about the sidewalks? Shreve: The sidewalks exist out there. • Conklin: Thank you Mel, Merry Christmas. • Technical Plat Review • December 19, 2001 Page 30 • • LSD 02-2.00: Large Scale Development (Superior Federal Bank, pp 557) was submitted by Bill McClard of Lindsey & Associates on behalf of Bennie Westphal and Matthew Cobb for property located at the southwest corner of Finger Road and Hwy 62 with a 2,891 sq.ft. building proposed. Edwards: The final item is a LSD 02-2.00 submitted by Bill McClard of Lindsey & Associates on behalf of Bennie Westphal and Matthew Cobb for property located at the southwest corner of Finger Road and Hwy 62 with a 2,891 sq.ft. building proposed. Starting with sidewalks, Hwy. 62 is a principal arterial which requires a 6' sidewalk and a minimum 10' greenspace. Please connect the sidewalk with the existing asphalt sidewalk at the west end of the project. Carter: I have discussed with the Sidewalks people, David, and he tells me that the Highway Department does not call that a sidewalk, that asphalt thing. They put that in there for grass control. We can connect to that if you want, we don't care Shreve: Right behind the curb there is an asphalt strip. Carter: In the plan they call it an existing 5' asphalt sidewalk and I talked to David about that because we were working on this. He said that the Highway Department told him that that is not a sidewalk, they put 5' of asphalt behind the curb to control weeds and grass. Shreve: That's what they put it there. People use it for a walk way and that was my thought. Your new sidewalk is going to be setting way back but for people to walk on they could continue. Carter: Ok, so you need a 6' sidewalk and not 5' and it needs to be 10' from. Shreve: That is the minimum. If you want to set it back with the new driveway then that would be even better I think we'll have more greenspace if you set it back to the minimum driveway dedication. Carter: Ok. I have the 5' setback to the new right of way. That will give you enough greenspace from there to the curb. Shreve: 10' is the minimum. More is desirable if you have room for it. Carter: Ok. Edwards: Finger Road requires a six foot sidewalk and a minimum of six feet of green space. Two Technical Plat Review December 14 2001 Page 31 access ramps are required at each street corner, however at this location existing field conditions and/or utilities may affect final design. Shreve: That is an Eric comment. With coming out on Highway 62 creating that little island, the traffic signal pole on that island and crosswalk activator buttons on that pole. To me, the logical solution would be to have a ramp going towards that island. There is a crosswalk light there. Carter: The way I show it going to the curb is ok or not ok? Shreve: I wasn't exactly clear If you show it going onto the curb that is fine Carter: Ok, maybe I need to drop into it a little bit. Shreve: I will need to look at it in the final location. My personal opinion is that they are going to want to go to that island, walk through on it. Carter: The sidewalk on Finger Road is against the right of way? Shreve: We're trying to get a 6' sidewalk and a 6' greenspace along Finger Road, I don't know how that fits on your existing right of way. Carter: If we sit it against the existing right of way and there is no longer 6' between the sidewalk and the curb. Shreve: We require a 6' greenspace and a 6' sidewalk if the sidewalk falls on the side of the property. You could go the easement to try to get it set back from the curb. Carter: Ok, so you need the six and six regardless of where it falls? Ok. Shreve: We have some areas where the sidewalk is actually a foot or two off the right of way. Carter: Ok, we can do that. Shreve: I want to thank you for drawing it through the driveway correctly. You are one of the few engineers that are doing it right. Carter: I spent about an hour and a half with Chuck one day out talking about this and we're trying to come up here a little. Technical Plat Review • December 19, 2001 Page 32 • • Edwards: Driveway approaches shall be constructed of Portland Cement Concrete. There are no comments from Parks. From our Traffic Superintendent, street lights are required every 300' at intersections and at end of streets. Are you showing your street light? Carter: I didn't show any street light. Edwards: He will need to see where they are and then if you need that then you can measure 300'. Carter: Basically what you are saying is that there would need to be a street light here, here and here if they don't have anything now. Edwards: Right. Something in there to break it up. Carter: Ok, if they don't have lights on this. Edwards: We have to have specific street lights but if there is something existing in here then he will work with you. Carter: I don't think there are any street lights in there. There may be one or two intersections, I don't remember but we will see. Edwards: From our Landscape Administrator, notes containing irrigation, size of plants to be installed and typical species for trees are required at this preliminary stage of approval. Trees are to be planted at 30' intervals along Hwy 62 and Finger Road Planting details and notes are required prior to issuance of the building permit. The trees for the commercial design standards are separate from your interior parking lot trees and your mitigation trees. Hesse: Glenn, you gave me that later. When Planning Commission looks at this they will want to know the general size and types and the irrigation spickets. That needs to be on there. Carter: Ok we'll probably put in most likely an irrigation system. That is typical of these bank projects. I've seen some of the others and I've seen some of their irrigation plans. We'll put those trees on this plan that I showed you. The trees that show up along the front, along the screen, those are separate from landscaping and separate from any mitigation. Edwards: Right. Carter: You need species on both? Ok, I understand. Technical Plat Review • December 19, 2001 Page 33 • Edwards: From Planning, we need elevations of the other two sides ofthe building. I need 12 copies for the Commissioners if you want to put them on 81/4 x 11, I know they are photos so it should be simple. Carter: Ok, were the photos ok of the existing building? Edwards: Yes, if that is exactly how it is going to be. I don't want them to mislead us. Carter: They are telling me that that is exactly what they are going to build. Edwards: Are there any adjacent driveways on Finger? Carter: There is one over here that was built when they first erected Wal-Mart. It is in poor condition but there is one there. Conklin: I would like to discuss the curb cuts. Planning Commission and staff typically try to be sure that curb cuts are brought back. We just looked at the lot split on that, we really didn't discuss access. There is a curb cut that is built in here for this. I guess I'm a little concerned with having two curb cuts that provide a left and right out within that. I would like to try to get some more landscaping up front. Another thing we've talked about Glenn is possibly clipping the project. There may be some additional. I know I'm throwing a lot ofstuffout here. I also looked at whether you should have a one way in on the north side and then the out on the south side and do a circular drive through there. Carter I don't know. We could certainly look at it and see. It seems to me like it could be. They want this parking in front ofthe building and that is the customer's parking. This is employee parking on this side. I don't know. We will certainly look at it and see what we can do. 1 guess we are kind of limited with time is one ofthe big factors. We've got to have revisions back by the 26th. Edwards. You might postpone for the next meeting. I know with Christmas it is going to be kind of hard. Carter: Well I wouldn't mind that but I'm not sure that the client would like that. Let me talk to them and see what we can do. Conklin: How did you determine the number on the entrances? Carter: That is when we came up and talked to Sara about this and we were trying to come up Technical Plat Review December 1S 2001 Page 34 with a width and I understood that that was a city entrance now that we could do that with a left turn lane and without an island and still be 39' wide. Conklin: They are meeting the width. I just look at this and this reminds me of College Avenue before we had street standards, where you just had all the continuance curb cuts along the front. That is what I see. If I see that then I think all of the Commissioners are going to see that and either make one central curb cut in the middle for people coming in or I was thinking that you could possibly split that up and do an enter on the north side and exit on the south side. You end up with very little landscaping right in front especially with your curb. Carter: We could've brought this line straight on out and moved this entrance down a little bit but it has got to have a curb radius there. Edwards: That looks extremely close to this curb cut, you have a 40' x 24' here. Conklin: I don't know where they are at with this property owner but if they want to do some type of shared, just like Olive Garden that we just looked at, this is going to be one small piece of an overall development. Either it is going to be a private drive coming through here, I'm not sure what it is going to be but doing something like that when they come in and utilize the curb cut that winds up with Wal-Mart. Carter: Well, we've had quite a bit of discussion about it. We are concerned that we have two large curb cuts right near intersections in an area that is going to possibly be developed and create more curb cuts. The representative from Superior went to his board and discussed some of those issues. They are pretty adamant about having two entrances. I'm having a hard time with them about that. I know it would be better if we just had one or maybe narrowed these down to one ways. Conklin: That is what I'm saying as a compromise here. Do a one way in and then a left and right out and then beef up the landscape in between those. You could do a 15' one way in and then do the 24' left and right out. Carter: Let me ask this, if they went with a one way in could that be a little wider than a 15'? One of their real concerns here, and I don't know if you've noticed it. We didn't provide a parking stall detail. We would like to make these parking stalls a foot wider than what is normally the requirement. We would like to go 91/2 x 19 ,they wanted to make it just a little bit wider. Instead of the 24' drive they wanted a 27' drive. They want to make things a little bit more comfortable. On the south side that is one way traffic and I recommended Technical Plat Review • December 111 2001 Page 35 • • a 15' drive and he said he wanted 17' and that is costing them a lot of dollars to do that. They are trying to make this extremely comfortable and they don't want it tight for their customers at all. Instead ofal5' would it be possible to go to something a little bit wider there if they agree to go with narrow entrances? Conklin: Kim, I have a question. With regard to tree preservation, we're doing a lot split and we're saying that we can't save any trees is that correct because of the design? Now we're expanding the parking lot, the amount of pavement. I want to be careful of what we do when we can't save trees and we're doing a brand new lot split. Look at Golden Corral, they went out and purchased more property. Hesse: I haven't gone through their plans yet. I do see that there are some trees that we need to show. There are three trees here that are really nice. I know they are right in your drive. Carter: I was wondering about those. I can't remember if they are in the right of way or not. Hesse: My question is do they have to dedicate any additional right of way or is that already there? Conklin: It's existing. Carter: There are about four cedars there. I didn't know if those trees were going to be preserved. Conklin: Did you do the preapplication meeting with Kim? Hesse: Yes, we went out there. At that time we were actually further back on the site. Carter: We were discussing lot limits and everything. We thought that the lot was going to be back here but there is this dense cedar growth here. What we did is we did about eleven or twelve designs and redesigns. We have rotated and flipped this thing about fifteen times trying to get out of those trees. This is, we went from 1.67 acres down to 1.38 acres trying to get this away from these trees as much as possible. We designed the detention pond so we would know exactly how much room we would need for that. We have done everything we can to try to minimize that side area to get away from the trees. Conklin: You don't have to get away from them. We can preserve them. It is not a liability. Carter: Well, if you buy property by the square foot. • • • Technical Plat Review December 19, 2001 Page 36 Conklin: Carter: Conklin: Hesse: Carter: Hesse: Carter: Hesse: Edwards: Hesse: Carter: Hesse: Edwards: Hesse: Carter: I understand Glenn, I'm just saying right now we've done everything in our power to get away from the trees. Not to get away from them but to save them. We can't go buy $100,000 worth of trees just to preserve them. Kim is the Landscape Administrator and I'll be quiet. Well, there is that one tree that you might preserve and that may be valuable. I know that there are some issues with the design. You might be able to save a couple along this edge here. I will have to wait and see where utilities are going to go and then I'll know a little more. This was 15' here, we had parking back here. We moved the parking from there to this place. We'll have to look at that. I thought that maybe this space back here. Well, we have to stay out of the right of way with our pond. If we are going to do any mitigation at all we need that space. I'll just have to look at it. They will have to have money in lieu? Well, they have the option of putting money either in the tree fund or planting the trees. We wouldn't want that many trees up front anyway. I discussed that with the owner yesterday. We don't know what the cost is. About $200. How much does a tree cost? About $200. We don't want to do all of them. We would like to do some mitigation. We don't want to cram all these trees up there just to keep from paying for trees. Technical Plat Review • December 1 q, 2001 Page 37 • • Hesse: Also, we have commercial design trees. If there is not enough room between these to acquire trees and tree mitigation we' II have to go with some other option. There needs to be some review of what can go in the pond area Carter: Those are spaced according to the tree preservation ordinance with the required species. Hesse: You could line up the species that are over there. Carter: Do they have to be separated by a certain distance? Hesse: Yes. Maybe you could plant some shrubs in here. I can't tell you until we know where the easements are going. Carter: We will try to work with you on the entrance and try to get the developer to consider making it a one way in and one way out. We'll have people pulling in here and parking and then ifthey could go out that way that would be fine. If they pull in here to the bank then they have to go around the bank to get out. That would reduce the size of this. I would assume that you would want to pull it back this way and maintain this radius here on the south side. Edwards: To pull it north? Carter: Pull this back this way so you could maintain the radius here and it also increases the distance between them and we could pull this out and narrow this to whatever. Is 15' your standard? Edwards. Yes. Carter Is that face to face? Carter: They may request a variance of 2' or something like that. Edwards. Ok. Carter: They would have to request a variance for that? Edwards: Yes. I was just looking at this. Look at the circulation on this, someone coming in this way and this is the open lane, they are going to cut someone off coming in this way. This is not going to be a good deal and out the same way. 1 think ifthey were to get this built Technical Plat Review December 1% 2001 Page 38 they wouldn't like it. Hesse: Everything is head in towards the building? Carter: That is one of the things that they would like This is the front and they want customers to come in like that. They want people, specifically people from Wal-Mart, to see these ATMs. You come out of there they are and say "I can swoop in there." Hesse: There is a reason for everything. Edwards: Just remember that you can do a setback reduction to 25' along Finger. That might help you out some too. Again, you need a floodplain reference. It looks like you're asking for quite a bit of additional parking, you would have eighteen by right. Any additional parking would be a conditional use and you need to get a conditional use application and that needs to be turned in by Friday. We do need your parking stall dimensions, the number. Like I was saying, the striping between the spaces, l don't see that we'll have a problem with that. I have done it before if you want to do that. On the north side, what is the radius of the first drive? I don see the proposed signage unless they are not having any on that side of the building I need an elevation of that too. We would prefer a monument sign. Carter: That is a 6' monument? Edward: Yes, 6' tall and 75 sq.ft. Are there any overhead utilities on this site? Carter: No. Newman: There is a pole on the north side of Hwy. 62 but it is not being used. Edwards: It will probably come out? Newman: I assume they will want it to come out. Carter: Unless you guys want to service from that or something. Newman: I would prefer to come in; well I'll get to that when she is done. Edwards: All utility equipment will need to be screened. I saw on the elevation that it is going to be screened with wood, it looks a lot nicer to be architecturally incorporated with a brick Technical Plat Review • December 10i, 2001 Page 39 • • wall. Cross access, we know property to the west is going to develop and we know property to the south is going to develop. We would like you to stub that out. Carter: Ok, we need to put what? Edwards: Cross access, stubouts to the south and to the west. Carter: Ok. So some kind of drive? Edwards: Yes. Carter: If this is one way then.. . Edwards: You might want to put it down here somewhere because who knows what will go here. We want people to be able to get through there without having to get back on Sixth Street. Carter: Ok, so there and somewhere on the south. The south would probably have to be here to get to the bank. Edwards: Those are the only comments that I have. Revisions will be due Wednesday, December 26th at 10:00 a.m. The conditional use application will be due on Friday. Have you met Trevor, our newest addition to the Engineering Division? This is Trevor Bowman. Trevor Bowman - Staff Engineer Bowman: You've got my comments. I think the big thing is the detention pond. It looks to be about half the size of what it is draining. It could present an issue. On top of that, you're showing a 36" line but some of our drawings show 30". We want to get that cleared. Any cut needs to be 10' from the waterline. That is what Kim was referencing a while ago as far as what is landscaped and how that is going to look. Those are my comments. Carter: We designed the pond and came up with a volume and then we drew a pond that had the same volume so I will check that. Bowman: I was looking at the drainage report and it said 4' of water. Carter: We went off of surface area and the depth but shape kind of changes that. We are going to grade onsite, we're just going to build our site up and that will bewhere water goes down. Technical Plat Review • December 19, 2001 Page 40 • • Bowman: Ok, other than that I think it is all pretty much explanatory in the written comments. Edwards: Utilities? Glen Newman - SWEPCO Newman: Glenn, we'll probably serve this from Finger Road if we have that circuit on the east side of Finger Road. I will need a 15' utility easement on the edge of the property, wherever we decide to put a transformer in onto the property. I guess it will be overhead service right? Carter: There is a 30' easement, 15' on either side of the waterline is it not shown on here now? Newman: On the south property line? Carter: Oh, you need something to the south? Newman: Yes, to the building. Carter: Ok, you can't service it from that easement and run a service line to the building? Newman: Lets talk about how much load and what kind of load you're going to need to have. What I need are three things in order to size that transformer. I will need an easement to cover those conduits 15' wide to cover the conduits going to the property to the pad in that transformer location. Then I would suggest to you that we put the pad mount transformer in this 30' easement that runs up the east side. It doesn't go very far but if you could put the transformer right there and then run the actual service line that would be customer installed and provided. Carter: Ok. If they don't want to do that then we need to provide an easement behind the building? Newman: Yes, with the conduit from the pole to the building. Petrie: If you set the transformer in that 30' easement we'll need that set off 10' from this water transmission line. Carter: Ok, we can set it 10' west of that waterline and then they will just have to go over the waterline. Technical Plat Review • December 13 2001 Page 41 • • Newman: Glenn, you're going to go underground across Finger Road? Carter: No, we're going across Finger overhead. Newman: And then dip, ok. Carter: Ok. Carter: We show a power pole right there at the entrance of Wal-Mart, is that your pole? Then we would just come across with another pole and then across the corner and we could set a pad there. Newman: Of course it will be the standard customer provides and installs a concrete pad with conduits from our pole to the transformer. Edwards: The transformer will have to be screened. Johnny Boles - Arkansas Western Gas Boles: Can you show the easements that were requested on the lot split? Also, I need to have the contractor get with me at a later date for load on the building. We would probably also like to service off of Finger Road. That is all I have. Larry Gibson - Cox Communications Gibson: We'II try to service this the same way electric does, coming across with the overhead. If you could furnish us with a 2" conduit from that point to the building, whichever one, I don't know if it is going to be with the electric. They will definitely want one. Superior Federal is one of our high speed data customers. Lets make sure we get one out there because they will definitely want one. Carter: A 2" conduit? Gibson: Yes Sir. Carter: So you are going to come across there.. . Gibson: We're going to come across there from that pole location to about 3' ofthe electric meter. Technical Plat Review • December RI, 2001 Page 42 • • Carter: So you will come up here, we'll probably have the electric meter here. Gibson: That will be fine. Carter: Do you need the same type of a conduit? Gibson: A 2" conduit. The one from the transformer will be customer owned and installed because it is secondary to the building. They can put the meter to the building or they can put a self supporting meter, I don't know near the transformer whichever way they want to do it. If they set the meter by the transformer they can go to the building, there has got to be a dip there somewhere where they come up. That is all that I have. Meeting adjourned. 11.15 a.m.