Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-11-27 - MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE A regular meeting of the City of Fayetteville Subdivision Committee was held on Wednesday, November 27, 2002 at 8:30 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS CONSIDERED ACTION TAKEN LSP 02-58.00: Lot Split (Lindsey, pp 519) Approved Page 3 LSP 02-49.00: Lot Split (Habitat, Jerry Street, pp 566) Approved Page 5 LSP 02-50.00 (1015): Lot Split (Fayetteville Freewill Baptist Church, pp 399) Approved Page 7 LSP 02-56.00: Lot Split (Lovell, pp 396) Approved Page 9 LSP 02-57.00: Lot Split (Keith, pp 398) Approved Page 11 LSP 02-59.00: Lot Split (American College, pp 599) Approved Page 15 LSD 02-31.00: Large Scale Development (City of Fayetteville, Solid Waste, pp 604) Page 16 Approved LSD 02-29.00 (1040): Large Scale Development Pulled by Staff prior to meeting (Sequoyah Commons, pp 485) Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 2 MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERSABSENT Sharon Hoover Lee Ward Don Bunch STAFF PRESENT STAFF ABSENT Kim Hesse Keith Shreve Sara Edwards Matt Casey Kim Rogers Renee Thomas Fire Department Perry Franklin Solid Waste Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 3 LSP 02-58.00: Lot Split (Lindsey, pp 519) was submitted by Jerry Kelso of Crafton, Tull, & Associates on behalf of Lindsey Management for property located at the northeast corner of Futrall Drive and Old Farmington Road. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and RMF -18, Medium Density Multi -Family Residential and contains approximately 26.1 acres. The request is split into two tracts of 19.39 acres and 6.71 acres. Ward: Welcome to the Subdivision Committee meeting of the Planning Commission. Today is Wednesday, November 27, 2002. We have seven items on the agenda. The last item, Large Scale Development for Sequoyah Commons has been pulled for today so if you are here for that particular item, that item has been pulled. We will start off with the first Lot Split, which is item number one. LSP 02-58.00 submitted by Jerry Kelso of Crafton, Tull & Associates on behalf of Lindsey Management for property located at the northeast corner of Futrall and Old Farmington Road. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and RMF -18, Medium Density, Multi -Family Residential and contains approximately 26.1 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 19.39 acres and 6.71 acres. Sara? Edwards: Recently we rezoned the 19.39 acres to RMF -18. The request now is to split that RMF -18 from the C-2 property. Right now the property is vacant. The property to the north is zoned R-1 and is vacant. To the south is C-2, to the west is R-2, the Markham Hill Apartments. A-1, which is West Campus and to the east is C-2 which is immediately across the highway, University Square. We have right of way existing. We are recommending approval subject to the conditions below and that is we discovered that there is a 30' private access easement along the eastern boundary of this property, we want that to be shown and it shall also cover the building setback. In the event that the easement is released it may be removed from the plat when proof of that release is furnished to us. Ward: Is that it? Edwards: The others are standard. I would like to point out that parks fees were deferred until the time of development. We do have a Large Scale Development for apartments in process right now. Ward: Ok, thanks. Matt with Engineering? Casey: No comment. Ward: Chuck? Rutherford: Sidewalks are not required for lot splits. Ward: Ok. At this time I will open it up to the public. Is there any public comment on this particular lot split? Seeing none, I will close it to the public and I will bring it Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 4 back to the Committee. Al, do you have any comments on this particular lot split? Harris: First of all, my name is Al Harris, I am representing Jerry Kelso since he is not here. On that 30' access easement is it along the entire piece of property? Edwards: We have deeds that I gave to Jerry that I believe went to that drive. Harris: That is all I have. Ward: Will you be moving those overhead electric lines or will they stay there? Harris: At this time we are working on a layout inside the development. I am not sure if Jerry has that finalized yet but I think he is probably trying to work around that right now. If not, they may have to come back and address that with the utility company as far as trying to move it. Edwards: It will be required to go underground with the Large Scale Development. Right now we think it is a line that doesn't even serve anything so even if it does we will require it to go underground with the Large Scale so we are not asking for an easement because it may move the location. Ward: Ok, are there any other thoughts or comments? Bunch: That was my question about the overhead electric since that first lot is coming through, to see what that served. Harris: I think there used to be a house back up there. Ward: Are there any motions? MOTION: Bunch: I move that we approve LSP 02-58.00 at the Subdivision Committee level. Hoover: I will second. Ward: I will concur. Thanks Al. Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 5 LSP 02-49.00: Lot Split (Habitat (Jerry Street), pp 566) was submitted by Patsy Brewer on behalf of Habitat for Humanity for property located at 1075 & 1093 S. Jerry. The property is zoned R -S, Residential Small Lot and contains approximately 0.35 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 0.17 acres and 0.18 acres. Ward: Orton: Ward: Edwards: The second item on the agenda this morning is LSP 02-49.00. It was submitted by Patsy Brewer on behalf of Habitat for Humanity for property located at 1075 and 1093 S. Jerry. The property is zoned RS, Residential Small Lot and contains approximately .35 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of .17 acres and .18 acres. Is the applicant here this morning? I am Marion Orton taking the place of Patsy Brewer. Ok, thanks Marion. Sara, are you handling this one? Yes, we recently rezoned this property to RS in order to allow for this split. The proposal is for a 7,500 sq.ft. tract and a 7,600 sq.ft. tract and the plan is to construct Habitat For Humanity houses. Adjacent development is both duplex and single-family. Water and sewer is available. No right of way is required to be dedicated. We are recommending approval subject to one additional condition and that is at Plat Review a 20' utility easement along Jerry was requested by Ozark Electric and we are requesting that that be added. With Parks Fees, the City Council has waived all fees for Habitat For Humanity so there won't be any Parks Fees assessed on this. Ward: Ok, Chuck, there are no sidewalk fees required for lot splits. Matt? Casey: No comment. Ward: Ok. I will open it up to the public. Is there any public comment on this particular lot split for Habitat? Seeing none, I will close it to the public and I will bring it back to our Committee. It looks like a very simple lot split and of course we all have a lot of fantastic great feelings for Habitat so we would like to get this thing approved and done with. Bunch: Condition one addresses an easement along Jerry Avenue. What about along Helen where we are showing a water line but now showing any easement? Is that already reflected in the survey of the lot lines? We are showing a right of way but we are not showing any easements. Casey: We need an easement a minimum of 10' from that water line. I didn't notice that it was actually so close to the property line. The one that was requested by Ozark will cover our water line along Jerry but we need one along Helen as well. Ward: We can make that a condition of our approval. Does this need to be shown on the plat before it is recorded? Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 6 Edwards: Right. Before we will stamp the survey approved they will need to add those easements. Ward: Are there any other comments or motions? MOTION: Hoover: I make a motion to approve LSP 02-49.00 subject to condition one and adding condition four an easement along Helen Street for the water line. Bunch: Ward: I will second. I will concur, thank you. Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 7 LSP 02-50.00 (1015): Lot Split (Fayetteville Freewill Baptist Church, pp 399) was submitted by Ray Smith on behalf of Fayetteville Freewill Baptist Church for property located at 4596 Wedington Drive. The property is zoned R-1.5, Moderate Density Residential and contains approximately 5.02 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 2.66 acres and 2.36 acres. Ward: Item number three is also a lot split, this is LSP 02-15.00 for Fayetteville Freewill Baptist Church submitted by Ray Smith for property located at 4596 Wedington Drive. The property is zoned R-1.5, Moderate Density Residential and contains approximately 5.02 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 2.66 acres and 2.36 acres. Why don't you gentlemen identify yourselves as the applicants? Smith: My name is Ray Smith, Attorney for the Fayetteville Freewill Baptist Church. Ingalls: My name is Jason Ingalls, I am with Northstar Engineering. Ward: Ok, Sara? Edwards: The request is to split the southern portion, which would be along Wedington, from the northern portion, which fronts on where Franciscan Trail would be. There is about 165' of Franciscan Trail that is not constructed at this time. Water and sewer is along Franciscan Trail. We are requiring that 50' of right of way for Franciscan Trail be dedicated. We are recommending approval subject to some conditions. That is that all lots are required to have minimum frontage on a public street and this lot would not have the frontage because Franciscan Trail is not constructed. Therefore, we are asking for a guarantee in lieu of construction at this time. That would be processed with the city subject to our standard guarantee procedures until such time it is developed. The second condition is that the existing church is on septic and there is a requirement if they are within 300' of sewer that they do have to connect. Ward: Casey: Ward: Casey: Ward: Edwards: Ok, thanks. Matt, is there any engineering? No, Sara stated the connection to the sewer, that is not the building itself, it is the property if it is located within 300' needs to be connected. It should've already been connected at the time of this sewer construction. Ok, so right now this church is still on septic system, what does it cost now days to get a sewer tap, about $1,000? No, it is less than that. I believe it is $475. That is just for the tap. Why don't you explain a little bit about the guarantee, what kind of money are we talking about there and how does that work? It is 165' of street. They will have to submit an estimate for construction cost of Franciscan Trail. It can be submitted with a Letter of Credit, a Bond, or cash in Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 8 escrow. My understanding is that the buyer of this property is working on development and he is getting pretty close so he would have to put up a Letter of Credit anyway at the time of approval so it is basically just requiring it a little bit sooner than we would've anyway. Ward: Ok, thanks. I will open it up to the public, is there any comment from the public? Seeing none, I will close it to the public and bring it back to the Committee. Bunch: Matt, you say the requirement on the sewer is for the property line to be within 300' not the building, what about the gravel driveway? Does that need to be addressed at this time? The parking lot for the church and the driveway are both gravel, do those need to be paved? Casey: Edwards: Bunch: Edwards: I don't have any requirements for that. Our requirements don't kick in at time of lot split, they kick in at time of expansion so since we are not expanding the church then we don't have requirements for that right now. Ok. Do we have Parks Fees? The Parks Depailment is deferring Parks Fees until the time of development with the knowledge that this is going to be developed. Ward: Ok, are there any other comments or motions? MOTION: Hoover: I make a motion to approve LSP 02-50.00. Ward: Do I have a second? Bunch: I will second. Ward: I will concur. Thank you gentlemen. Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 9 LSP 02-56.00: Lot Split (Lovell, pp 396) was Mel Milholland of Milholland Company on behalf of Roy Lovell Jr. & Stephanie Easterling for property located at 6310 W. Wedington Drive. The property is zoned A-1, Agricultural (request for R-1, Low Density Residential pending) and contains approximately 2.80 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 2.15 acres and 0.65 acres. Ward: The fourth item on the agenda this morning is LSP 02-56.00 submitted by Milholland Company on behalf of Roy Lovell, Jr. and Stephanie Easterling for property located at 6310 W. Wedington Drive. The property is zoned A-1, Agricultural, there is a request for R-1, Low Density Residential pending and contains approximately 2.80 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 2.1 acres and .65 acres. Sara? Edwards: This item has been through two readings at City Council. It is going for its third reading at the December 3, 2002 City Council meeting for R-1. Right now there is a single-family home on this site. East and west there are single-family homes, it is still zoned A-1 north is the county, across the street is PIT Development we saw Monday night. Water and sewer are available on Wedington. Right of way dedication according to the Master Street Plan is being abided by at 55' from centerline. We are recommending approval subject to some conditions and those are that the lot split is contingent upon approval of the R-1 zoning designation. There are also Parks Fees on this in the amount of $470. Ward: Ok, thanks. Matt, do you have any concerns with Engineering? Casey: No Sir. Ward: At this time I will open it up to the public. Is there any comment on this particular lot split? I will come back to the applicant and ask you to identify yourself'. Jefcoat: I am Tom Jefcoat with Milholland Company. I think Sara is right, we are on the third reading of the rezoning. The owner has been notified of the Park Fees and it will be developed as an additional single-family. Ward: Ok, are there any other comments? Bunch: One question, it says sewer is available but is the existing house actually connected to sewer? Jefcoat: Yes, there is a manhole in front, I believe that is where it is connected. Bunch: I wanted to make sure it was connected because that house may have predated the sewer being extended into that area. It may already be but we don't have that information in front of us so I would like to add that as a condition. Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 10 Hoover: If there is city sewer within 300' of the property they have to connect? Casey: Yes. That is not the city, that is state. Hoover: Ok. Ward: Ok, are there any other comments or motions? MOTION: Bunch: I move that we approve LSP 02-56.00 at the Subdivision Committee level with the added condition of approval that we determine if the existing house is in fact connected to the sewer line and if it is not that it be connected. Hoover: I will second. Ward: I will concur. Thanks Tom. Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 11 LSP 02-57.00: Lot Split (Keith, pp 398) was submitted by Gerald Keith for property located at 1341 Sunshine Road. The property is in the Planning Area and contains approximately 3.04 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 1.86 acres and 1.19 acres. Ward: The fifth item on the agenda is LSP 02-57.00 submitted by Gerald Keith for property located at 1341 Sunshine Road. The property is in the Planning area and contains approximately 3.04 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 1.86 acres and 1.19 acres. Are you the applicant? Keith: I am, I am Gerald Keith owner of the property. Ward: Ok, thank you Gerald. Sara? Edwards: Right now there is a single-family home on this property. It is in the county. Everything surrounding it is in the county. There is R-1 zoning to the east. Water is available along 51st. Since this is outside of the city limits they will not be allowed to connect to sewer. There is a waiver process for City Council to allow that. They are dedicating 30' from centerline for the right of way. We are recommending approval subject to some conditions. That is that we still have some issues with the legal description on tract "A". I think the directional calls are off. The gas easement on the property dimensions as 80', all of our records show 80' but it says 50' so just change that 5 to an 8. Keith: Ward: Casey: He told me that the city has 80 and the surveyor told me that he went back to the recording data and it shows 50' so he needs to pull that out and change this to whichever way it is. Since this is in the county there are no Parks Fees or anything. There are no sidewalk requirements. Matt, did you have any concerns with engineering? Yes, at Plat Review we requested that they show the location of the existing water service line and they have done that on this resubmittal and it does cross the proposed split tract so a new water meter will need to be set and a service line connected that is contained on tract "A". This existing water meter can still be used to service tract "B" but we need the additional to be relocated parallel to the driveway back to the house. Edwards: Will we have someone go out and verify that that has been done? Before I stamp the lot split can I call your office or Dave Jurgens? Casey: We can check our records because they will have to come get a tap from Mary Alice so we will have a record for that. Edwards: You can get a receipt for that and bring me a receipt. Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 12 Bunch: Matt, you are saying that you want the water line located within that 10' utility easement on the north side of the lot? Casey: No, I prefer it not to be in the utility easement because it is a private service line so it could just run along the driveway and be contained on the property. Bunch: Ok, so it would still be on the north side. Keith: That 75' really doesn't do that guy in the back any good. I realize running up against the city's requirement of 75' minimum frontage on the road but in this case it would've been preferable for him, and I have got an offer on the house from the guy that wants to buy it that we would narrow that down a little bit and back that back line up a little bit away from his house, he would end up with the same square footage but he wouldn't have all of that right of way that is the front yard that goes way out towards the street to maintain. Ward: Do we have any other way to go around that Sara? Edwards: We have a tandem lot provision in the county. It would still go through the Conditional Use process, it would have to go to the Planning Commission but we could look at that. Ward: That is usually 25'? Keith: Even if we took it down to 50' that would be good. I don't know if he wants to go through all of that or not, we will find out. Ward: I am just trying to give you other options where you would have a lot more width on tract "B" and less to maintain for tract "A" back there. Keith: We would have to start the process again and go all the way to the Planning Commission? Edwards: We could do a Property Line Adjustment but you would have to take the Conditional Use all the way to the Planning Commission so it would be about four weeks from the time that you submitted the application. Keith: How much does that cost? Edwards: I think a Conditional Use is $100. Keith: How many meetings? Edwards: Just the Planning Commission. Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 13 Ward: You would be trying to do a Property Line Adjustment since you have gone this way. Hoover: How does it state that we need 75' frontage, does that go back to the Subdivision Regulations? Edwards: Yes, we have Suburban Subdivision Regulations for our Planning Area and it requires 75' of frontage along the street. Casey: If you decide to go that route you need to be sure to place the water meter within the area you are planning to keep. Ward: I will open it up to the public. Is there any public comment on this particular lot split? Seeing none, I will close it to the public and bring it back to our Committee. Are there any other comments? Bunch: On the waiver on the sewer, what is the story on that? Edwards: We do not provide sewer to areas outside of our city limits. Basically, what he would have to do is put a request into City Council which typically have not been approved to request to be able to access our sewer. What they have done in the past is requested an annexation which he can't do in this case because there is property separating him from the city limits. Bunch: Where are the city limits? Does it come down the centerline of 5161 Street? Edwards: Actually it doesn't. It starts on that far side and then there are two or three lots to the south. When we annex we don't annex across streets. They have to be adjacent to the land actually. Bunch: Those new subdivisions that are going in across the street from it are inside the city limits aren't they? Edwards: Yes. Bunch: So doesn't the city limits actually come up to Sunshine or 51s`? Edwards: Yes it does. Bunch: The centerline of the road is actually, because that was one of the considerations that we have on some of these subdivisions that half of the road would be in the county and half would be in the city. My question is do we need to show the city limits on this drawing as well as a note about the sewer because the sewer line actually is in the easements on these properties and I think it would be beneficial to a potential buyer to have that note on there showing why they can't connect to a sewer line that is on their property. Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 14 Keith: From the sanitation standpoint it makes sense to connect with sewer instead of putting another septic tank in that sooner or later the city is going to absorb going out that way anyway. It may be three or four years. Bunch: It may be several years down the line if somebody buys that lot and sees that they have the city sewer on their property that they are not allowed to connect to, there could be a big misunderstanding so to me it would be better to have it documented on the drawing itself. Casey: It seems kind of contradictory to the 300' rule that the state has. I guess that would be a question for our City Attorney's office. Keith: We don't want to get into that, we are just trying to do a lot split. MOTION: Bunch: I move that we approve LSP 02-57.00 at the Subdivision Committee level with the additional condition of approval that the city limits and a notation concerning sewer hook up be added to the drawing. Ward: Hoover: Bunch: Do I have a second? I will second but did you put in there removing the water line to tract "B"? Actually, providing water to tract "B". The one that is existing could be used for tract "B" and then we were going to add a water meter for tract "A". As an additional condition of approval, add a water meter to service the existing house which would be on tract "A". Hoover: I second. Ward: I will concur. Thank you. Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 15 LSP 02-59.00: Lot Split (American College, pp 599) was submitted by Al Harris of Crafton, Tull, & Associates on behalf of American College Consultants for property located at the southeast corner of Beechwood Avenue and 15th Street. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential/C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 22.11 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 12.13 acres and 9.98 acres. Ward: The next item, item number six is also a lot split and it is submitted by Al Harris of Crafton, Tull & Associates on behalf of American College Consultants for property located at the southeast corner of Beechwood Avenue and 15th Street. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential and also C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 22.11 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 12.13 acres and 9.98 acres. Sara? Edwards: What they are basically doing is splitting the R-2 from the C-2. Surrounding zoning to the north and the east is I-1 and to the south and west is R-2. We are recommending approval. We have seen lot splits on this property, one other lot split on this property which all of our conditions were addressed as far as right of way dedication and water and all of that so we don't have any conditions to discuss. Ward: Edwards: Ward: Harris: Ok, that makes it a lot easier. Matt, are there any concerns? I guess when the Large Scale comes up we will worry about sidewalks and all of those great things and landscaping and so on. Is there a Park Fee involved? There is not. What they are doing, they did go to Parks and they are working with the trail system on this property so we are doing land in lieu of money. At this moment I will ask if there is any public comment on this particular lot split. Seeing none, I will bring it back to our Committee. Al, for public record go ahead and say who you are. If you have any comments to make on this particular lot split. I am Al Harris with Crafton, Tull & Associates. I think this has been reviewed in the past when it came in for rezoning and there is a creek that goes along the south and part of the east property. I think that will connect with the trail system. Ward: Ok, are there any other comments or motions? MOTION: Hoover: I will make a motion that we approve LSP 02-59.00. Bunch: I will second. Ward: I will concur. Thanks Al. Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 16 LSD 02-31.00: Large Scale Development (City of Fayetteville, Solid Waste, pp 604) was submitted by Carole Jones of McClelland Engineers on behalf of the City of Fayetteville, Solid Waste Division for property located at 1560 Happy Hollow Road. The property is zoned I-2, General Industrial and contains approximately 13.6 acres with a proposed glass pulverizer facility and a concrete compost pad. Ward: Pugh: Ward: Edwards: Ward: Rutherford: Ward: Item number seven on our agenda is LSD 02-31.00 for the City of Fayetteville Solid Waste Department. It is submitted by Carole Jones of McClelland Engineers on behalf of the City of Fayetteville and it is for property located at 1560 Happy Hollow Road. The property is zoned I-2 and contains approximately 13.6 acres with a proposed glass pulverizer facility and a concrete compost pad. I will go ahead and let you introduce yourself. My name is Brian Pugh, I am with the Solid Waste and Recycling Division. Ok, thanks. Sara? Basically what they are proposing is a 7,500 sq.ft. glass pulverizer and 1.04 acres of a concrete pad that is going to be used for composting. Surrounding zoning is I-1 and A-1 to the west. Tree canopy, there is 15.5% existing and they are going to preserve 15%. That is a requirement. We are recommending approval. There are no conditions to discuss but there are some standard conditions which include a sidewalk condition that Chuck will be able to talk about. Ok, thanks. Chuck? The frontage that they have along Happy Hollow Road which is really shown on the plat, the footage that they have along there, we are going to require a sidewalk out on Happy Hollow or 15th Street, the remainder footage that they get from Happy Hollow Road, in other words to go from one street location to another to have a connection from Armstrong to Happy Hollow Road, the Sidewalk Division is going to kick in the funds to make that a connection A to B or street to street to have a sidewalk along there as far as their requirement. Like I say, they will be required to pay the amount of footage that they have along Happy Hollow Road which equates to 675' of frontage and there is 933' out there on Happy Hollow Road or 156 Street that will connect. Will that be a 6' sidewalk? Rutherford: Yes. Casey: They show the proposed water service line that is coming out onto the existing easement. When they actually construct that they need to keep that off that easement. If it is serving this building here, it needs to parallel. Ward: Ok, thanks. Kim, are there any Landscaping concerns on this development? Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 17 Hesse: We have no requirements for this type of development so there is no proposed landscaping required by ordinance. They have met tree preservation. Ward: You might tell us a little bit about do we have to worry about any kind of special noise inhibitors or things like this on this pulverizer. Is it going to be making all kinds of racket? Pugh: It is not going to be silent, it is going to make some noise. From what I have seen of this type of equipment in operation before and the noise level is not anything that I would be too worried about. This property is located behind our transfer station and next to a facility located by Rolloff Services so I don't think the noise is going to be that big of a concern. Bunch: What about to the north? How close is that to the salvage yard? Pugh: The actual site where the 7,500 sq.ft. pad is going to be is actually within 150' of the property boundary for the Rolloff Services. Bunch: You don't anticipate at any time in the future closer property being residential or anything like that where that type of operation's noise will be a factor? Pugh: No Sir. Ward: Sara, do we need to put some kind of special condition about noise? Edwards: We can. We check all industrial projects for noise and odor both and we will be checking this. Bunch: It will be just standard compliance for the noise ordinance. Ward: The last thing I want is the city being the one making all the noise. We run everybody else out of town for doing that. Bunch: What are we looking at as far as hours of operation? Pugh: We are probably only looking at 100 hours starting off a year. This equipment is rated ten tons an hour and we recycle about 1,000 tons of glass a year so it is going to be minimal operation to begin with when we do get it started, about 100 hours for the first year and as we collect more glass then we will use it more. Bunch: Will it be day shift or night shift? Pugh: It will definitely be on day shift during normal operating hours. Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 18 Ward: Ok, is there any public comment? I will close it to the public and I will bring it back to the Committee. Bunch: I would like to add a condition of approval that operation of the glass pulverizer be restricted to day shift because that would also bit during the higher levels of the noise ordinance. Hopefully we will have more recycling in the future with the expanded program for apaitâť‘ient complexes and that type of thing. We could hopefully be generating considerably more glass in the future hopefully if we get our program up to accommodate that. Hoover: Does the other equipment out there already make noise? Pugh: On this side itself the only thing out there is the compost operation currently. Just to the west of that there is a pad where our recycling trucks drop their recycle material so there is a little bit of noise where they drop their glass and different materials there. For the most part the only equipment on that site is for the composting operation. That is the equipment to turn the rows and stuff, it is not that noisy. Hoover: Is this getting regarded in the floodplain area? Casey: Just the detention pond. Hoover: You can do that in the floodplain? Casey: Yes, just not the floodway. You can see it a little better on mine, I have got it highlighted. All of the grading is contained outside of the floodway. Hoover: Can you have a detention pond in the floodplain? Edwards: Yes, I have checked and there are no regulations against having a detention pond in the floodplain. Hoover: Ok, thank you. Ward: Why do you all need a concrete pad for compost? Pugh: It will make the product a better quality. It will keep the material off the soil that it currently on. Right now we are getting rocks and dirt and clay and stuff like that mixed into our compost. If we raise it up onto a concrete pad, which is really what the state prefers you to do with a composting operation is to have it on a pad. It will make it easier to move equipment around on it, we can build bigger and better compost rows and keep the moisture content narrated better and just produce a better product. Ward: So this pad is going to be about an acre? Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 19 Pugh: Yes Sir. Ward: Are there any other questions, comments, or concerns? Hoover: I am kind of confused. This all might be fine. For some reason I just wasn't prepared for this one. Bunch: Right now it is just a flat area where they have been composting with an elevated sewer. The question I would have is how come they are limiting the size of the composting area to just an acre? Pugh: Well, we are hoping to expand to the other side of the operation where it currently is at right now but we don't plan on doing that for another year. Bunch: With the operation to the south through the gate? Pugh: No, on the composting site itself put another acre of concrete next year to the north of where we are proposing concrete currently. What we are able to do when we get these pads, we will be able to build our rows bigger and so we will be able to contain more of the compost in one area as opposed to where we have it now where it is spread out over the whole site. Bunch: Are there any sort of environmental regulations having a composting facility that close to a stream that feeds into the water supply? Pugh: Not that I am aware of. This site has been approved by the state. It has been in operation for several years now and there is none that I am aware of. Rutherford: This concrete that you are going to add to this in my mind would cut down on nutrient runoff. Pugh: Right. Part of that catch basin in there is going to be a sodded basin so it will be able to hold some of the nutrients and the runoff going down to the river, we are going to make sure that we keep vegetation there to absorb the nutrients as they runoff. Ward: Pugh: Ward: Pugh: Just for the record, what day do you all accept compost now? The composting operation site itself is open on Tuesdays and Thursdays from 8:00 to 4:00 and on the first Saturday of each month. What does it cost to bring leaves and limbs and sticks down there? The cost for bringing that through is by the truck load. Different size trucks have different fees. Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 20 Ward: What are we charging now for compost if somebody wants to get a pickup load? Pugh: Compost is actually done twice a year because we have to actually make the product. In the spring and fall we have our compost sells. They are $8.00 for a small pick up load, $9.00 for a medium truck, and $13.00 for a large truck or trailer. Ward: You have to be a citizen of the city? Pugh: Yes. Just bring a water bill to show proof of residency. Mulch is available year around and it is $2.00 a bucket load for us to load it into your truck. The actual charge for the compost is not a charge for the compost, it is a loading fee. Ward: Ok. Rutherford: You have to set your alarm early to get there for compost because it goes quick. Pugh: We are hoping with this site we can make more compost. Hoover: On the pulverizer, is this a big piece of equipment that sits out on a pad? Pugh: It is about 65' in length and about 7' in width. It is a pretty much straight line system. Basically, the idea is you have a hopper at the very beginning of it that stands 6' or 7' off the ground. You load that hopper with your glass, it can be full bottles, broken bottles, labels, lids and all. That gets dumped straight into that hopper and it has a metering system to it where it will continually feed this conveyor line and make a steady flow of material going into the pulverizer. The pulverizer itself has what they call flexible impactors that spin around at high RPMs and will actually beat the glass against the impactors, the size of the pulverizer, and glass itself. As it comes out of that process the labels and the larger lids that don't get pulverized, it is not fractionable, that will pass on through and what is left of the glass is sizes 3/8" and smaller all the way down to fine grains of sand. Then it goes onto another conveyor and into the trammel and the labels and metal and stuff like that get screened off and we dispose of that and then the rest of it gets graded into two different grades from 3/8" down to an 1/8" and then everything that is finer than that. We are actually going to make two grades of finished aggregate. Hoover: This is all out in the open, there is no building? Pugh: We are proposing a cover but it will be an open cover over the equipment to keep water and things like that out of there. Hoover: When we went to the recycling center, there is that compactor that is inside the building. Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 21 Pugh: Right. Hoover: Why was that inside? Pugh: That equipment needs to be covered for maintenance reasons basically to keep water and stuff like that. Also, we store materials, paper, cardboard, newspaper, junk paper and that stuff can not get wet or else we can't sell it so all of that is kept inside and it makes it where we can bail it at anytime depending on what the weather is doing. Hoover: What I am trying to understand is the noise level on this and if it is in open air I can just imagine what it is going to sound like when they drop all of that glass in there. What do other cities do? Do they have them out in the open or are they in a building? Pugh: This type of recycling is pretty new. There are communities across the country that are going that route basically because they are driven that way because of the glass markets. This basically right now our glass is going to Oklahoma and it is costing us too much money to do that and so we are having to think alternatively and get creative on how we recycle our glass. In doing it this way we will be able to separate our glass in colors rather than just throw it all together. A lot of the places around the country that do this are located on recycling facilities existing so I don't know exactly how close they are to residential areas or whatever. I am not going to say it is going to be quiet because you are breaking glass. Hoover: I think that is what I'm getting at. It is like when I pour my bottles into the recycle bin in the morning. It is pretty loud. I guess I would just have to note, I would hate to be the first one to complain, but if it is noisy I think that the city will have to look at building some kind of structure around it. Bunch: Since this is a Large Scale Development do we need to show the pole barn or whatever it is that is going to be built? Pugh: That is going to be on that 75' x100' pad. Hoover: What do we look at in I-2, do we look at the elevations at all? Edwards: No. Commercial Design Standards strictly apply to Commercial. Bunch: The building has to come through the process though. Edwards: Basically what they are doing is putting a pole barn up so we weren't terribly concerned with that but I am sure we can add that to the plans. Bunch: The only reason I am making that comment is that if we had a private entity coming through with the same project then we would look at it and since this is a Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 22 city project we need to hold the city to the same standards we would a private entity. We need to show the pole barn even though it probably is not a substantial part of the project. It is basically like a hammer mill with flexible hammering. Pugh: Yes. Bunch: Do you use the product for asphalt or building material? Pugh: There is a wide range of different applications that we are hoping to use this material for. The fine material is basically sand and it looks like sand, it feels like sand. The great part about this is when it goes through this process all of the sharp charred pieces of the glass are removed and it comes out in rounder shapes. The larger pieces we can use as backfill for utility beds, for piping, under new sidewalks, under new streets as fill material. We can use it as landscaping. The company that I am working with to get this equipment has talked to me about coloring the glass and you can make a uniform color and use it for landscaping or we are going to try to approach sand blasting markets and use this material for that. There is a whole wide range of markets that we are looking at selling this material to. Bunch: The glass that is used in asphalt, has technology changed or does it still create a real sparkly glassphalt? Pugh: The problem with using the actual glass in the aggregate to make the asphalt is that when you make a glass bottle they use chemicals that will react with cement and they get what they call an alkali-cilica reaction and it actually weakens concrete and it leads to water penetrating it and making it weaker. They don't actually recommend at this point, unless it is finely ground into a 50 mesh putting it actually into the concrete. They recommend using it as a base for your roads and sidewalks and things like that. Bunch: What about asphalt? Pugh: It is still used in asphalt. It does make a sparkly and you can see it at night. At night it actually illuminates the street and makes it where you can see better but in the daytime they are talking about how the sun reflects off of the glass part that is in there so it can blind you. I think they have also shown that the braking distances are actually less with the glass asphalt than they are with regular asphalt. There are some concerns with that. We are trying to use it as a base fill and go that route with it. Bunch: l know that when glass is pulverized it gets slicker. Pugh: That is why they recommend in parking lots. Friction will actually slow down the exposed aggregate affect. Subdivision Committee November 27, 2002 Page 23 Ward: Are there any motions? MOTION: Hoover: I move that we approve LSD 02-31.00. Ward: Is that with all the comments? Hoover: Of course, with all of those many, many comments and I guess a tour of the facility. Bunch: Also that it complies with the noise ordinance and that we show the pole barn on the Large Scale Development. Bunch: I will second. Pugh: What is the noise ordinance as far as decimal level? Bunch: There are different decimal levels and also it depends on if residential adjoins you, it depends. Ward: I will concur. This meeting is adjourned.