Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-01-02 - MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF TECHNICAL PLAT REVIEW A regular meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee was held on Wednesday, January 2, 2002 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS CONSIDERED ACTION TAKEN LSP 02-6.00 Lot Split (Farrell, pp 283 & 322) Page 2 FPL 02-2.00: Final Plat (Crystal Springs phase II, pp 245) Page 4 Forwarded Forwarded LSP02-3.00 & 4.00: Lot Split (Lot 2 CMN Business Park II Phase I, pp 134) Forwarded Page 16 LSD 02-3.00: Large Scale Development (Party City, pp 134) Forwarded Page 19 PPL 02-3.00: Preliminary Plat (Sage Meadows, pp 398) Forwarded Page 29 STAFF PRESENT STAFF ABSENT Keith Shreve Kim Hesse Trevor Bowman Renee Thomas Kim Rogers Dennis Ledbetter Perry Franklin Sara Edwards Ron Petrie Solid Waste UTILITIES PRESENT UTILITIES ABSENT Jim Sargent, SWEPCO Mike Phipps, Ozark Electric Coop. Sue Clouser, Southwestern Bell Johnny Boles, Arkansas Western Gas Glen Newman, SWEPCO Larry Gibson, Cox Communications LSP 02-6.00 Lot Split (Farrell, pp 283 & 322) was submitted by Shawki Al-Madoun, PE of Northstar Engineering Consultants, Inc. on behalf of Earl and Carolyn Farrell. for property located north of Mount Comfort Road and north and west of Holt Middle School. The property is zoned R- Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 2 1. Low Density Residential and contains approximately 183.05 acres. The request is to split into three tracts of 145.88 acres, 36.35 acres and 0.88 acres. Conklin: Good morning, welcome to the Technical Plat Review Committee meeting Wednesday, January 2, 2002. The first item of business is a lot split for Farrell submitted by Shawki Al-Madoun of Northstar Engineering on behalf of Earl and Carolyn Farrell for property located north of Mount Comfort Road and west of Holt Middle School. The property is zoned R-1 and contains 183.05 acres. The request is to split into three tracts of 145.88 acres, 36.35 acres and 0.88 acres. Good morning Mike. Bender: Good morning. Conklin: Let me give you a copy of the staff report. I will go over staff comments first. From the Planning Division, Carolyn Farrell's signature on the application. You need to add plat page 283 and 322. A vicinity map needs to be visible, readable. You needed to dimension the right of way from centerline. On street requirements 90 feet of right of way shall be dedicated for Rupple Road for the entire length of the property. 70' of right of way shall be dedicated for Double Tree Road. I have a question mark on that. Does this adjoin Double Tree somewhere? Bender: Not that I'm aware of. Conklin- Ok, that might be a mistake from staff. Bender: Well, it might up here. I will have to double check that. The one that I'm familiar with is what we're splitting off here for subdivision. It is so big that this north end might. Conklin- You can get with Sara Edwards. She will be back tomorrow and we can look at that. On Mount Comfort Road 45 feet from centerline shall be dedicated. In order for this project to continue through the cycle, 37 copies of the revised information will need to be submitted by 10:00 a.m., Wednesday, January 9th. From our Sidewalk Coordinator, sidewalks will be required per the Master Street Plan when the property develops. We are not asking for any sidewalk construction right now. Trevor, would you like to go over your comments? Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 3 Trevor Bowman - Staff Engineer Bowman: The main thing is that we're going to request a 20' utility easement along Clabber Creek where the sewer line is going to go to the new treatment plant and there is a sketch in there where you can see where we're requesting that. The other stuff is pretty straight forward in the comments there. There are not very many comments. Bender: Of course we will also have a preliminary plat coming through for part of this tract "A" here shortly also, just for your information. Do you have a time frame on that sewer or do you know? Bowman: No, not really. Conklin: Is there anything else? Sargent: That is not in our service area so I have no comments. Conklin: Are there any other staff comments? You will need to get with the utility companies and talk to them about what easements they need to serve this development. We are asking him to show that proposed easement? Bowman: Actually, Ron reviewed this and I'm not sure. 1 -le is out. Bender: We're trying to set up a meeting with Ron because there are several other issues with the actual subdivision. I think we talked the other day. We've got all kinds of things. The main purpose is to get Tract A separate so a different owner can purchase it and develop it. Bowman: Right. This easement isn't on tract A. It is on tract B. Bender: There are several people involved with it so a final answer on that I can't really say. Conklin: Ok, thanks Mike. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 4 FPL 02-2.00: Final Plat (Crystal Springs Phase II, pp 245) was submitted by Mel Milholland of Milholland Company on behalf ofJED Development for property located south of Crystal Drive and east of Holcomb Elementary School. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains 4.67 acres with 15 lots proposed. Conklin: The next item on the agenda is a final plat for Crystal Springs Phase II submitted by Mel Milholland on behalf ofJED Development for property located south of Crystal Drive and east of Holcomb Elementary School. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains 4.67 acres with 15 lots proposed. Good morning Tom. Jefcoat: Good morning. Conklin: Here are some staff comments. I will start with the Planning Division. With regard to there are some lots within the hundred year flood plain. There are some differences in what engineering looked at and what we looked at. Anything within the hundred year flood plain requires a one acre minimum lot size until FEMA approves a letter of map revision. That would need to be done. You will have to combine those lots. We have lots 121 to 123. However, Ron Petrie in Engineering had additional lots. Those lots, 117 through 120 and 124 through 121. Bowman. It looks like he may also have 125, 126 and 127. I'm not sure because this is another one that Ron reviewed. He asked for the minimum finished floor elevations on 125, 126 and 127 and for the combined lots 121 through 124 and 117 through 120. Conklin: If you could show the official flood plain boundary on that and we'll be able to tell which lots are in there. Jefcoat: Ok, well that is the finished flood plain elevation that is shown. Conklin: No, the one that FEMA currently has on file until we get it changed. Jefcoat: Ok, well we had a question about that and I thought we had talked to Sara about that is that once we have that filed with the city we were going to go ahead and show the lots as it would be. Conklin: And then hold the plat? Jefcoat: Well, if we do it this way we will have to refile the plat twice which is ok. They will help. They will be able to sale or develop these lots until we hear from FEMA. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 5 Conklin: I had an idea, I don't know if it is feasible but call it Crystal Springs II, Phase I and Phase II and then just do a final plat on this part. That is an idea that I had on Monday when I reviewed this. That is just something to think about. Jefcoat: Ok. Conklin: Has it been submitted to FEMA? Jefcoat: Yes. Conklin: Yes, ok. When do you expect to hear back from them? Jefcoat: We filed it Friday, December 23rd. The same day we gave it to Sara. Conklin: Ok. Bowman: Ron has a comment here that says that if you want to proceed that the lots should be reconfigured as it was shown on the construction drawings and the existing flood plain map shown on the plat. I don't know what configuration that was because I didn't review it but that is something to consider as well. Jefcoat: Conklin: Yes, it was these three Tots and these three Tots. Lots 21, 22 and 23 and 18, 19 and 20. I'm willing to bring it forward in phases if you or Mr. Milholland would like to do that or you can plat larger lots to be platted in the future. It is up to you, you're probably not going to be selling those lots. Hopefully everything was met by FEMA with regard to the compaction of the soils and everything else that occurred out there to erase those lots from the hundred year floodplain and you don't have any problems with density or compaction or anything through FEMA. Why don't you let me know. Give me a call and let me know on that. Jefcoat: Ok. Conklin: Moving on, add the square footage of each lot to the plat. Change the building setback note on the plat to reflect utility easements. Addresses shall be added and may be obtained from Jim Johnson, 911 Coordinator. All utilities shall be placed underground. In order for the project to continue all requested revisions are due at 10:00 a.m. Wednesday, January 9, 2002. Jefcoat: Ok. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 6 Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Good morning Mel. Good morning Tim. What we're talking about is possibly bringing this forward in phases until we get the FEMA thing done. That is an idea that I had. I'm not sure what you're thinking with regard to how you want to proceed. It is in the process and we would appreciate your looking at it like it is going to be approved and not carry it to final plat approval, or I mean not file it until you get that. Conklin- Ok, if that is what you want to do. I didn't want to hold you up though on selling those lots that are outside. They decided to go this route here. That is fine. I don't have any problem with doing that either. Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Jefcoat: Conklin- Jefcoat: Milholland: Conklin: I talked to the owners and they would rather have it looking like what is going to be approved filed and just not file it until they get their FEMA. Ok, I'm willing to break it into two pieces if you want a Phase I and Phase II. He doesn't want to do that. Ok, I won't charge you another fee either. We're anticipating that the FEMA reply will be back by the time of final plat. Ok. We have a five week window there and we're hoping that that occurs. The holidays may delay that a week or something. Our thoughts were, and I shared this with the owners, that if you went this route and not this way here now that you would have to go back through the process again and wait another five weeks. If it a five or six week delay after the final plat approval and you're still holding a final plat then you haven't lost any time. I was just thinking that if you broke it into two pieces you could do a final plat there and you're free to go sale them between the final plat for that piece. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 7 Milholland: They didn't want to do that. Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Shreve: Jefcoat: Shreve: Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Jefcoat: Conklin: Milholland: It is up to your client. If anything happened with FEMA I didn't want to be on the phone back and forth trying to get those lots, our signatures on the plat. I understand. Ok. From Chuck Rutherford, at this location Pyrite Drive is a residential street which requires a four foot sidewalk and a minimum of five feet of green space along one side of the street and wrapping a cul-de-sac (as shown). New sidewalks, driveway approaches or access ramps constructed in the right of way shall meet Unified Development Ordinance §171.13. Driveway approaches shall be constructed of Portland Cement Concrete. An inspection is required prior to the concrete pour. Add a note to the final plat that all retaining walls shall be set back a minimum of 2 feet from the right of way. All retaining wall construction shall be on the building permit and have the approval of the City Engineer. We weren't anticipating a concrete retaining wall. That is a standard comment. For that land it really doesn't apply. We're just trying to get that on all final plats. Oh, that must be something new. We haven't seen that before. It is fairly new. I guess there are probably some areas in town where retaining walls are being built. The sidewalks are being bonded on this one too. Ok, that is allowed to be guaranteed. 150% of the cost. Ok, if you want to get that estimate to us or Sara or Chuck to get it going. I said a part of the sidewalks. Some of the sidewalk is already constructed. The cul-de-sac. The cul-de-sac piece and then back out to the school. It is constructed. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 8 Conklin: Ok, I checked that yesterday just to make sure. Just one comment I thought might improve the understanding of what this is, you have a 5' offsite easement. I am assuming that is a pedestrian access easement? Milholland: Yes. Do you want me to call it that? Conklin: Yes, just for clarification. Milholland: Unless the utility people need something there. We can call it 5' UE? Conklin- Or a public access easement, I'm not sure what to call it. I have been having a hard time lately with some of these older developments. People are bringing these lots in and I've got these lines and dashed lines and they want to know if it is public or not. Milholland: Why don't we just call it a pedestrian sidewalk? That is really what it is for. Conklin- Ok. Milholland: Then if they want something different then they can tell us. I think we'll put 5' on there, they usually want 20 or 25'. Conklin: You volunteered to do that right? Milholland: 1 think the sidewalk was requested before so we'll put it there. Conklin: Ok. This access easement right here.. . Jefcoat: It is also for a sidewalk. Milholland: And utilities. Conklin: Is that for a sidewalk? Milholland: Yes, that is it. Conklin: Who is building the sidewalk in that area? Milholland: That will be built in Phase III, the next phase over there. There is also a bridge being built. Jefcoat: By the developer. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 9 Conklin: Ok, just so that you're aware of that Keith. Shreve: That is the first I had heard of it. Milholland: You can build it if you want to. Conklin: I just wanted to clarify it Mel. Shreve: We'll let you do it. We appreciate it. Milholland: The spirit of the thing is to go on through but who knows? Conklin: That is great, it is nice to have that pedestrian access. Milholland: I think there will be some response to this again with the next phase coming in on whether they want that access there next to that channel of the silt pond. Jefcoat: There is a silt pond in there but it does connect with the school, that was the purpose. Conklin: Ok, but these are going to be on private property though? Milholland: Yes, the sidewalk will be on private property. Conklin: Ok, they are just easements, they are not public property for city maintenance, ok. Is there a POA? Who does maintain those? Milholland: There is a POA in Phase I. This one hasn't been talked about on whether it will be a POA maintained. The city is the one, and this has been years ago four or five years ago, someone wanted a sidewalk out to the school so that the children wouldn't have to walk down the street to get over to the school because there is a playground out there. They wanted to walk down here and around that and back. Conklin: That will be nice. Kids can walk to school, that is good. Milholland: What we agreed to do at that time was to give it on the outside on private property. That was about the extent that it was talked about. Conklin: Who is maintaining the detention pond? Is that the POA? Is that a part of this? I am just curious if it is a privately maintained detention. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 10 Milholland: I don't think it would be a POA because this drains about a hundred acres backup on some other people's property. That is the main ditch right there. It actually carries water off of other people's property a lot more than it will this one. Conklin: I was just trying to clarify that. The responsibility for maintenance. Milholland: It was constructed during Phase I so Phase I should have a hand in it. I think this is a major ditch down through there. Conklin: That is something that we can talk to Ron about too. Just to make sure he understands exactly the maintenance issues. Trevor, would you like to go over Engineering comments? Bowman: A lot of these things are about the FEMA requirements. You need to put on there the hundred year water surface elevations. I think they need to be shown on the plat. Other than that all of this stuff is really straight forward. Milholland: You said add minimum elevations on lots 20 and 25 and 26? Those weren't in the hundred year to start with. Is it because they are touching that or something or what? Conklin: Is there a drainage easement back there or something? Bowman: Again, this is one that Ron looked at. Conklin: Since you have a drainage easement there and you have to calculate the hundred year flow based on the ultimate build out through there. Ron probably wants to make sure. Milholland: Oh, ok. He is just talking about these ones right here where we're partly in the old flood plain. I thought we got those didn't we? Jefcoat: We had those on there already but we didn't up here. Conklin: Ron will be back and you can meet with Ron Petrie but my guess is, that since you have a drainage easement back there touching it on that lot, they want to make sure that your finished floor elevations are above the hundred year water surface elevation for that drainage ditch. Jefcoat: That is no problem, we can show them. Milholland: I just wondered why because we haven't done that before, unless they were in an area that we had to fill and raise up. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 11 Bowman: Milholland: Bowman: Jefcoat: Milholland: Bowman: Jefcoat: Bowman: Milholland: Bowman- Milholland: Conklin: Bowman: Conklin: Sargent: I suspect that is probably why. Again, Ron is going to be back tomorrow. Normally on a lot where there is no fill you don't change the elevation, you leave that to the owners if it is not in that area. These lots here were in the flood area and that is why we got them on there. We'll go ahead and do it. I can see that his red marks here are along this 15' drainage easement. He has got some numbers here. I'm suspecting that he got those from you guys somewhere along the way and he is just saying show them on the plat. Either that or he is calculating what the minimum should be. Let me write this down because they are different. That will go against our finished building there too. I just don't want to do something and then have to take it out. He did that for the combined lots that he has mentioned. Those may have been the elevations off the old preliminary plat. I also see that he has these marked here and we've got those shown and at one time those were reversed so we'll just have to get with him. That may change. Yes, you can call. He talks about there, like I mentioned a while ago, about reconfiguring it as it was shown on the construction drawing. If you guys are going to just leave it like this and wait until the FEMA stuff comes through then some of this may wash out a little bit. Well to go through the Planning Commission we'll have to do this I think. Ok. Then when the FEMA comes in that is assurance to Tim that they are ok. We'll go ahead and find out whatever it is and do it. It is not that much anyway. Is there anything else Trevor? No. Is this Ozarks? Yes. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 12 Conklin: You'll need to get with all of the utility companies and make sure that they are satisfied with regard to easements. The crossings should be in. The street lights probably haven't been installed yet. Milholland: No. Conklin: What we've been doing on that is we approve a contract and payment for the installation of those street lights, that is how we're guaranteeing those and so far we haven't had any problems getting those in but I want to make sure the developer has paid and there is a contract in place with Ozark Electric for the lights. Kim Rogers - Parks & Recreation Rogers: I'm having trouble getting into our 1994 archives but there may be some grading issues. Due to 15 units single family rate would be $7,050 or .375 acres. I am going to have to look into it. Milholland: He banked quite a bit for the rest of the development. Rogers: I'm going to get into the archives and look into that. I'll give you a call. Also, Trevor, if you could help me and Parks with their floodplain changes and any drainage that may happen on Gary Hanpton Softball Complex, I'll need to be notified of anything like that. Are there floodway changes? Milholland: It is floodplain. Conklin: Rogers: Conklin: Milholland: They are raising the ground elevations above the hundred year floodplain in order to plat lots less than an acre. It shouldn't change anything because there is an established floodway out there. You could fill the entire floodplain up and the water is only going to increase by one foot which is allowed by federal law. What about the wetlands? Mr. Milholland is investigating that. It was done back when Phase I was worked out. The Corp of Engineers came up and I think they appeared before the Planning Commission on this particular subdivision. How much is that fee on the Parks? Rogers: It may be $7,050. The land in lieu would be .375 acres. As I said, I need to research 1994. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 13 Milholland: Rogers: Bowman: Rogers: Milholland: It was banked, I remember it. I'm pretty sure it was banked, I wasn't here but I recall hearing about it. From us you need the issue of the drainage across the softball complex? Yes, I need any changes that are going to affect us. We really need to watch that. Drainage is not changing. It will be where it is right now and where it has been for three or four years. Conklin- One other thing we're doing differently Mel and Tom, is under state law, all street dedications are required to be accepted by the city by ordinance. There has always been some confusion between us, Springdale, Bentonville and Rogers on how we approve final plats. The only thing we will be taking to the City Council is the dedication of streets, an ordinance to dedicate Pyrite Drive. They are not going to be reviewing the final plat. Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Conklin- Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: They are not going to need our description or anything like that then? This will be one of our first ones that we are doing. We'll work with you and Kit Williams to figure it out. What we did is we did a blanket ordinance accepting all the street dedications which we've approved in the past. So in the future, since we don't have many final plats we'll just take these up and meet the state law. I was concerned about meeting the state law. Do we still need the dedication statement on the plan too? Leave it as is for right now. Sometimes it takes a long time to change the way we do things but that state law has been bothering me for years where it says only the City Council can accept street dedications under state law. I just want to try to follow state law. Actually, under your present ordinance, the Subdivision Committee can accept this subdivision in except for the streets right? Yes, that is correct. Will you all draw up the ordinance? Yes. So all we have to do is wait at that point in time. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 14 Conklin: Milholland: Rogers: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Bowman: I'm going to try to put these on consent agenda. I don't want to charge your clients for you to be at the meeting hundreds of dollars an hour to accept a street. I don't want you to have to sit at council for three hours while we talk about accepting your street dedication. Ok. Kim, will you get with me once you find that banking information? I may have a copy of it from way back in Phase I but I would like to get up to date on that. Yes I will. I know that it was in February and September of 1994, I just haven't been able to locate those files. Also, it is not brought up here but when we developed this subdivision, we put in a lift station and a forced main and a water main and there was an agreement in writing. I know that after that you started charging subdivisions so much a lot but prior to that charge the forced main, lift station and water main was designed to accommodate this whole tract of land including that south of the creek. Do you normally charge new subdivisions so much a lot for sewer? We are no longer doing that. That has been discontinued based on our wastewater and sewer improvement project. In essence, the letter protected the client from having to enlarge the lift station or doing anything else to the other forced main because you added on some more subdivisions after that. I will just advise you that if the City Council adopts impact fees to help pay for 42'1 million dollars worth of treatment for 10 million gallons a day that would be for treatment plant capacity. That doesn't have anything to do with capacity load? Right. That would be across the board too. Yes, that would be across the board city wide. I just noticed something too. On the easement around this waterline here, it looks like it needs to be adjusted to show 10'. As this waterline comes up around this cul de sac, he had it kind of red lined there like it may need to be moved over. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 15 Milholland: We probably put a 45' in there. Bowman: Right in here is where he is concerned. Basically that is that comment, 10' from the waterline. Milholland: That is no problem, an over site probably. Conklin: Are there any other staff comments? Ok, thank you very much. Milholland: What is the date of the revisions? Conklin- The date for the revisions will be on Wednesday, January 9th at 10:00 a.m. in the Planning Division. LSP 02-3.00 & 4.00: Lot Split (Lot 2 CMN Business Park II Phase I, pp 134) was submitted by Chris Rogers of CEI Engineering Associates, Inc. on behalf of Hydco, Inc. for property located at the northwest corner of Steele Blvd. and Joyce Blvd. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 5.57 acres. The request is to split into three lots of 3.7703 acres, 0.8131 acres, and 0.9878 acres. Conklin: The next item of business is LSP 02-3.00 and 4.00 for CMN Business Park II, Phase I submitted by Chris Rogers of CEI Engineering on behalf of Hydco, Inc. for property located at the northwest corner of Steele Blvd. and Joyce Blvd. The property is zoned C-2 and contains 5.57 acres. The request is to split into three tracts of 3.77, .81 and .98 acres. Good morning Chris. Rogers, C.: Good morning. Conklin: I will begin by going over Planning Division comments on page 2. Add adjacent zoning, add plat page 134, the right of way shall be dimensioned from centerline. Additional right of way is required for Joyce Blvd. pursuant to the Master Street Plan to include 55' from centerline. All utilities will need to be placed underground. In order to continue the process 37 copies will need to be submitted to our office on Wednesday, January 9th. From Sidewalk Administrator, Chuck Rutherford, sidewalks exist along Joyce Blvd. and Steele Blvd. which meet the requirements. New sidewalk driveway approaches or access ramps constructed in the right of way shall meet our U.D.O. requirements. The sidewalk will need to be continuance through driveways with a maximum 2% crossslope. Portland Cement Concrete shall be used. An inspection will be required prior to concrete pour. If you have any questions there is a phone number on the report. I just have a couple more comments to make. With regard to additional curb cuts for lot 2A and 2B, I would like to discuss showing something on the plat showing access easements for those driveways. You show those in your large scale development but just to make sure Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 16 that it is clear that common access will be provided as a part of this overall development and that no additional curb cuts will be permitted on lots 2A or 2B. I can work with you on some type of wording on that. Rogers, C.: Ok. Conklin: I know that is the plan, it is just not shown on there. I am assuming that there will be some type of POA or something maybe, I'm not sure what you're thinking for maintenance and joint use access. Trevor, you can go over Engineering Division's comments. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 17 Trevor Bowman - Staff Engineer Bowman: There are not very many You need to show the existing water and sewer on the plat and these comments are in there too. You need to extend an 8" sanitary sewer over to lot 2A, and then provide the necessary private drainage easements for the proposed pipes to drain on lot 2C. That is all I have. Jim Sargent - SWEPCO Sargent: We have a piece of switchgear that is back in the southwest corner that is there to serve lot 2. We will require conduits from that switchgear down to lot 2A and lot 2B for service to those Tots. Conklin- Where will those conduits be located? Sargent: In this utility easement along the west property line. Conklin: Your switchgear is up here? Sargent: Yes, it is right there in this corner. Conklin: Ok, what size of conduits? Sargent: Two 4" conduits. Conklin- Ok, and that is coming from this northwest corner of lot 1 or lot 2 all the way down and across the front along Joyce Blvd.? Sargent: What we will do is put a tapping cabinet in the southwest corner of lot 2A and another one in the southwest corner of lot 2B. Conklin- The conduits go to those tapping cabinets? Sargent: That will be the point of service for those two. Conklin: Those tapping cabinets are underground? Sargent: No, they are above ground there. Conklin: What do those look like? Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 18 Sargent: They are about 2' to 3' tall, they are a green box 3' long. There is one in front of McDonald's out there. Conklin: Ok, they can put landscaping around them right? Sargent: Unless you have a better idea of where those need to be for lots 2A and 2B. Hyde: It could be brought across the northerly boundary of the two lots couldn't it instead of bringing it all the way out the boulevard? Sargent: It could, we would need a utility easement along through there to do that. Hyde: You're right. Sargent: That could be done though. Rogers, C.: I was going to say that could restrict us a little. Hyde: We still have a meeting tomorrow? Sargent: Yes. Bowman: The conduits are going to go all the way over to lot 2B? Sargent: Yes. That is all I have got as far as the lot split. Conklin: Ok, are there any other staff comments on this? Ok, we'll move on to the next item. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 19 LSD 02-3.00: Large Scale Development (Party City, pp 134) was submitted by Chris Rogers of CEI Engineering Associates, Inc. on behalf of Hydco, Inc. for property located at the northwest corner of Steele Blvd. and Joyce Blvd. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 5.57 acres with a 33,250 sq.ft. retail space. Conklin: The next item of business is the large scale development submitted by Chris Rogers of CEI on behalf of Hydco, Inc. located on the northwest corner of Steele and Joyce. The property contains 5.57 acres with a 33,250 sq.ft. retail center proposed on this lot. I will start with comments from the Planning Division. Twelve color elevations are required for Planning Commission review. Elevations of all four sides and any freestanding signs shall be submitted by January 9, 2002. We typically don't get all four elevations but the Subdivision Committee has been asking for all four sides. Hyde: We do have all four sides but I brought you a revised elevation that we did on Friday. We can update those other three elevations. Conklin: Ok, thanks. On page two add plat page 134. Right of way shall be dimensioned from centerline. Site coverage shall be revised to reflect lot 2 remainder only, 3.77 acres and 3.14 paved, 10% coverage. I will get with Sara, I'm not sure exactly what that means. Rogers, C.: That is all lots. Conklin: Ok, all lots together separated out with site coverage requirements. Make sure the landscape islands in the entrance have a minimum 25' radius. That is the driveway coming in. Rogers, C.: Are you talking about these two right here? Conklin: I'm not sure which one she is talking about, just make sure your curb cut has a 25' radius on Joyce. Rogers, C.: Ok. Ledbetter: She is talking about this one right here. This is a little short for us. If we swing that big ladder truck in there we're going to take something out. Conklin: Ok, so it must be back. You probably need to pull your island back some to get that truck in there. Ledbetter: If you would please. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 20 Rogers, C.: Conklin: Ledbetter: Rogers, C.: Ledbetter: Rogers, C.: Conklin: Hyde: Conklin: Rogers, C.: Pull this back? Pull this back so when they are turning in they have enough room to come in where it is 90° again, probably cut it back that far. That would help us out a little bit. Ok. Thanks. No problem. Dimension your parking spaces at 9x19, dimension driveway, curb radius should be a minimum of 25' and describe your parking lot lighting that you propose on this site. Other comments include, are there any freestanding signs proposed? The building should be designed so that front facades are more articulated. All utility equipment and electrical equipment shall be screened and I talked with Mr. Barry Hyde on the phone and he provided some revised elevations and I will have to review those. Can I give you a call maybe tomorrow? Yes and I can give you some more comments on that. Basically, for the record, staff has reviewed additional elevation drawings and found those to not meet our commercial design standards. Staff has asked the applicant to go back and incorporate elements from other strip centers in this area. Particularly, Bames & Noble and Northwest Village. That area where Pier 1, Barnes & Noble is located, where Shogun is located in Spring Creek Center where Goody's is located over by Wal-Mart. I would like to go back and look at how it can be more articulated and meet our commercial design standards. We will work with you on that. I did have one additional comment to make and I am going to like for you to look at this Chris. Your throat length that you have for your main entrance, whether or not in your engineering opinion should it be extended to avoid the potential of cars blocking these access points. I'm not sure if you have done any conceptual plans on these lots to locate these two curb cuts. Our recommended throat length in our parking ordinance talks about a minimum of 75' typically, if not more, for shopping centers. I know that you have more than one way in and one way out but I just want to avoid any conflicts in that area. You are showing 75'? Conklin: I think I drew in 75' just to see where that would place that. You will reduce that up anyway. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 21 Rogers, C.: So when I reduce that I could just add to the other end? Conklin: Yes, bring it up if that is not a problem with your conceptual designs on the other two out lots. Rogers, C.: Ok. Conklin: I look at Northwest Village where Barnes & Noble and Pier 1 is, I don't think we want to do that again. Rogers, C.: People cut across? Conklin: Yes and cars back into that main. This is a much better design than that one. They had some issues to work with but I want to avoid where we have those turning movements impacting the main entrance because it turned out to be a mess with traffic. Best Buy was required to have an aisle all the way up the front to come in. Rogers, C.: Of course this is a lot smaller. Conklin: Yes, I am aware of that. I would just like you to take a look at it. Rogers, C.: Yes, we will take a look at it and figure out how we can compromise on that. Conklin: Ok, I had a question with regard to these driveways going on to these lots and these curbs. Is that going to be constructed as a part of this large scale development? Rogers, C.: Unless otherwise, the curbs around the out lots. Hyde: Probably not, we would prefer not to. Conklin: Ok, you need to take that off your plans then if you are not proposing to construct those improvements, those final aprons coming in too. Are you going to own all pieces of property? Hyde: Initially, yes. Conklin: Are you going to be developing all three? Hyde: No, we will be selling two of them. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 22 Conklin: The only other comment I will make is that in this development there is a unified development theme for commercial design standards so we will be looking at whatever goes on these out parcels, how they incorporate elements from your strip shopping center that is proposed up there. Hyde: Even though they are for sale, we anticipate that we will control the design and construction, we hope. Conklin: Has Nanchar, CMN, approved the architectural design of the building? Hyde: Well, we were about to submit it until you and I talked last Friday so I was trying to get a little closer with you before I send it to them. I have talked with Brian and they are ready to look at them. Conklin: Ok, I will need that prior to Commission but you might as well wait even until after Subdivision Committee because there may be additional changes. I will just share with you, typically, with a commercial development like this, there are changes that occur all the way up the Planning Commission meeting with regard to elevations. There are many people that participate in this process. As staff, we are trying to give you some guidance here but I will have three Planning Commissioners that will be looking at it also and making suggestions on commercial design standards. My goal here is that once you go to Planning Commission it gets approved that night. We'll see how this all works out. Hyde: Commission is the 28th of January in this cycle, is that right? Conklin: Yes. That is all I have, Trevor do you have anything else? Trevor Bowman - Staff Engineer Bowman- Yes, a few things. Some of these are pretty general comments. The easement around the waterline has to be 10' from it and so Ron asks in comment number four that you show the easement where that fire hydrant is where the elbow hits. We have to have a 5' separation from waterlines and other utilities. You need to put gate valves to separate public waterlines and fire lines. Just put a gate valve there at that T where you're going with this fire line. Rain catchers are required on your sewer manholes. Rogers, C.: So we put the gate valve right here? Bowman: Wherever your fire line is. The T that goes on your fire line, he is showing two valves right there. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 23 Rogers, C.: Ok, to isolate that system? Bowman: Right. This gate valve on makes sure that fire line is a private as opposed to public. Rogers, C.: He wants it to be 8"? Bowman: Right, if it is a dead end line like that it has to be an 8". That is one of the earlier comments there, number three. You need to have the current property owners sign the permit application for the grading permit. With the lot split coming in the same cycle I think what he is saying that if you don't have the lot split done yet then the property owners, whoever owns it right now are the ones that have to sign the permit application. Rogers, C.: Ok, we have it straightened out then. Bowman: Other stuff in the grading is pretty much straight forward I think. Drainage I think there are some things that we are fairly newly putting stress on. I don't know if Ron has talked to you about that yet. Rogers, C.: Yes, about the sediment control. Bowman: Ok, I won't go into detail on that then. The drainage is going to have to be privately maintained in the future and then something that we haven't been asking for but there is an issue that has recently come up with the paved area in front of the dumpster. We are seeing failures there and so what we want to start doing is ask for a 7" thick concrete pad underneath the dumpster and in front of the dumpster for our vehicles. That is not going to be inspected. We are just asking people to do that. Rogers, C.: Are you requiring any type of reinforcement for that or just unreinforced slab? Hyde: It will be standard for us in our construction to show a 20x10 6" reinforced concrete slab for that. Bowman: Ok, that would be great. If you have any questions on the other stuff that we have give Ron a call. He will be back in the next day or two. Conklin- Ok, I skipped over the Sidewalk Administrator's comments so I will do those now. Sidewalks exist along Joyce and meet city requirements. New sidewalks, driveway approaches and access ramps constructed on the right of way shall meet U.D.O. requirements. Sidewalks should be continuous through driveways with a 2% crossslope elevated to 2% above the top of the curb. Remove lines representing curbs through the sidewalk section from the drawing. Portland Cement Concrete shall be used. You will be required to have six bicycle parking racks. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 24 Rogers, C.: Conklin: Rogers, C.: Conklin: Sargent: Rogers, C.: Conklin: Rogers, C.: Conklin: Sargent: Hyde: Sargent: Hyde: Sargent: They are showing two locations so that is 3 and 3? The ordinance says it should be within 50' of the entrance. That is why we split it up. We do have a standard ordinance for the bicycle rack that you can't just go and buy anywhere. It is not your typical style specification bicycle rack. We are spending a few million dollars in trails out there so the bicycle parking racks are necessary out there. We have an underground primary that runs along this utility easement along the west side of this property line. It looks like you are going to be doing some grading there that may have to be relocated or moved and you can expect to pay the cost of relocating that electrical. We can get it located, it is probably about 14', that is what we required. It looks like he doesn't have the existing elevations, it looks like he is talking about the entire slope. If you notice out there they started the slope right at the property line and came down. We are going to cut all of that back for that drive. To the property line? Well, there is going to be a retaining wall probably starting in this direction here so it is going to be close to it. We will have to bury it somewhere in there. Ok. We will also need a utility easement along the back or north property line. There is one in there that goes partly across if you could just carry that over. We are going to this transformer over there for that switchgear. We will need load information when you get that. I think I will have that for you tomorrow, we have a couple of transformer pads and a kind of third point at the back of the building. We do require a 10' clearance from the transformer. There will be the service drive. That is all I have. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 25 Rogers, C.: Hyde: Conklin - Kim Hesse - Hesse: Rogers, C.: Hesse: Rogers, C.: Rogers, C.: Hesse: Rogers, C.: Hesse: So we should move the transformers to the other side of the drive? Yes. Are there any other staff comments? Landscape Administrator For subdivision you just need to note on your plans which way you are going to irrigate. Also, put your plant types on your key so that I know. You are going to be doing this grading in these sections right? Yes. Is that a real deep well? We are going to have to check that, we may have to pull that back. I need to go out and figure out what is happening to these trees. Obviously we are going to lose this one and this one and possibly these with that construction. I don't know the shape of them at this point. We had asked Nanchar to not replace them but they did anyway, we had asked them to hold off until these were developed but they chose, as a part of their obligation, to get them into the ground and so they did. I am not sure what we will do, I need to go out and look at them. Ok. These trees are in a bad location anyway. We will lose them when you do that grading. Let me just go out and I will have better ideas as to what to require at Subdivision Committee. Are you talking about whether or not we can.. Whether we need to move them or what we need to do with them if they are healthy. Rogers, C.: Ok. Hesse: Rogers, C.: Hesse: There are three and I don't know the impact of this one with that kind of construction. Really, this is all existing here. This grading is already existing? Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 26 Rogers, C.: Yes, it should be whole like that and the same thing here, we shouldn't be affecting any of these. Really you are just looking at the drive. Hesse: These that are shown? Rogers, C.: Yes, it is just catching it up front up here and opening it to the inlet. Conklin: I see 16 spaces here, we need some more landscaping. Is there any landscaping proposed up in these areas? Hesse: You've got additional trees over here. Was that the intent to use those? Rogers, C.: Our intent was to cover the building so that the building would be open. Hopefully, unless we need to move one of these trees, we were hoping to have this to cover that area but still leave the building open. Conklin- What is this? The sidewalk across the street right there, concrete? Hesse: I think that is fine. Conklin: Is that a waiver or a variance? Hesse: I can see that as giving us the coverage we need, it is just really across. They have three more trees than required here and several more than what is required over there. If we keep with this landscape. Have you reviewed your landscape plan? Hyde: That is preliminary but I have looked at it, I don't think we see any quick objections to it. Conklin: It is pretty long but you're right, it is adding. Hesse: Yes, they are adding a lot. I guess by Subdivision, you could review if you are comfortable with the number of trees. My decision will be based off of this plan and what the Planning Commission approves. At this point I am happy. Conklin: In this entrance, you are going to put these trees in too? Rogers, C.: We were needing those for the coverage to get our number up so that is why we were putting them in. This is inside the property line so we were needing some coverage. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 27 Conklin: Hyde: Conklin: Rogers, C.: Hesse: Rogers, C.: Conklin: Hyde: Conklin: Rogers, C.: Conklin: Hyde: Rogers, C.: Bowman: Conklin: Ledbetter: My only question is if you don't construct this, you need to find out if you are going to do these improvements because you need those improvements to back out. That is what we talked about earlier. You are constructing this on parcel one and two, this drive. Curb and gutter around the perimeter of that. Yes, on those out parcels. The property line goes into the drive. You will be constructing at least this. Yes, it will be at least paved. Is there going to be any curb on it? We would rather not put the curb and gutter in until the out parcel is constructed just because we don't know where the curb cuts are going to end up and that kind of thing but we will put in what is required to make sure that our storm drainage works properly. That was my only question but that is an engineering issue. We may have to put in part of it to catch the inlet but not all of it. Ok, I can see parking spaces backed up in this aisle eventually. Right, I just hate to put in what we may have to tear out. We want it to work out and obviously we are going to have landscaped area there if possible. We will clarify that for next week's meeting, where we're putting the curb, determination or whatever. Be sure to show what is going to be constructed and what is not. We try to go out and inspect all of these at the end of the project. If the inspector sees this plan and it is not constructed they would make you build it. We don't want any misunderstandings. Is there anything else on this one? Thank you very much and I'll give you a call Barry. Are you going to sprinkle these? Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 28 Hyde: No, these are going to be unprotected. Ledbetter: I was just going to say that if you are going to sprinkle these it would be better to sprinkle them all. Conklin: Thank you Dennis. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 29 PPL 02-3.00: Preliminary Plat (Sage Meadows, pp 398) was submitted by Dave Jorgensen of Jorgensen & Associates on behalf of Mark Foster for property located north of Hwy 16 and east of 51st Street. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 31 acres with 89 lots proposed. Conklin: The next item is PPL 02-3.00, Sage Meadows submitted by Jorgensen & Associates on behalf of Mark Foster for property located north of Hwy. 16 and east of 51st Street. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 31 acres with 89 lots proposed. I will start with Planning Division comments. Lots 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 86, 52, 57, 59, 35, 36, 37 and 39 shall be dimensioned at the 25' building setback line. All lots need to be 70 feet wide under zoning. Lot areas shall be added for each lot on the plat. For streets, 25' from centerline shall be dedicated for 51st Avenue. Improvements will be required for 51st. Trevor will go over those improvements with his Engineering Division comments. All utilities shall be placed underground. In order for this project to continue through the process we need 37 copies by 10:00 a.m. Wednesday, January 9, 2002. From our Sidewalk Administrator, a 4' sidewalk is required with 6' of greenspace on both sides of the street. 51st Street is a local street and requires a 4' sidewalk with a minimum of 6' greenspace. On the city side, the developed side, east side, the necessary grading for sidewalks shall be done as part of the street construction. Two access ramps are required on each street corner at "T" intersections, corresponding ramps should be installed across from the intersecting street. New sidewalks, driveway approaches or access ramps constructed in the right of way shall meet Unified Development Ordinance requirements. Portland Cement Concrete shall be used continuous through the driveway at a 2% cross slope with 2% above top of curb. An inspection is required prior to concrete pour. A table needs to be added that shows the street name, street width, right of way width, green space width and sidewalk width on the plat. Trevor, would you like to go over Engineering comments? Trevor Bowman - Staff Engineer Bowman: Sure. Some of them are pretty standard. On number three, you can see that we would like you to extend a waterline along Cannondale Drive to connect to the existing waterline adjacent to 51st Street. Also a waterline eastward along Ponca to connect to the existing waterline in Fieldstone. Hennelly: Up to here rather than do that "T" just make it across just like we did on Dover? Bowman. This is one that Ron looked at and actually he took it with him when he went for the holiday and he e-mailed me his comments back so I don't have his red lines. Basically, what he is saying is go ahead and make a loop there. What the next Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 30 comment says is label the line sizes. Since you are completing a loop there, he said you could reduce some of the 8" to 6" if you choose since you are completing a loop there. One of the first comments is that fire hydrant locations shall meet the more stringent of hours for the fire chiefs requirements. You need gate valves on all branches of your "T"s and your crosses. Hennelly: On the preliminary plat? Bowman: That is what he is asking for. You may want to give him a call when he gets back in the office. Concrete encasements are not allowed. You need to use steel encasements. There is the issue of the City ofFayetteville's Master Water Plan calls for a 12" to be installed along Sunshine. Determination will have to be made about cost share on that issue. Sewer, he has a minimum easement for water lines shall be 20' if it is required because there is more than one in there. Fence will not be permitted across the sewer line that will block access to the existing manholes unless you provide a way to get to them. The plans will be sent to OMI to determine the effects of these lots on the existing lift station. You may have to upgrade that lift station. Steel encasements will be required under box culverts, between walls, etc. Concrete, again, is not permitted under current city policy. You need to show rain catchers in your manholes. Evidently he is not finding a submittal of a permit application. You have got a setback here on cut and fills, a minimum of 5' from the property line unless you get written approval. Additional information which is a standard comment He says that there are several areas where you are showing grading within a tree preservation area. Can Kim address that later if that is a concern? There are some issues on drainage. It looks like he has got several comments there. He talks about multiple pipes used, easements larger than 20' are required and he lists some places there. Where you can you need a drainage easement and a utility easement to be separate easements. We are showing a 10' drainage easement across the entire piece of property. Do you know if there is an existing storm pipe across that? Hennelly: There is and we are going to end up removing it and installing a new one. It is within the right of way of Ponca and then turns down Dover and discharges into this area here and it is all going to be removed and replaced. Bowman. Ok, you just need to show that. According to the drainage manual, a detention pond has to be sodded. A 20' setback is required from the hundred year water surface elevations from any of the buildings. You need to add that setback to your plans. The maintenance of the detention ponds will be the responsibility of the POA or the HOA or whatever. He asks a question about that lot 43 and 44. Should they be removed and this area labeled as a common area or labeled unbuildable. If they remain lots 43 and 44 they should be labeled unbuildable on the preliminary and Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 31 final plats but what he says that if those are unbuildable you may as well just take them out and label them common area and that may reduce your parks fees. Hennelly: The only reason we do that is that it is easier to identify that parcel as lots 43 and 44 as the detention easement rather than giving meets and bounds and trying to reestablish it. Bowman: He is asking a question here so that is not something that he is saying to do but just something that is to consider. Conklin: Just from a planning standpoint if they are unbuildable. Hennelly: We would note that on the final plat that they are unbuildable. Bowman: The following comments apply to the drainage area map. There appears to be several acres from the Fieldstone subdivision that drains from the streets that was not included in the draining calculations. There appear to be several acres from the south that enter the site to the south of lots 8 through 10 and in the roadside ditch that will be routed through the southern detention pond. He said that this drainage area was not shown on the map and was not included in the drainage calculations. Please label the drainage area and show the area of the drainage on the water shed map and provide a map that shows the predeveloped basins at each discharge point. I will get you that sheet. If you want we can go down and make a copy of it before you leave. He says the design of the detention pond shows a total net decrease in the storm water runoff after construction. However, this will likely increase the runoff of the two proposed discharge points from the existing discharge flows. Therefore, the Engineering Division will need a written approval from the downstream property owners in order to accept this design. If written approval can not be provided before the Subdivision Committee meeting it will either need to be tabled or additional information will be needed. That is something that you definitely will need to get on. You may want to talk to him more on that. You should provide calculations and hydrographs for the combining of post developed discharge flows and he asked if the discharge flows routed to the ditch before they were combined. He has a question, all of the remaining ends were used with .24 except the south area, he wants you to justify why you used something different there. Verify that the south pond contour areas that were used in the calculations are correct. Under streets, the Planning Commission will be responsible in determining offsite street improvements to 51st Street. The preliminary recommendation will be that the developers of this subdivision widen 51st Street to local street standards on the east side of the road and on the west side it should be to county standards. I apologize for not knowing a little more about it but Ron did the review while he was gone. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 32 Conklin: Are there any other staff comments on this one? Hesse: Do you show these as being preserved trees? You couldn't have them if they are in the building footprint they would have to be on the side lot line if they are going to be preserved. These are the ones that we looked at on the site. These are healthy, I may go out there today but here there is not must of an adjustment to get that on a side lot line but we would have to watch where that light is because the utilities may have the electric coming down here. The same with the sewer line affecting these two trees. Hennelly: Actually that is an existing sewer line. We are just coming in here and tying into the existing. Hesse: Ok. I will go out there today and then talk to you on the phone. I will just see if Engineering has some more copies. Hennelly: We turned in a copy of the report and then a couple of the grading plan. Conklin: Kim, please call me when you don't get plans like that directly and let me know. Bowman: Ron will be back either late today or tomorrow. Conklin: Are there any other staff comments? Rogers, K.: Parks fees due will be $40,420. The Parks Board met and approved this in December. Conklin: I have a couple of other comments with regard to these double frontage lots on 51st. I am assuming that houses will be facing towards the east on Dover Street. Hennelly: We have no access allowed onto 51st Street. Conklin: Ok, we have that note on there. Is this project going to be phased? Hennelly: No, I don't think so. It is going to be one shot. Conklin: Have you checked and made sure that this lines up with Fairfield's plans? Hennelly: You will notice that there is a slight break, two curbs here. The one that Lynn Williamson is doing to the north there has 140 foot lots up along the east boundary and we had 130' lots and so I made that jog to make sure it lined up with their streets. Technical Plat Review Minutes January 2, 2002 Page 33 Conklin: Ok, great. I assumed there was coordination there but it would be bad to end up with streets that didn't line up. Hennelly: We did make sure that we would match them. Conklin- I'm glad that you coordinated that. I think that is all that we have today. You will need to get with the utility companies. The date for your revisions will be Wednesday, January 9th at 10:00 a.m. Hennelly: That may have to do with when I can get with Ron. Conklin- Ok, thank you.