Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-06-27 - MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE A regular meeting of the City of Fayetteville Subdivision Committee was held on Thursday, June 27, 2002 at 8:30 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS CONSIDERED ACTION TAKEN PPL 02-4.00: Preliminary Plat (Ash Acres P.U.D. , pp 367) Forwarded Page 2 ADM 02-20.00: Administrative Item (Fournet, pp 444) Approved Page 5 LSD 02-17.00: Large Scale Development (Nelson-Berna Funeral Home, pp 99) Page 7 Forwarded MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERSABSENT Sharon Hoover Don Bunch Lee Ward STAFF PRESENT STAFF ABSENT Kim Hesse Sara Edwards Matt Casey Keith Shreve Kim Rogers Tim Conklin Subdivision Committee June 27, 2002 Page 2 PPL 02-4.00: Preliminary Plat (Ash Acres P.U.D. , pp 367) was submitted by W.B. Rudasill of WBR Engineering on behalf of Rob Stanley for property located south of Ash Street between Gregg Avenue & Woolsey Avenue. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 1.28 acres with 6 lots proposed. Ward: Welcome to the June 27, 2002 meeting of the Subdivision Committee. We have three items on the agenda this morning, one old business and two new businesses. We will start off with the first one, which is the Preliminary Plat for Ash Acres, submitted by Bill Rudasill of WBR Engineering on behalf of Rob Stanley for property located south of Ash Street between Gregg Avenue & Woolsey Avenue. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 1.28 acres with 6 lots proposed. Sara? Edwards: This is a Planned Unit Development, which means that it must be forwarded to the full Planning Commission and the Planning Commission shall specifically grant a density bonus. There are some findings that have to be made as part of that. I am still requesting that the tree preservation area be clearly shown on the plat and will be dedicated as a tree preservation area on the Final Plat. We still do have a conditional use for a tandem lot for Joseph Kilgore down to the south. The private drive will be constructed to public street standards, and everything else is standard. Parks fees in the amount of $2,350 will be due. If you remember, this was sent back to the Subdivision Committee from Planning Commission at the May 28th meeting. Ward: Why don't you refresh our memories, what was the main reason? Edwards: There was some neighborhood concern and the applicant wanted to meet with the neighborhood, which I understand that they have done. Ward: Ok. I will go ahead and go along with the staff. Keith on Sidewalks? Shreve: They are proposing a 4' sidewalk along Ash Street, which meets the requirements. Ward: Ok, is it shown on the plat like it should? Shreve: Yes. Ward: Matt, are you taking care of the engineering part? Do you have any concerns? Casey: The changes made didn't affect the previous engineering so I have no additional comments. Ward: Ok. Kim on landscaping? Hesse: I have no additional comments. Ward: Ok. At this time I will go ahead and open it up to the general public. Is there anyone from the general public that would like to make public comment on this Subdivision Committee June 27, 2002 Page 3 particular item? PUBLIC COMMENT: Shock: My name is Lara Shock and I am representing the Woodland Neighborhood Association. I just want to say that he did meet with our association in a timely manner and addressed all of our concerns. There were some really good questions answered and it was very beneficial. The things that were gone over at that meeting, I just want to make sure that nothing has changed, the tree preservation, I think they increased that. Stanley: We increased the greenspace. Shock: Right. Ward: Thank you for coming this morning. Is there any other public comment? Seeing none, I will close it to the public and bring it back to the Committee and to the applicant? Bill do you have any questions or any concerns? Rudasill: Ward: Rudasill: Basically I am here to answer any questions you may have in regard to that. Mr. Stanley may have some stuff that he wants to present to you. As you know, this goes back to the full Planning Commission. Do you have any concerns about the conditions of approval? The primary reason for the things that they were discussing with us were define more accurately the greenspace that is going to be provided, meet with the adjacent owners to deal with their concerns. We have done both of those. Ward: Ok. Are there any questions or comments from the Committee? Bunch: Yes. Has the house design changed any or the footprint? I know that the last time we saw this it had gone from being single story to two story, there was a new design sprung on us. What is the latest? Stanley: The footprint has not changed. It will fit within that footprint that is on there. It did go from a one car garage, one story house that was about 1,200 sq.ft. to between a 1,400 and 1,500 sq.ft. house each, two story with a two car garage. There will be more parking but it will still fit within those existing footprints. Bunch: How many bedrooms? Stanley: Three bedrooms, two and 'h baths. That is one of the things like Ms. Shock said, we met with the Woodland Association. There was a good crowd there. There were probably 30 people or so there, I thought from my perspective, that it was a very positive meeting. I passed around a picture like this to kind of show them that this is not going to be the exact elevation but it will be very similar to this. I got this off the computer from the floorplan. I explained that the bottom story Subdivision Committee June 27, 2002 Page 4 would all be brick and have fire places, 9' ceilings downstairs, I just told them that they were going to be very nice homes and I sod them and landscape them. I felt like there was a real positive feeling when I left there. Several people told me that they though it was going to be a nice project. That went well and then we did increase the greenspace from the required 35% to 40%. One of the concerns of the Commission was that I am asking for the one additional unit, which I think there was a little confusion from the meeting in that I think some people thought I was wanting to build six units. I explained that it was a total of six units, including the one existing house. I was really only asking to build five units and I think that helped clarify some people's concern. The one unit by itself over there on the east side has greenspace all the way around it. It connects to all of the neighbors so it is providing green buffer to everyone that I am adjoining to. Bunch: On your house that is listed as number one, the existing unit, do you plan on doing any sort of architectural dressing on that to get it to blend with the rest of them or just leave it as is? Stanley: When I bought that house a year or so ago, I did remodel. I spent about $10,000 on that house. I remodeled the outside, remodeled the inside, new carpet, gutted the kitchen, put new central heat and air in it, landscaped it, which it had not had. I really improved it quite a bit. The only thing I am going to do is right now there is no driveway for that house, so you actually pull up into the front yard to park and when I do this, and build a street, I plan on putting a new concrete driveway for them to park on and I will probably landscape the front entry to that section more right by the street in that front yard to give it a pleasant look. I won't actually be changing anymore on the house, I have spent quite a bit on it already. Ward: Ok. Bunch: That is all I have. I will move that we forward PPL 02-4.00 to the full Planning Commission. Ward: Do I have a second? Hoover: I will second. Ward: I will concur. Thank you. I know that it has been kind of a long process but I think we have ended up for everybody's benefit, a very nice project I kind of like these P.U.D. type of developments personally. I think they make a lot of use of land and gives a lot more greenspace. It looks like a great project. Stanley: Thank you very much. Hoover: Thanks for meeting with the neighbors. I really appreciate that. Stanley: It went really well. Hoover: It will be very good in the long run I'm sure. Subdivision Committee June 27, 2002 Page 5 ADM 02-20.00: Administrative Item (Fournet, pp 444) was submitted by David Fournet of Fournet Properties, LLC for property located at 824 Hughes Street. The property is zoned R-3, High Density Residential. The request is to build on a nonconforming lot of record. Ward: Our second item on the agenda this morning is ADM 02-20.00 submitted by David Fournet of Fournet Properties, LLC for property located at 824 Hughes Street. The property is zoned R-3, High Density Residential. The request is to build on a nonconforming lot of record. Is the applicant present? Fournet: Yes. Ward: Sara, please explain what we're looking at here. Edwards: Basically what we have here is a lot 50' x 112 ''A'. What they are requesting to do is to enclose a porch. This does encroach into the setback, but it is an existing encroachment so it won't require the Board of Adjustment approval at this time. However, we do have the section of our code which requires that the expansion or addition be approved by the Subdivision Committee. We are recommending approval subject to some conditions. 1) All required building permits must be secured for this project. 2) This approval shall be valid for this proposal only and shall not extend to anything other than the existing structure and enclosed porch. 3) This approval does not alleviate the non -conformity of the existing structure. A variance by the Board of Adjustment is the only means in which this may be accomplished. Then you have got your code section of where that applies. Ward: Do we have to worry about sidewalks or anything on this kind of project? Engineering problems or landscaping? Mr. Fournet, why don't you give us a little brief what you are going to do there, exactly how it is going to work. We haven't seen it and don't know exactly what you are planning. This is our first look at it. Fournet: Ok, if I leave anything out you will let me know right? This is an alleyway that goes between Hugh Street, Leverett is right here and then North is right over here, there is another lot here. This is graveled alleyway. Most of the front yard is right of way. On the back of the house there is just a little square 700' 1945 house. The edge of the porch, there is a little shed roof off the back of this. It is a concrete floored covered shed roof porch, it is called a patio here. All we are going to do is wall it in basically with windows on this side and move the washer and drier out of the kitchen and put those out here. Ward: Fournet: Ward: How many square feet is that little covered area that you are going to enclose? We are going to enclose about 180 sq.ft. Ok. I assume the only reason we are looking at this is because it is a 50' lot, is that right, instead of a 60' lot? Subdivision Committee June 27, 2002 Page 6 Edwards: Exactly. Ward: Let me first of all ask if there is any public comment on this particular issue. Seeing none, I will close it to the public and bring it back to the Committee. Are there any other comments or questions? Hoover: It is crazy that we have to do this. That is my comment. A 50' lot is not an uncommon lot and we never changed that or added that to our ordinance. Bunch: We have a lot of those in Fayetteville. Ward: We have a lot of 25' lots. Motion: Hoover: I will make a motion to approve ADM 02-20.00. Ward: Do I have a second? Bunch: I will second. Ward: I will concur. Thank you. Subdivision Committee June 27, 2002 Page 7 LSD 02-17.00: Large Scale Development (Nelson-Berna Funeral Home, pp 99) was submitted by Michael Weir & Brian Moore of Engineering Services, Inc. on behalf of Scott Berna of Nelson-Berna Funeral Home for property located at the northeast corner of Crossover (Hwy 265) and Zion Road. The property is zoned A-1, Agricultural containing approximately 3.12 acres with a 8,350 building proposed. Ward: Our next item on the agenda this morning is LSD 02-17.00 for Nelson-Berna Funeral Home submitted by Michael Weir & Brian Moore of Engineering Services, Inc. on behalf of Scott Berna of Nelson-Berna Funeral Home for property located at the northeast corner of Crossover (Hwy 265) and Zion Road. The property is zoned A-1, Agricultural containing approximately 3.12 acres with a 8,350 sq.ft. building proposed. Will the applicants please introduce yourself for the record? Smith: Michael Weir is the applicant. Tim Cooper is the Architect and I am Ray Smith, Attorney. Ward: Ok, thank you. Sara? Edwards: The proposal is for a funeral home. Recently we processed a rezoning, which rezoned the majority of this property from A-1 to R -O, a 540 sq.ft. piece was left A-1 in order to permit a crematorium. There are 59 parking spaces being proposed and if you look at the numbers you don't have 59 numbered off but there are actually 40 in the stacking lanes based on the length. A conditional use is being processed for parking above that allowed by code. Additional right of way is being granted along both Zion and Crossover pursuant to the Master Street Plan. Currently 14.7% of the site exists in tree canopy. They are proposing to preserve 7.4% and are requesting mitigation. Right now, unless the applicant can provide more information, we are recommending that this item be tabled due to this first condition. That is that a crematorium is only allowed in an A-1 zone and when the building got aligned it didn't exactly fit in that piece of A-1 that we left specifically for the crematorium. Somehow we need to get that adjusted. The reason we are requesting that it be tabled is because if we have to move the paving area back it may have an impact on the tree preservation numbers. Secondly, we are requesting that the smoke stack for the crematorium be shown on the building elevations. We do understand that that is something that comes along with a crematorium. Planning Commission determination of requested offsite improvements. Staff has requested that in lieu of the standard street widening to 14' from centerline for the entire length of the property on the north side of Zion, instead that they improve a little bit past this first driveway, they do both sides of the street and do a center turn lane to help with the traffic in that area. Also, I would like Planning Commission to recommend requested signage. Right now they are proposing a 72 sq.ft. monument sign. Our sign ordinance will only permit a maximum four sq.ft. sign in a R -O District. Staff is in favor of this request if it is revised to include a height of six feet as permitted in Commercial districts. The applicant must also seek approval for a variance from the Board of Sign Appeals. Right now the 6' dimension doesn't include the top of the brick Subdivision Committee June 27, 2002 Page 8 Ward: columns so they need to bring that down a little bit. If you are in favor of that, they need to seek approval for a variance from the Board of Sign Appeal. Determination of compliance with Commercial Design Standards. I am just going to go ahead and go through staff and get all of their comments first and then we will try to address all of these items and see if we can't get some kind of consensus. Keith with Sidewalks? Shreve: They are proposing to build a 6' sidewalk along Crossover Road and the full length of the property on the north side of Zion Road which would meet our requirements. Ward: Ok, thanks. Matt with Engineering? Casey: I posed some questions during our Plat Review meeting and I spoke with Michael Weir yesterday about the existing waterline service that is going to be removed in the middle of the property. I asked what that served and his answer was that it serves a house that sets on the adjacent property. With that being abandoned, that house will not have service so an extension of the water main to that property will be required with the new service. Ward: Ok. So put in another waterline and then take this one out sometime during the project. Is that the only other engineering? Casey: Yes Sir. Ward: Ok, Kim with Landscaping? Hesse: The only thing I see per our landscape requirements is that you will need the shrubs shown for the Planning Commission's approval between the right of way and parking area. We are going to have a lot of trees on this project because of the mitigation. They are doing a lot of trees. Just to explain to you, if you go out on site or visit this on tour, this is a very nice tree we are taking out here which I support the removal of, mainly for the reason of the type of tree it is. It is a chestnut. If you've ever seen a chestnut they are spiked balls. You really can't have them in an area by parking or where pedestrians will be. There is no way to really develop this and to stay clear on that. It is just not a good tree for this type of use. I definitely approve of the plans. They have got a lot of mitigation showing. Those are shown on the plan with a circle around them so that you can see the difference between the mitigation trees and landscaping trees. Ward: It meets pretty much all of our landscape requirements? Hesse: Yes, they have supplied all of the information. Ward: Ok. Let me go ahead and open it up to the public. Is there anyone that would like to say something from the public? Give us your name for the record. Subdivision Committee June 27, 2002 Page 9 Thompson: Ward: Thompson: Ward: Thompson: Ward: Edwards: Ward: Edwards: Ward: Bunch: Ward: Hoover: Cooper: My name is Virginia Thompson and I own the property directly behind. Ok, that would be to the east? Yes. I just have some concerns. I do own half of the pond that is on the existing property and I am curious as to what is going to be planned for that. It is a residential area and it is an agricultural area. Is the pond the main area that you want to address? We are going to address concerns that we have on all of these conditions. We will go ahead and do those conditions first and talk about them and then if you still have concern, if we need to talk about it we will just go ahead and bring it back. We won't exactly close it to the public. How does that sound? That sounds great. It looks like the first condition that we need to talk about is this A-1 zoning for a crematorium. Sara, that is kind of unusual. Why couldn't the I-1 work? It doesn't make sense. That is the only zone that allows a crematorium? Where did we come up with this? I don't know, I think that it has some density with it. Usually a smoke stack would be in an I-1 or something like that. That goes back to veterinary crematorium probably. We don't have any other way to give a variance on this? Where is the crematorium on these plans? It is this little rectangle right here. At one time the crematory was larger and it was turned this direction. The building has shifted a little bit with parking and all of that so what happened was that it was here and then when we realized it was a little smaller, we got the specs on it, we were able to turn it and it just fit in the plan better. We were able to pull this back and this doesn't compete with this elevation. We just did a lot of things to the plan. Also, we were at 8,500 sq.ft. and now we are like 7,600 sq.ft., so we were able to reduce the square footage as well. When we did this square, it seemed like the Planning Commission understood that there may be a little bit leniency on coming back and having to do an as built on exactly where it ended up being because the crematory is inside the funeral home, so it is hard to get exactly where it was going to end up. The funeral home can't be in A-1. Subdivision Committee June 27, 2002 Page 10 Ward: That sounds like a bunch of malarkey. Edwards: It is kind of messy. The problem is that we rezone by legal descriptions and so it is exact. We can only permit what is allowed in that zone. What we can do, if we can't change the building or move it to get it in that area, we won't have to rerun the rezoning back to the Planning Commission, but we will have to run that legal back through City Council, which won't be a huge problem. I want to make sure what we intend to do and if we intend to leave the site as is, then that is fine and we can go ahead and forward it to Planning Commission, we will just have the City Council rehear the legal description. Cooper: There is the option of swapping these two into the cooler and we could swap those too. The only problem is there is a garage door right here, a small garage door so this really needs to be up against this wall. Then we start adding square footage again. It is really square footage that the owner doesn't need. He is trying to limit his footprint. Bunch: When we ran this through the first time didn't we kind of request to allow that A- 1 zone to float until the design was finalized and then nail it down or how did it wind up being? Edwards: It had an actual legal description. We had talked to them and told them that it had to be pinned down that way because state law requires it by the legal description and there is just no way to have a floating zone. Bunch: Floated until the building plan is finalized and then nail it down. Edwards: Maybe what we should've done is not have Council approve it until they were sure. I thought from talking to them, that that is where it would be for sure. It is just going to be a little bit of delay. Ward: It looks like to me the best way to handle something like that was just the property all zoned R -O with a variance if that is what we needed to give them for that little space. How big is this? Cooper: We couldn't get a variance for that. Edwards: It is not an option. Cooper: We were understanding it as being kind of floating too. I am not sure who said it but it seems like somebody said we might have to adjust a little bit to accommodate any changes. Bunch: It just seems to make sense since you don't know what you are going to run into when you are doing your foundation drillings, and designs, and whatever. Subdivision Committee June 27, 2002 Page 11 Cooper: Ward: Cooper: Ward: Edwards: Ward: Hoover: Cooper: Hoover: Cooper: Ward: Cooper: Ward: Cooper: Bunch: Cooper: Bunch: Ward: We didn't want to make it too big either, we could've made it larger but then it would've been arbitrary. How big of an area are we talking about here? The crematory is 5'4" by about 16'. We had thought it was about 9' x 20' so it is a lot smaller than it was. Ok. What I will just need is for you guys to get me a legal of what exactly you want, which way and we will just run it back through Council. The next item we need to talk about is putting on the plat the height and diameter of the smoke stack, maybe even the kind of materials it is built out of. It needs to be on the elevation. Is there much stack? Just one stack, I would say probably a 14" to 16" in diameter. It is like a stainless steel that comes up. How tall is it? I would say 4' to 5'. I am just going off the existing one. We don't want to drive by there one of these days and there is one out there that is 85' high. No. That needs to be shown and I think worded on the final plat, maybe a paragraph about size and height. Ok. Speaking of the stack, do you have forced air ventilation with it or anything that could create noises? Some stacks have considerable draft and roar to them. No. There may be a little noise in the actual room but outside there is none. This would need to meet compliance since you have a residential area and it is in an A-1 next to R -O, compliance with the Fayetteville noise ordinance. The next item here is the determination of required offsite improvements. What are your comments on the street improvements, the widening of 14' from centerline? Is this something that your client is acknowledging what the cost would be? Subdivision Committee June 27, 2002 Page 12 Weir: Yes, we have shown it on the plan. They can speak to the client's wishes better than I can. Cooper: He was just concerned that he was improving someone else's property across the street from his. If this improved further, his area won't be improved. He felt a little funny about that, improving somebody else's property on the other side of the road. Ward: Ok, Sara? Edwards: We just really thought that the incoming traffic and outgoing traffic for the funeral home would benefit more by the wider intersection and having room to stack well up to the driveway. The traffic being caused on the other end past the driveway is going to be very minimal. Cooper: The way that their session will work, they will be lined up this direction and then everybody will file in and they will come out this way. They were going to come out and use this drive, we haven't gotten rid of this one so they won't even be accessing this. One of the other issues, he was saying, would they contribute to their portion. Edwards: What we are doing is basically in lieu of making the improvements the entire length of the property, which is a standard condition that we require of everyone, that we would do it this way and have similar costs. If your client would rather improve the entire property at 14' from centerline north, this is just our recommendation. Hoover: Improvements would be curb and gutter all the way down? Edwards: Yes, all the way down. Smith: Cost would be about the same either way. Edwards: Right. Ward: That is an ordinance regulation that is required, it is just kind of which one do you want to go with. You do have your choice, I would think that this is the better one. There is a chance that as all this area is developed out there, there is a chance that there will probably be a stop light there at that corner. You might not always be going directly out on Hwy. 265. You might be going back and hitting Zion Road. There is a stop light there. Bunch: There are quite a few cemeteries to the east of it and I can see very easily where the hearst and the attendant limousines could come out here and then go this way or this way because you have all the people stacked in this area so it makes no Subdivision Committee June 27, 2002 Page 13 difference to them whether they come out here or here. All it is is whether you go east or west under the canopy. Cooper: The canopy is set up just long enough to where that hearst can fit and then right when you come out that door then the casket is loaded. Bunch: So it doesn't matter which direction the hearst is turned should it? It doesn't matter whether it is going east or west. It would be kind of a limiting design. Cooper: I won't argue with these guys. They have been pretty specific since he has been in the business... Bunch: It would be a very limiting design to not allow himself that kind of flexibility. It would be rather ridiculous to pull out onto 265 and come around if the funeral is over at Oakland or Zion or some of those graveyards. Ward: There are a lot of cemeteries over there. If there is ever, with the way things are going, and there are a lot more subdivisions put back to the east and one of these days there is a stop light at Zion then you won't be pulling out onto 265 trying to go south, not in that traffic. You will never get out. Lets address the next item. It has to do with the sign. Where is the sign? Weir: There is a little tiny note that says sign location. Cooper: Right here by the drive on Hwy. 265. Ward: We have a little drawing of what the sign is going to look like. It is going to be a brick monument sign and it is going to be 72 sq.ft. Cooper: We can make the top of columns 6'. Hoover: Sara, have we approved these before in the R -O district? Edwards: I have no recollection of that, not since I've been here but typically the R -O sign restriction was put in place for around this area where you are converting a single- family house into an office where a 4' sign is perfectly appropriate. I think they are going to have a little bit of trouble with a 4' sign working for them here. We are in support of that. Ward: Will there be any other signs on the building? Cooper: No. Ward: Would they be allowed signs on the building Sara? Edwards: Yes they would. Subdivision Committee June 27, 2002 Page 14 Ward: Cooper: Ward: Cooper: Ward: Cooper: Edwards: Ward: Cooper: Hesse: Cooper: Ward: Hoover: Bunch: Cooper: Bunch: You might talk to your client and see, now is the time to do it. Ok. He hasn't mentioned that but I will talk to him. The next thing we need to talk about is Commercial Design Standards. Please give us a description of the materials, the colors, and the design of the building. The brick color is real similar to this color on the elevation. It is going to be a brick building with white trim. Those will be the painted fiberglass columns, asphalt shingles. The colors are going to be very similar to what we're looking at here? They are really close. I will say that they have revised this north elevation. It was basically a blank wall and we were concerned about the articulation. Will there be quite a bit of landscaping along that north line as far as shrubs, trees, and so on? There are some existing trees. They are not exactly on that elevation right but there were some existing trees here. I am not sure. I think those are all gone when you build your foundation. You certainly have the numbers that we could move mitigation trees up there if Planning Commission wanted. That won't be a problem. From what I can tell, it looks like a very nice building. It fits in with the designs of the homes out in that area. A lot of the homes look very similar to that structure. Are there any other comments with the Commercial Design Standards? Are you happy with the north elevation Sharon? I think that is fine. What is this door right here on the north elevation? That is for the crematory. The crematory is a self contained unit and that is for any kind of maintenance that may be done or if they decide to remove it at some point, they can actually even slide that out. It is actually facing onto a landscaped area? Cooper: Yes. That whole side of the building was kind of a functional side. After staff recommended to go back and articulate it, I discussed it with the owner and there Subdivision Committee June 27, 2002 Page 15 was more flexibility than what I had thought there was to actually have some windows and openings and that stuff. Bunch: I would like to move some of the mitigation trees to along that line and still be able to do maintenance and stuff around the doors. Ward: Michael, why don't you address the pond and so on. What is your take on that? Weir: I assume she is talking about the existing pond. Specifically, I don't know that I can address that. We are not touching that pond. Cooper: I jog up this street almost everyday and this is a long distance from there. Ward: How far is the back of the parking lot to the pond? Weir: 240'. This is a detention area and it will be dry most of the time. There will be a little bit of build up on that, two sides here just to detain runoff. Thompson: So you don't have any intention of changing this whatsoever? Is there any fencing or trees going in here to provide any buffer? Hesse: They have got trees all through here. Without going inside the pond they are pretty much everywhere they could be. I think in the long run it will be a pretty shady backdrop. Casey: They will need that fencing at the top of the pond. Bunch: Will the building of the detention pond and the reshaping of the topography of the land affect the recharge for the existing pond? It looks as though a considerable amount of recharge for that pond will be eliminated. Casey: The post development flows should be close to equaling the predevelopment flows that will be discharged from the detention pond into the existing pond. Weir: The point discharge is actually right where the pond is. Our outlet structure will actually discharge toward that pond area. Ward: Ok. Casey: I think there will be actually more area flowing into the pond after this is constructed but the flows will be equal. Ward: Right. On the stacked parking, it seems like I've been to several funerals lately and there hasn't been enough parking. Is this going to be enough? Subdivision Committee June 27, 2002 Page 16 Cooper: Weir: Bunch: Cooper: Bunch: Cooper: Ward: Hoover: Weir: Hoover: Weir: Hoover: Weir. Hoover: Ward: Weir: Hoover: That was one of the issues. We wanted to get the parking minimized as much as we could. The owner felt like this would be enough parking for him just on his experience. We have reduced it considerably. We originally had nine stacks, we had to reduce that to eight to fit our setbacks and land requirements and everything else. We lost five cars in our stack lane but we do have other parking in that area. How does this compare with other funeral homes in the area Nelson-Berna, Moore's, and Beard's over on Happy Hollow? Very similar. I am sure that this will have to go to the full Commission. It would be nice to have those types of numbers to show how utilization is and how large our funerals are in this area and that sort of thing. They operate kind of close. The owners confer with each other. We have spoken with some guys in Fort Smith that have funeral homes and so he has got a wide range of information from other funeral homes. Ok, this has to go to the full Planning Commission. I have one question on this pond and detention pond. Are you going to be able to construct the detention pond without, this dotted line is the existing pond? These two lines actually touch. The dotted line is actually an erosion control fence. The pond is smaller than what is actually here, ok. The contour line is actually the edge of the pond. Can you get the flow for the detention pond without affecting the wall of the pond right there? Are you concerned about the contour line? Yes. This flows into it. It slopes in one direction and falls out the back. You are saying that the pond does not start in here at all? Subdivision Committee June 27, 2002 Page 17 Bunch: Hoover: Bunch: Hoover: Weir: Hoover: Weir: Casey: Hoover: Weir: Ward: Bunch: Hesse: Thompson: Bunch: It does start in there but this is the recharge pad down through here so that will be a gently sloping bank and then embankments to retain the water will be on the low side and be built up. I guess I'm just saying, the water is not coming right up to the edge of this where it then starts to slope down. That is what it looks like to me from this. It could conceivably I guess with a high water event. You are saying it is slower, I was just wondering when you have a slope that quick, if you have water I assume the water is lower. Yes, we are building up from that point. I just wanted to point that out to the engineers. I am assuming that you are not affecting the pond and how it exists and the vegetation around it and all that sort of thing. We shouldn't be. The proposed detention pond is actually smaller than what is shown on here. There was an error in the sizing. It should be less than half the size that is shown. That will also allow a little bit more room. Ok, good. I was just thinking of dirt work right around that area. We have reevaluated our detention pond design, which we had a few problems with our computers and discovered a little glitch in our program that we were using to design this pond and we have discovered that this pond is really oversized and we are going to be able to make it smaller. It will be downhill as we can get it but I think the difference is this is a 5,500 sq.ft. bottom and we can bring it down to as much as 1,300 sq.ft. It will be considerable. The next time you see this there will be a little regarding in this area and we'll be able to show you that. Are there any other concerns? Just a question. You are saying S. Maple, is that Sugar Maple or Silver Maple on trees that you're taking out? There are a couple of places that you are showing trees being removed, I think it is on H and A, tree group A and tree group H. It says S. Maple, are those Sugar or Silver Maples? I think those are Sugar Maples. They are Silver Maples. Aren't Sugar and Silver in different classifications as far as priority? Subdivision Committee June 27, 2002 Page 18 Hesse: A lot of these are Silver Maples, there are some Sugar Maples here. Bunch: Are Sugar and Silver in different priorities and would require different mitigations? Hesse: It has more to do with what they are doing on the site. In this case I think they were both equal when we looked at them, mid-level. A lot of it may have been lowered because of their health. A lot of those along the road have been cropped by the utility companies and a lot of the trees along the north property line are in pretty bad shape. Cooper: There were woodpecker problems. Hesse: There were some structure problems. There is one very large Wild Cherry that a lot of canopy is dead in. Ward: Are there any other comments or motions? Are we going to table this or are we going to forward it? Edwards: I am fine with forwarding it if the design isn't going to change, which it sounds like it isn't. Bunch: What would be our recommendation on making an adjustment to the legal description to accommodate the crematorium zoning? Edwards: I am just going to send a new request up to Council and get that back up on the agenda. Hopefully they can do it in one reading. Bunch: This will have to be subject to their approval. Thompson: I am curious, I know that we are all on septic tanks directly behind this. Is there a major sewer system at this point? Weir: With the shrinking of this pond we had a guy come out and it perks and we think that this is where we are going to put a septic system. We did look into connecting to the sewer. I believe we come in too low to connect to this manhole Hoover: What are the city requirements? I can't believe we have a new development going in and no sewer connections. Casey: I think that if it meets the Washington County Health Department's requirements for septic. Hoover: We are in the City of Fayetteville in a developed area. I would think our goal would be to get everybody on sewer. Subdivision Committee June 27, 2002 Page 19 Edwards: Casey: Edwards: Casey: Edwards: Casey: Thompson: Ward: Thompson: Weir: Hoover: Weir: Bunch: Weir: Bunch: Weir: Bunch: Weir: Bunch: There is a sewer line running in front of their property right? There is a force main. Is that possible for them to connect to? No. Where is the next nearest place? There is a manhole right here but they can not get into that. The elevations do not allow it. The next one is down at that subdivision a couple of properties down, which is a long way. I just worry about the quality of water in that pond if there is a septic tank. Right, it would have to meet all Health Department requirements. My intended use eventually for that land behind my home is for my horses, I want to be able to use the pond. There is a setback requirement for septic tanks and ponds such as these, and we are going to meet that I'm sure. Is it planned to be between the parking and the detention pond? Yes. The leach aid will go to the detention pond and then go directly to the existing pond. I think that the requirement is that it is 100' from the pond. With this reduction in this pond we should be able to accommodate that. The question I have is that 100' from across normal land or does that include the use of the detention pond? What I understand is the detention pond is considered a dry area. It only holds water when there is a heavy storm and then it runs off. That is definitely something we need to have shown on the drawings. Of course, it says potential septic location. At the time we turned this in it was still potential. Why can't we pump into the existing manhole Matt? Subdivision Committee June 27, 2002 Page 20 Casey: It would have to be a private force main. We don't allow private force mains to run under the street. Weir: We looked into that. Casey: It looks like they could potentially get the leach field in there and be 100' from the proposed detention pond. Ward: Is there any other potential way to get to sewer any other direction? Casey: They would have to extend the main from the north to this property. Ward: How far is that? Weir: It is a couple thousand feet. Bunch: What about on the west side of 265, is there anything over there? Casey: That is what this manhole down here on the south connects into and that was the closest point. Motion: Bunch: I will move that we forward LSD 02-17.00 to the full Planning Commission and address the issues that we discussed this morning. Hoover: I will second. Ward: I will concur. Thank you. If the neighbor has anymore questions, can you give her a card where she can contact you? Weir: Submittal deadline is when? Edwards: Next Monday by 10:00 a.m. Bunch: We need the revised legal description in too. Ward: Thank you, we stand adjourned.