HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-02-27 - MinutesTECHNICAL PLAT REVIEW
A regular meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee was held on Wednesday, February
27, 2002 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain,
Fayetteville, Arkansas.
ITEMS CONSIDERED ACTION TAKEN
LSP 02-12.00: Lot Split (Wilson, pp 482)
Page 46
LSP 02-13.00: Lot Split (McDonald Living Trust, pp 648)
Page 2
FPL 02-3.00: Final Plat (Copper Creek, pp 99/100)
Page 6
PPL 02-7.00: Preliminary Plat (Legacy Pointe, pp 435/474)
Page 13
Forwarded
Forwarded
Forwarded
Forwarded
LSD 02-8.00: Large Scale Development (Mathias Properties, Inc., pp 401) Tabled
Page 24
LSD 02-7.00: Large Scale Development (Dandy/Schmitt, pp 524) Forwarded
Page 32
STAFF PRESENT STAFF ABSENT
Keith Shreve
Kim Hesse
Sara Edwards
Ron Petrie
Renee Thomas
Kim Rogers
Tim Conklin
Shelli Rushing
UTILITIES PRESENT
Jim Sargent, AEP/ SWEPCO
Mike Phipps, Ozark Electric Coop.
Sue Clouser, Southwestern Bell
Larry Gibson, Cox Communications
Glenn Newman, AEP/ SWEPCO
Perry Franklin
Dennis Ledbetter
Solid Waste
UTILITIES ABSENT
Johnny Boles, Arkansas Western Gas
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 2
LSP 02-12.00: Lot Split (Wilson, pp 482) was submitted by Alan Reid on behalf of
Troy Wilson for property located at the SE corner of Holtz Drive & Palmer Avenue. The
property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 0.38 acres.
The request is to split into two tracts of 0.19 acres and 0.19 acres.
Edwards: Welcome to the Wednesday, February 27`h meeting of the Technical Plat
Review Committee. The first item on our agenda is a lot split for Wilson
submitted by Alan Reid on behalf of Troy Wilson for property located at
the SE corner of Holtz and Palmer. The property is zoned R-1 and
contains .38 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 0.19 and 0.19
acres. Is there anybody here for this? What we will do then, if nobody
minds, is put this off until the end and hopefully somebody shows up for
this item.
LSP 02-13.00: Lot Split (McDonald Living Trust, pp 648) was submitted by William
Jenkins of Jenkins Surveying Inc. on behalf of McDonald Living Trust for property
located at 2350 S. Hunt Lane. The property is in the Growth Area and contains
approximately 29.26 acres. The request is for 28.35 acres and 0.91 acres.
Edwards: The next item is LSP 02-13, McDonald Living Trust submitted by
William Jenkins of Jenkins Surveying on behalf of McDonald Living
Trust for property located at 2350 S. Hunt Lane. The property is in the
Growth Area and contains approximately 29.26 acres. The request is for
28.35 acres and 0.91 acres. Is anyone here for this one?
Carter:
I am Glenn Carter, I am the designated representative for that one, they
requested that I verify it. The surveyor regrettably couldn't be here today
and I don't know if that is going to have to be pulled but if you could
comment on it and I could take your comments, we would appreciate it.
Edwards: Ok, we can do that. There is nothing on it from Parks, nothing on it from
Traffic, nothing on it from Sidewalks because it is in the growth area.
You're missing a legal description of the original tract. We will need that
added. Labels were not submitted which, are required. That needs to be
added. A copy of the County Assessor's plat is required as a part of
submittal, that was not provided. Then, the proof of an Arkansas
Department of Health permit shall be submitted prior to filing the lot split.
You said you located the septic system?
Carter:
Yes, we looked on the property and discussed with the previous owner and
installers to find out the history of it, we looked at the soil type and the
soil type is a very good, well drained soil. It is very sandy and there are
not any signs of any problem with the system so I am certifying that the
system is functioning properly.
Edwards: It is all contained on the .91 acre piece?
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 3
Carter: It is all on there.
Conklin: With regard to a septic system that you would apply for today, where they
talk about a reserve area...
Carter:
Conklin:
Carter:
An alternate area?
Yes. There is an alternate area available on this lot?
Yes there is. We didn't apply for a new system, there is one existing. Is
there another requirement besides verifying the existing and alternate?
Conklin- I just want to make sure that if it fails that there is room to put an alternate
on there.
Carter: If it fails, we have got enough room within the setbacks required by the
Health Department to put a completely new system in. It may require a
pump, but if it does, so be it. There is room to do it.
Conklin: Room to require a pump?
Carter: Sometimes our alternate areas are higher than the house so you have to put
in a pump, but anyway, that is a side issue. There is, all the soils are good
and there has been soil fits dug on the entire property to check the soil and
it is all a good, well drained soil. There will not be any problem with
future applications.
Conklin: Was a permit issued for the septic system?
Carter: No, it was done before permits were required.
Conklin: Ok.
Edwards: I guess we can just make a statement that a permit won't be required
because it was prior.
Petrie: You have got a letter and things like that?
Carter: Yes, I have a letter that has been forwarded to the Health Department so
that the Health Department will provide you a letter. I haven't given it to
the Health Department.
Conklin: You are going to ask the Health Department to say "ok" to this?
Carter: The way it was put to me was that the Health Department required a D.R.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 4
to give them a letter stating that the system was functioning properly.
Historically, that is how I have done existing systems. You go out and
you inspect the soils and you look for different things. If everything is in
order, you send the Health Department a letter and that satisfies them and
then if they need to send you a letter, or if I need to send you a letter, we
can do that.
Conklin- I would like some documentation, beyond just functioning properly, that
there is enough area within this lot to have an alternate area.
Carter: I can do that.
Edwards: I need adjacent property owners, plat page, there is an error in the legal
description, if you can call it out. We need the right-of-way dimensioned
from centerline. There is a 30' dedication from centerline required. It is
kind of hard to tell on this drawing so it may be ok. That is all that I have.
Ron, did you have anything to add?
Petrie: Just one thing that wasn't answered. This an existing building, does it use
a well right now?
Carter: No, there is a 3" line that comes up on the property and then changes to a
2" and they have a tap off of that. They are using city water.
Petrie: The well that is shown on this is no longer working?
Carter: It has been done away with. As a matter of fact, we discussed the well and
the proper closing of that to satisfy the Health Department, so the owner is
aware of that.
Petrie: That is all I had.
Carter: Is there a problem with using, well the property itself is in the county, is it
not? The water is in the city but they are tapped off of it, can he get more
taps for the other lot?
Petrie: There is a limited number he is going to be able to get off of a 3" line.
Carter: Will that be a boar or a cut or is that up to the county? The waterline is
across the street from the property.
Petrie: It will probably have to be boared. If he is just getting a water meter set
then that is something that the city is going to do, come in and pay the tap
fee. It is really up to the city, what we do, it is cheaper than a cut on a
permit.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 5
Edwards: Utilities?
Mike Phipps — Ozark Electric Coop.
Phipps: Glenn, we just need Jim crown over to get through that transmission line
easement. I have no other comments.
Larry Gibson — Cox Communications
Gibson: No comment.
Sue Clouser — Southwestern Bell
Clouser: No comment.
Edwards: Ok.
Carter: Jim is going to give us the width of that or has he got that?
Phipps: Yes, Jim will look that up.
Carter: Ok, thank you very much.
Edwards: Thank you.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 6
FPL 02-3.00: Final Plat (Copper Creek, pp 99/100) was submitted by Brian Moore on
behalf of Gary Brandon Enterprises, Inc. for property located east of Stonebridge
Subdivision and north of Zion Road. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density
Residential and contains approximately 34.34 acres with 81 lots proposed.
Edwards: The next item is FPL 02-3.00 for Copper Creek submitted by Brian Moore
on behalf of Gary Brandon Enterprises, Inc. for property located east of
Stonebridge Subdivision and north of Zion Road. The property is zoned
R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 34.34 acres
with 81 lots proposed. Good morning.
Moore: Hello.
Edwards: This is Shelli Rushing, she is from the Planning Division and she is going
to be going over staff comments this morning.
Rushing: First, for Parks Review, the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
recommended that taking the land dedication on December 8, 1999. The
Park Land dedication is 1.46 acres, leaving a balance of $10,622. The
owner stated that he would have the utility line removed from the
dedicated property and this will be a requirement of acceptance. They
stated that they would need the park boundaries stated and put on the plan.
The actual park fee will be determined on the date of final plat. That is all
from Parks. It looks like we don't have anything from Traffic. Under
Sidewalks, just add a note on the final plat that all retaining walls will be
setback a minimum of 2' from the right-of-way. All retaining wall
construction shall be on the building permit and have the approval of the
City Engineer. Driveway approaches shall be constructed of Portland
Cement Concrete. From the Planning Division, you need to show the state
plane coordinates, not latitude and longitude. Add the plat page number,
we would like to see some lot numbers on detention and parkland lots.
The Restrictive Covenants should say that the common areas will be
maintained by the POA and also provide lot sizes for those common areas.
You need county approval of the Zion Road improvements and provide
addresses. That is all I have.
Edwards: I have something to add. It looks like you have duplicated your notes,
they are there twice and then on the left hand corner, number five says
"No curb cuts shall be allowed on Double Springs."
Petrie:
Brian, you have my comments there. I will go through them real quick.
As you know, we need the final inspection before we can proceed onto
Subdivision Committee. To my knowledge, there are two items that we
discussed that need to be resolved. Those are the lift station and also the
waterline. I assume the waterline is going to be abandoned. We need the
hundred year water surface elevations and limits of flooding shown for the
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 7
existing pond and the detention pond on the final plat. Just the limits in
water surface elevations. In addition, we need the minimum finished floor
elevations for the future houses on lots 11, 12, 40, 51, 73 and 74. Those,
you've already got on your construction plan. In addition, we would like
four benchmarks on your plans near those locations. Those are four,
separate, distinct locations, just something near those for the house
builders. Easements, I have listed several places, if we could get a little
bit more description. It would be hard to come back and duplicate what is
shown on the plat without some more call outs. I have got those listed
there, just let me know if you have any questions on those. Utility and
drainage easements should be separated along the north side of the
subdivision. That is shown on the construction plans as separate, it just
didn't get put on this. Sanitary sewer shown on the south side of lots 25
and 27 needs to be located in a utility easement. This is a problem, I think
you are calling that only a drainage easement so somewhere in there we
need to separate that out and combine them in that area south of lots 26
and 27. Utility easement shown on the west side of lot 74, it appears that
you need another 5'; you need 10' from the sewer line. Lastly on
easements, what is shown as the 100' wide utility easement on
Stonewood, that is also a drainage easement. If you could label your
detention pond as a common area, we would like to see a copy of the
covenants to make sure the maintenance responsibilities are in there. We
mentioned Double Springs. On note number six, it called out pipes, that
has to do with private maintenance. If we could remove pipes in there and
make sure we call it a detention pond. I would like to see an additional
note regarding irrigation systems, especially since you went through the
expense of putting that in and making it available. I just want to make
sure that that is documented on this plat and that it doesn't get lost. Other
than that, the last items are typical items the Engineering Division needs
before we can sign the final plat. There is nothing new on those. Do you
have any questions?
Moore: No.
Edwards: I have a question. Will anything permit this from going forward to the
next Subdivision meeting?
Petrie: Final Inspection.
Edwards: I have one more thing. Are the streetlights installed yet?
Moore: The streetlights are not installed.
Edwards: Ok, we have a requirement that at least the poles be in if the electric is not
run to them before Planning will sign off on the Final Plat.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 8
Moore:
Conklin:
Phipps:
Conklin:
Phipps:
Conklin:
Phipps:
Conklin -
Phipps:
Edwards:
Phipps:
Edwards:
Phipps:
Conklin:
Phipps:
Conklin:
Phipps:
Conklin:
Moore:
Conklin:
Ok.
Is this Ozark?
What do you want?
We want the poles sitting on the ground so we can go out there and say
"There are streetlights sitting there."
Ozark will not agree to that.
Why not?
When we do the subdivision we will do it all at once. We are not going to
piece work this thing in.
When will you do the subdivision?
When we get these changes made on the final plat.
How long do you think it would take?
I'm going to say 3-6 weeks.
Have you been paid from them?
We can not get a cost until we get the final plat, which we are doing today.
We are just trying to avoid a situation that we are dealing with in another
subdivision where there are wires sticking out of the ground and there are
no poles.
I know the subdivision you are thinking about.
Residents are wondering where the poles are.
We've got them, we are just waiting on a check.
We are working on that check for you.
It is not something that we could show you a receipt from them saying we
paid?
How much money are we talking about that this developer is going to
have to pay Ozark, do you have any idea?
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 9
Phipps: On this project, underground, I am going to guess between $40,000 and
$60,000.
Conklin: We can do a guarantee again, like a letter of credit.
Phipps: Those lights, the way they are set, the wire has to be run first because the
streetlight goes down over the wire. I can't put the pole in, the wire has to
come up through the middle of it. The wire has to be in before you have
the streetlights. The wire will go in as the transformer progresses through
the subdivision after we install the primary cable.
Conklin: Ok. We just need to start getting a letter of credit for that like an estimate.
I don't know, that is $40,000 to $60,000.
Moore: I don't understand why we can't just pay it and then show you a receipt
that we paid it. He is going to give us the cost. That is better than a letter
of credit.
Conklin: When you pay them, is it a contract that you enter into, is it an invoice that
we get that says paid on it?
Phipps: Yes, once they pay Ozark Electric we will be responsible.
Edwards: There will be no additional costs tacked on that would prevent you from
continuing?
Phipps: No.
Conklin: Ok, that is fine. If you want to pay them, that is all we want, someone to
pay Ozark. Is that how SWEPCO works?
Sargent: Yes.
Edwards: Utilities?
Mike Phipps — Ozark Electric
Phipps: On the south side, lot 46, we have got a vault in the southeast corner, just
west of that 100' utility easement. I think we all come up in that area
where we are wanting to cross that 100' utility, greenspace and drainage,
why can't that 20' easement continue across lot 46?
Moore: I don't remember on that, I'm not sure if there was a tree we were trying
to save or not.
Petrie: I remember when we were doing the construction plan, there were several
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 10
places Kim wanted.
Phipps: Ok, I take it there are probably trees behind lot 50 then?
Moore: Right.
Phipps: Ok, so you're doing it for the trees. You did put us a 15' UE on the other
side.
Moore: 1 am pretty sure that is what it was.
Phipps: It must be. These streetlights, some of them you have a 20' UE to, that
can be knocked down to 10' or just use the setback that you had.
Moore: Ok.
Phipps: These other crossings look good. Lots 25, 26 and 39, we may have a little
trouble getting through that. You've got a junction box there and a
headwall that we may have to tunnel under to get us over into that other
easement because of those crossings. That is all I had. When we get these
changes, we need them as quick as we can get them. I can run it through
and get you a cost of the lights. I think it is probably going to be similar to
Stonebridge as far as the cost. I think that was $44,000 for everything.
That is all I have.
Larry Gibson — Cox Communications
Gibson: The quads look good. I had the same question about this but if that is a
tree, there is nothing we can do about that. Just give us a couple or three
weeks notification before they start so we can get our stuff together.
Sue Clouser — Southwestern Bell
Clouser: We are going to be coming through along Hearthstone to feed Stonewood,
are these roads cut in yet?
Moore: There is asphalt in.
Clouser: I didn't do Stonewood, but the other Engineer told me that you guys, and I
don't know who he talked to, but you agreed to put 4" conduit under there
for us to feed Stonewood.
Moore: 1 don't think so.
Clouser: He talked to somebody and somebody said that, I will have to find out
who he talked to about it. We are having a problem getting over to
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 11
Stonewood.
Moore: Ok, but at this point we've got curb in and asphalt in.
Clouser: Well, they are going to have to boar it or something but they are going out
there. I think they are going to start the job today, placing the cable.
Moore: Before the easements are in place?
Clouser: That is the only way we could get down there to feed Stonewood so I
don't know. Like I said, I didn't do Stonewood. I don't know who he was
dealing with to make that agreement. Is there anyway to increase this to a
20' utility easement if we are all going to have to go through there
between 47 and 48?
Moore: Between 46 and 47 I am going to increase by 5'. That will be 12'/z on 46.
Clouser: That is it, thank you. I will find out who he talked to. They are out of
Springdale I think.
Conklin: Brian, I just want to make sure your developer is aware of this. I think
you probably have Springdale addresses on these lots. Mark Foster has
contacted our Administration and I have been in contact with the U.S. Post
Office and once every ten years the city can request that the developments
within the city can have Fayetteville addresses. The first problem is, I
don't have a map, I don't know where the boundaries are and we are
trying to find that. I need to write a letter with the Mayor's signature and
send that to the Postal Service and take a vote of all the people out there
living. If more than 50% of the people living out there right now say they
would rather be in a Fayetteville address than a Springdale address. I have
talked to a couple people looking at houses out there and it is an issue.
Right now the majority of the people who live out there have Springdale
addresses for twenty or thirty years. I am almost wondering if it would be
better to have people move into these developments and vote after they
move in. That is something that you might want to talk about. I don't
know, changing addresses in the city, people get very sensitive about that.
I have tried twice and failed twice over even changing a street name. The
city may even be more because someone who thinks they live in
Springdale, they really don't live in Springdale but they have those
addresses. Who knows? Fayetteville is so desirable and nice they may
decide not to be Springdale addressed, or it could be the other way around.
Moore: So what are you telling me?
Conklin: Just so that you are aware.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 12
Moore: Just so they are aware that it might change.
Conklin: Yes, I am trying to keep everybody informed. Someone was telling me
this morning that they think that Silverthorne Subdivision out off Double
Springs has Farmington addresses. I don't know if that is true, people get
very sensitive, especially buying houses that they moved to Fayetteville
and they have to tell all their friends that their address is Springdale.
Moore: Ok.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 13
PPL 02-7.00: Preliminary Plat (Legacy Pointe, pp 435/474) was submitted by Dave
Jorgensen of Jorgensen & Associates on behalf of Charles Sloan of Sloan Properties, Inc.
for property located east of Double Springs Road and south of Owl Creek. The property
is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and RMF -6, Low Density Multi -family
Residential and contains approximately 49.80 acres with 132 lots proposed.
Edwards: The next item is PPL 02-7.00, Legacy Pointe submitted by Dave
Jorgensen of Jorgensen & Associates on behalf of Charles Sloan of Sloan
Properties, Inc. for property located east of Double Springs Road and
south of Owl Creek. The property is zoned R-1 and RMF -6, and contains
approximately 49.80 acres with 132 lots proposed. Good morning. First
from Parks and Recreation, the Parks Board recommended to take money
and land. The details have not been determined for parks property. She
still needs to meet with the Parks Staff, you, and Charlie Sloan, and there
is a meeting set for today at the Parks office. Do you want to add anything
Kim?
Rogers: We just have a lot of options to talk about and we want to work it out.
Brackett: We have got a couple of drawings for you.
Petrie: We probably just need to figure out if the layout is going to change at all?
Brackett: The layout is not going to change. The worst thing that could happen is
they not take any parks land. The best thing is that we are going to have a
different design for the detention pond and it will shrink the detention
pond, we will cut out the park property and it will cut the remainder.
Rogers: I'm sure it will give a corridor if we do go with that option. The problem
is that this is on our Parks Master Plan as taking land but then Charles
Sloan has said that he may want to develop, we need to work that out. We
may want to take money instead. There are a lot of combinations of
options.
Brackett: Even if we don't give the parkland, he is going to develop the
neighborhood park.
Edwards: That requires going back to the Parks Board?
Rogers: Right and City Council.
Edwards: From Kim Hesse, our Landscape Administrator, she has got quite a few
comments that you can read through. It looks like mainly, please provide
a chart representing the high, mid and low level trees existing and
preserved. This will be needed for mitigation analysis and helpful for tree
preservation review. Kim, I was just going over your comments for the
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 14
Legacy Subdivision and I read that they needed a chart, do you have
anything to add?
Hesse: I need that before I can determine.. .
Brackett: I just need to talk to you regarding what I can use for the rows.
Edwards: It looks like you have shown your trees on here. If you intend for this to
be your tree preservation plan...
Brackett: It is not.
Edwards: We need copies for the Planning Commission for the next go around. We
will need copies of the tree preservation plan as well, the standard 37. If
you can incorporate your tree preservation plan into this plan.
Brackett: It won't work. You can't read it. The tree preservation plan on the
grading plan didn't work. Do you need 37 or do you need 9 for the
Commissioners?
Hesse: I've got the chart, so one for each of the Commissioners.
Brackett: I could do another plan but I would rather just do nine copies.
Conklin: How about twelve so that staff can have a couple? The whole theory here
is that the ordinance states that the Planning Commission approves a tree
preservation plan. If they can't see the tree preservation plan then what
are they approving?
Brackett: I understand.
Conklin: Well, you were on the Committee.
Edwards: On to our Traffic Superintendent comments. He would like you to add to
the plat where Milliken ends and where Rocky Crossing begins. He
would like you to check with Jim Johnson at 575-3380 about that. He
needs streetlights added at Persimmon and Double Springs and at Green
Chapel Road between lots 10 and 11, between lots 130 and 131, and on
Double Springs, half way between Persimmon and Double Springs and
Green Chapel and Double Springs. If you have any questions you can
contact him on that. He also wants you to get with him to check the sight
distance at both entrances to the subdivision. From our Sidewalk
Coordinator, the necessary grading for sidewalks shall be done as a part of
the street construction. There will be two access ramps required at each
street corner. Single ramps shall not be used, and you can get the details
from him. Detectable warnings are now required when constructing and
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 15
altering curb ramps. A 24" wide strip of detecting warning should be
installed at the bottom of a curb to indicate the transition from the
sidewalk to the street.
Shreve: That is an ADA requirement to get those at the bottom of the ramp.
Brackett: I assume you have some detail, I will get with you.
Edwards: On Persimmon Street, we are requesting that the sidewalk be constructed
at the right-of-way line, which gives approximately 17' of greenspace and
we would like that dimension changed in the table.
Brackett: That is going to be a problem with a couple of trees.
Shreve: We can work around the trees if we need to. What we are trying to do, the
street there is planned to be widened in the future, we wanted to clear the
sidewalks for that new construction.
Brackett: Ok, that is going to give a large greenspace, it is going to look odd.
Petrie: We haven't decided if we were going to cost share with that. It may be
that we want a 36' wide street and the city would go in and take that. I'm
just throwing that out there.
Shreve: It would be in the same situation as Bridgeport with New Bridge Road and
the sidewalk is set back 10' or 15'.
Conklin: Yes, if you live by these homes, on these lots, you need to be aware that
the Master Street Plan connects all the way over to Shiloh Drive. Lindsey
is building one piece of it right now.
Shreve: We can work around a few trees but for the general sidewalk we would
like to have it set back.
Edwards: That is all from Sidewalks. From Planning, I would like you to add plat
page 435 and 474. In your vicinity map, you show the city limits, I think
that is what you are showing cutting through this property. I would like to
see that revised. You can talk to our GIS division but they say on the legal
description, they say plane coordinates are not rotated properly. When the
final plat comes through we want you to add the setbacks for all four
sides, right now you are just showing the front. On the Master Street Plan,
you're doing good on that. Double Springs is a minor arterial, we've got
the right-of-way there, and Persimmons is a collector and you are showing
the right-of-way there. Are there any overhead utilities on this site?
Brackett: No, I don't believe there are.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 16
Edwards: Ok, you know the standard if there are.
Brackett: Yes.
Edwards: Again, we have the streetlight issue, which we are still working on, but
payment will be required prior to acceptance of the final plat and no
access will be allowed from Double Springs. Revisions are due by March
6`h at 10:00 a.m. Ron?
Ron Petrie — Staff Engineer
Petrie:
I will skip over the general comments. Number two, the fire hydrants
would be ok with our written standards, you've got more than enough.
You are probably familiar with a few of these. If you would add the
waterline sizes that you are proposing on the plans. Numbers six and
seven are just general policy notes. Sewer easements appear adequate.
We will need an access to backyard manholes. That could affect one
location, possibly two, depending on what we do with the park. Either
find a way to avoid manholes in these backyards or we will need some
type of access. A 20' easement is requested between lots 61 and 62, and
between lots 19 and 20. That has to do entirely with the sewer and future
connections to adjacent property owners. Just look at the elevations and
try to find the best way to make that happen.
Brackett: Ok.
Petrie:
We are requesting that the sewer be extended to the west side of lot 77
along Persimmon Drive. That is right out front. I need to send a set of
these plans to Paul Hawkins at OMI to determine if it will affect the
existing lift station or if there are any improvements needed with that lift
station. I need another set of plans so I can send and request another set
from you, it is just this one plan. I hope to get something back from him
very soon. The grading, it was acceptable as a preliminary, that looks
good. If you revise your detention pond with all these comments from
parks, we would like to see a revised grading plan. Drainage, I had some
comments regarding easements and really it has to do with, for one thing,
we would like to see separate drainage and utility easements where
possible. I have listed six locations where we would like to find a way to
let that happen. There are several locations where we saw easements 15'
in width for drainage, 20' is the minimum requirement. I have got a note
that we would need additional drainage easements north of lots 185, 112,
113, 132, 125 and 126, which is basically just to the south of Greens
Chapel Road. We show those storm pipes to be extended pretty far into
those lots.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 17
Brackett: Ok.
Petrie:
I know that all may change before we get the final plans. Also, provide a
minimum of 25' wide drainage easement through the detention pond for
the boundary. Number two, just something after looking at your plan, we
will probably need the storm pipe system extended to the south. You've
got about 5 acres of offsite drainage coming onto the site, it looks like at a
fairly specific location. We just want to plan for when that happens.
Other than that, the drainage report is fine and acceptable. If you change
the detention pond we will need revised calculations. On streets, I
mentioned that we may choose to cost share to get Persimmons Street up
to a collector street at this time. Of course, right now just as it is shown,
28' wide would be all that is required. There is a slight possibility that we
would like to get that to a 36' wide street. The city would be responsible
for the additional charges.
Brackett: The easement would stay the same?
Petrie:
It has got a 70' so that probably wouldn't change. There are several of
these streets that would be removed to a residential street classification. I
think right now we show everything as a local street. When you look at
that, that would reduce the street widths from 28' to 24' wide and right-of-
way from 50' to 40'. Last under streets, the Planning Commission will
have to determine any offsite street improvements. You are showing what
we would recommend, we have discussed this previously so there are no
surprises there, widened 14' from centerline with curb and gutter. Lastly,
just a note, regarding this construction on Double Springs, if they are not
completed when you begin construction, you do need to get their approval
to get in that right-of-way. It will be our right-of-way and our street when
it is completed but at this point, while it is under construction, it is under
the state's control and you will need an ok on that.
Brackett: Ok.
Petrie: That is all that I have.
Conklin: Charlie, the lots aren't created as half lots like they were over at Appleby.
Sloan: They will be.
Conklin: Ok, two units, but right now they are not shown that way?
Sloan: No they are not, that is shown for one big unit on there, we would like to
split that in half.
Conklin: I just want to make that known because the utilities, it probably makes a
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 18
difference.
Sloan: You can't really buy one lot so in a sense, you have to buy both lots to
make a building so in that sense it is a zero lot line.
Edwards: But you will have to do a lot split on every one of these lots. If you would
just show it now, you could avoid that.
Conklin: You need to show that now. Chris, do you understand that?
Brackett: We need to split all of those?
Sloan: Yes, all of those are supposed to be split.
Conklin: So you need lot 40 A and B, that is how I would like to see it so we know.
I was thinking, I don't remember the name of that.
Sloan: North Heights.
Conklin- Right.
Edwards: Chris, on lot 68, 69 and 70, you are not showing a minimum 70' lot width,
we did measure that for a 25' setback and I tried to measure and it didn't
look like it was meeting that. I just need you to check on that.
Brackett: Which ones?
Edwards: 68, 69 and 70. Utilities?
Mike Phipps — Ozark Electric Coop.
Phipps: Lets get back to this zero lot line.
Conklin: Yes, North Heights.
Phipps: I'm not familiar with North Heights, I am familiar with Harbor Meadows
in Springdale and those transformers. What we are going to require is 15'
from any structure to our transformers. If it gets closer, the developer will
be required to build a blast wall between the transformer and the structure.
These things where they are 2' or 3' away from these buildings is not
going to be good.
Conklin: Basically, you put a duplex on this lot and you have a firewall in between
and you have the property line running down the middle but the setbacks
between the structures are still going to be 8'. The structures are a
common wall in between. In between, you still have the typical RMF -6
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 19
setbacks between the structures. I don't know if that helps or it doesn't
help.
Sloan: Basically, it is one unit and we meet the side setbacks.
Conklin: I think Fieldstone has some of those out there.
Phipps: Ok, Harbor Meadows is terrible up there.
Conklin: I don't think there are any structures 2' or 3' from each other. You are
going to have 16' from overhang to overhang between each lot, 9 and 10,
11 and 12.
Phipps: These drainage easements for gas, phone, electric and TV, they can go in
the same easement, we require a minimum 20' easement too.
Brackett: I guess I need to know which of those you are planning on going through
so that I can change those too because they want us to separate that.
Phipps: I have to come through just about where everybody does. We need a 20'
UE between 82 and 83, run that to the east all the way over to 127 and
128.
Brackett: Stop it there?
Phipps: Yes. We will need a 20' UE on 58 and 59, there is one there that is not
labeled, is it the same thing on 62 and 63?
Brackett: Yes.
Petrie: I asked for an easement between 60 and 61, but the one between 62 and 63
will work, we can take the other one off.
Phipps: You've got one for water?
Petrie: Sewer.
Phipps: I am going to cross here and as I cross I'm going to come up. I don't
want to put a bunch of 90s in there underground.
Brackett: Ok.
Petrie: If you will make that a 25', we can all get in there.
Phipps: On these crossings Chris, we will need six 4", 42" deep. From 79 and 80
straight across over to 88, 82 and 82 over to 86 and 87, 110 and 111 to 114
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 20
and 115, 131 and 130 over to 127 and 128, 122 and 121 to 58 and 59,
Brackett: One to 122?
Phipps: Yes, 121 and 122, to the east 20', straight back across to 58 and 59. 99
and 100 to 62 and 63, lots 28 and 54 to 26 and 27
Brackett: Did you ask for an easement between 26 and 27 that I didn't get?
Phipps: I thought you had one labeled there, maybe you don't, but we need one
there if you don't have a 20'. There at lot 6 over to lot 42, along that
easement, what do you have sewer or drainage in there? We need to cross
right in there.
Brackett: Ok.
Phipps: At the end of these stub out streets, we need crossings. Then the one to
the south there. We've got a 25' UE along the setback of Double Springs
inside the right-of-way.
Brackett: Yes.
Phipps: Alright, any relocation of existing facilities will be at the developers
expense.
Brackett: You don't have anything along Double Springs do you?
Phipps: Yes, I have got a house here. On lot 76 that you have overhead to, we are
going to have to relocate that to underground. We should be on the west
side. There is a 10' UE for all streetlights. It is like 96 and 97, you would
need a 10' UE on those. Before I could tell crossings on this, I would like
to see where these drainage easements are going to be concreted at so we
can call for conduits under those to pick up these lots that may be on either
side of the drainage easement.
Brackett: All the drainage will be underground. We are not planning any swales
right now.
Petrie: The pipes are for hundred year?
Phipps: Even if it is pipe, we are going to need a crossing underneath to get over,
depending on how deep they are because we need to cross, especially
where you have a separated, like on lots 42, 43 and 44, when I come
through there, we may be on the north side of that drainage easement but
we are going to have to get to those three lots. I imagine this is for
everybody, we will need conduits under that drainage easement to set our
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 21
facilities to serve those three lots. We could leave it on the other side and
make whoever buys the house dig back under that, but that is really not
providing good service.
Brackett: When we have a better idea of the drainage I will get with you on the
design.
Phipps: It is a lot cheaper to do that than us coming in and having to boar to get
under that. It really gets expensive and you could save a lot of money by
doing it beforehand. That is all I have.
Larry Gibson — Cox Communications
Gibson: I will agree with these utility easements and crossings Mike has asked for.
Any relocation of our facilities, which I think the majority of ours is going
to be on the west side of Double Springs Road, will be at the developers
expense and we ask for about three weeks notification before they start on
any utilities to get our plans working. That is all I have.
Sue Clouser — Southwestern Bell
Clouser: Did we get a crossing from 110 and 111?
Phipps: Yes.
Clouser: Ok. I agree with all the crossings and utility easements and if we have
anything that needs to be relocated, it will be at the developer's expense.
Edwards: I just have one more thing. This house on lot 76, that is to remain?
Brackett: Yes.
Edwards: Ok, what we are going to need to do is do a variance on that. The side
setback is now becoming a rear and it is not meeting the 20'. It looks like
it is 15' out. It is no big rush because we have got some time until the
final plat, but I just wanted to make you aware and the existing structure
can remain.
Phipps: Chris, one more crossing there that I want to point out. We have got a tree
here on 42 or 41, a 30" walnut.
Brackett: They are all going to be gone.
Phipps: They are all going to be taken out?
Brackett: Yes.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 22
Phipps: Lets do this. Lets get another crossing from 44 and 45 over to 51 and 52,
that way we'll have an option there if we want.
Brackett: Ok.
Gibson: On this zero lot line, is that what you are calling that when they build a
duplex on one lot?
Sloan: They buy one half of the lot. The original lot line though is platted that
way and there is no way to move, it has to be located that way.
Conklin: When they build those, they need to make sure the wall in the middle is
right up and down the middle of the wall.
Gibson: What is going to ultimately end up happening is anything you have to
relocate or anything like that
Sloan: We have never had one lot line adjustment problem.
Conklin: This is not that uncommon.
Gibson: Have you done one?
Phipps: No.
Sloan: You can come look at my last project and you will know exactly what I'm
talking about.
Conklin: North Heights, right before you get to the nursing home.
Phipps: It is in our design that we draw up. I am going to go through here and I
am going to set meter pads for one meter because whoever puts the
pedestals in there puts one meter at the fence.
Edwards: It is like a duplex, don't they have two meters on a duplex?
Phipps: Yes, but we don't have to worry about crossing the property lines with our
services or our facilities.
Sloan: The utilities are on the centerline, you have two lots together and you have
accomplished that.
Phipps: Yes, but when we initially go into a subdivision, that is what we do, the
property lines on the plat, it is set on those. I could see if we skip a lot
line.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 23
Conklin- These are going to be individual lots. That is why I brought it up.
Phipps: What are we showing, 132 lots in this thing? I would set this up for 132
meters. If you are going to 264.
Brackett: Do you want us to renumber?
Conklin: Yes. That is why I brought it up, I just wanted to make sure you guys
were aware of it.
Phipps: Good, I wasn't aware of it.
Conklin- I looked at it and I knew what he wanted to do out there, he has been
talking to me for about six months now.
Phipps: I appreciate that. That affects the size of the transformer too. I would
have set it up for four and I have got eight.
Brackett: Am I done?
Conklin: Yes, thank you.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 24
LSD 02-8.00: Large Scale Development (Mathias Properties, Inc. , pp 401) was
submitted by Northstar Engineering Consultants, Inc. on behalf of Mathias Properties,
Inc. for property located at the northwest corner of State Hwy 16 and Tahoe Drive. The
property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 1.21 acres
with a 14,875 sq.ft. office building proposed.
Edwards: The next item is LSD 02-8.00 for Mathias Properties submitted by
Northstar for property located at the northwest corner of Wedington and
Tahoe. The property is zoned C-2 and contains 1.21 acres with a 14,875
sq.ft. office building proposed. First of all, this is not meeting a lot of
ordinances so I have taken the liberty to make sure that you guys do have
one of our ordinance books.
Ingalls: We do.
Edwards: Ok, well you can have another one. We are going to go over all the things
that you don't meet. The most significant problem is two things, we don't
have a drainage calculation, which is requiring us to pull you at this time.
You will come back to the next Plat Review, I think it is March 13th
because anytime you do not meet an ordinance requirement, you need to
submit a waiver in writing requesting that with rational. I don't see any
ordinance that you are not meeting that staff will support. There is no
reason to not have your required greenspace and not meet your parking lot
aisle widths and that kind of thing, and not have your landscaping. This
will be reviewed at the next meeting but we are going to go ahead and go
over all of our comments because we did all review this. Do you have any
questions so far?
Ingalls: No.
Edwards: Ok, this is Shelli Rushing, she is an Associate Planner in our office and
she is going to read the staff comments.
Rushing: First is from our Parks Operation Coordinator, Kim Rogers, there are no
comments with regard to parks. Second, from our Development
Coordinator from Sidewalks, Tahoe Drive is a local street in a C-2 zone
which requires a 6' sidewalk and a minimum 6' greenspace. The sidewalk
would be continuous through driveways with a 2% crosslope and elevated
2% above the top of the curb. He would like you to add a sidewalk
symbol to the legend. 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 with
Portland Cement Concrete and an inspection is required prior to concrete
pour. Bicycle parking racks are required, two racks will be required.
Ingalls: You want those along Tahoe Drive, is that what you are requesting?
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 25
Shreve: Bicycle racks need to be up close to the entrance of the building.
Rushing: They need to be within 50'.
Shreve: I've got a copy of that section here that I will give to you if you want.
Rushing: Next, we have the Landscape Review.
Hesse: I'll talk to him. All of those things that you need to check off on this copy
is a preliminary requirement. You guys wouldn't meet all of those
preliminary requirements, it seems like no preliminary plat requirements
are met, that is what I'm asking for. Do you have a copy of the tree
ordinance with that?
Edwards: It is, it is attached to it.
Hesse: The islands aren't big enough to meet the 150 square foot requirement.
Edwards: They are missing at least two islands in the parking lot right?
Hesse: Yes.
Rushing: All of the above requirements apply to this development and are to be
indicated on the plans. Many of the interior parking lot landscape islands
are too small to meet the 150 square foot requirement. Additionally, a
landscape island is required within the southern most row of parking, trees
are required at 30' intervals along all right-of-way and a continuous row of
shrubs is required between parking lot and adjacent streets. Very few of
the preliminary landscape requirements are met on this plan and must be
added prior to re -submittal. From our Traffic Superintendent, Perry
Franklin, not too many comments. He has noted at the bottom that your
parking dimensions are not adequate and he has provided an attachment
for you to explain those. At least one ADA space must be van accessible
and needs to be located on the nearest route to the office entrances, the
center of the parking spaces.
Edwards:
Rushing:
On your landscape ordinance, be sure to go by that one because they
missed copying the back pages of it. I don't want you to miss half of it.
Planning comments, we need elevations for the rear and the side facing
Tahoe, we need a frontage facade. Provide preliminary grading and
drainage plans, tree preservation plans. On the next page, we need to see
the adjacent zoning. The legal description needs to be on the plat. Label
street centerlines on Highway 16 (Wedington) and Tahoe. Provide the
right-of-way dimensions from Tahoe. We also need a site coverage note,
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 26
where building and pavement do not exceed 85% of the site. Indicate the
plat page number and on your vicinity map, if you would show Colorado
and Steamboat Roads on there, they are not shown on there right now, and
indicate the building site. For compliance with the Master Street Plan,
Wedington is a principal arterial and requires a minimum of 110' of right-
of-way dedication so the right-of-way needs to be shown as 55'.
Ingalls: Do we have enough?
Rushing: Your dimensioning 51' right now, which is going...
Petrie: When we are sitting here looking at the final plat, I think on the final plat
it was assumed we had a 55' of right-of-way, we need 5' more of right-of-
way with our last plat to obtain that, which is going to require your
setback to move back and your greenspace to move back. I'm not sure if
you guys were looking at an old plat or what the situation was.
Ingalls: We might have been.
Petrie: The conditional use is shown along the north side and also the east side as
shown on this plat.
Ingalls: Is this a copy of the recorded final plat with you guys?
Conklin: Yes, the original.
Petrie: Final Plat, lots 1R, 3R, 4A, 4B, 5, 6, 7, and 8 filed August of 1999.
Edwards: Ron, did you see that they are missing easements too?
Conklin: There is a 10' utility easement shown right here on this east boundary line
along Tahoe that kind of narrows down here.
Petrie:
The easement along the north, they've got their 20' utility easement, that
easement extends through that property line and they dedicated 28.65'
wide.
Rushing: When we started looking at the property, you have your use listed as retail,
however the structure states office building.
Ingalls: It is office.
Rushing: Ok, so it needs to be changed to office there. If it is an office, we are
deficient in the parking space requirements, which has been noted on
there. That needs to be taken care of, you need to show your parking lot
lighting, the bike racks.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 27
Ingalls: Is there any way we can apply for a waiver on the parking? Is that
something you think that we could get done?
Conklin- I'm not sure, can you justify the need? I am not going to give you a
response right now.
Ingalls: We can probably come up with a way to get some more parking in there
but I know this building, he doesn't want to decrease the size of the
building is what I'm getting at. If we can increase the parking space to
within four or five spaces of what is required.
Conklin: You need to write a letter explaining rational to figure out why we argue
for more parking for everybody and then we don't need parking for some
people and trying to understand what is happening here.
Edwards: We will need all of that in writing with your next submittal.
Ingalls: Ok.
Rushing: You need to provide a detailed landscape plan, all landscaping will need to
be irrigated. All 90° parking must be shown as 19'. The driveway throat
length is approximately 30', we recommend 40' for that. There are a
couple of things here that came from the zoning book. You need to show
a 5' landscaped area between the property line and paved areas on the
north and west sides. We will need a 15' landscaped area between the
propertyline and the parking lot on the east over here. This will need to be
15' and when your property line curves, you will have to curve with it.
Ingalls: I didn't realize that. You need a 24' minimum here.
Conklin: You need to meet our regulations.
Ingalls: I understand, but you have got to understand where I'm coming from too.
Rushing: There is an existing drive access here, we need to make sure we've got the
curb cuts right.
Ingalls: We knew about that and we do have a curb cut here.
Rushing: Ok. If you are going to maintain the aisle width at 12', you need to
request a variance for that.
Edwards: That is something that you can reduce from 20' down to 12'.
Ingalls: I thought that is what we were doing with the one way.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 28
Edwards:
Ingalls:
Edwards:
Ingalls:
Conklin:
Ingalls:
Conklin -
Ingalls:
Rushing:
Edwards:
Ingalls:
Edwards:
Conklin:
12' is what you can go with.
You can't do 20'?
You need a waiver for greater than the ordinance if that is what you want.
Ok.
Keep in mind, we are trying to make sure we're meeting our landscape
and open space requirements.
I understand.
Ok, more pavement is not necessarily desirable in this situation since we
are having a difficult time meeting our ordinances.
Ok.
Ok, locate detail on the proposed sign, show the screening for the
dumpster and the access for the dumpster shall not face Tahoe or
Wedington. The dumpster can't be located within 15' of landscaped area
on the east. We did receive the elevations. Revisions are due by
Wednesday, March 0h at 10:00 a.m.
I wanted to make a comment. There is a 5' landscaped area required on
all front and backsides adjacent to pavement. You've got pavement right
up to the propertyline, that is not allowed, there is a 5' landscape
requirement on the north.
What about on the west side?
On the west, only adjacent to the pavement, so not next to the building.
With regard to the design of your building, that is not going to be
acceptable. We will end up most likely having what they call a wrap
around front facade, especially on Tahoe Drive and the Planning
Commission, if this is part of a larger development, typically all four sides
are going to have to look like a front. I just want to tell you right now
because we don't need to be at Planning Commission arguing about this.
Tahoe Drive is a street and that is considered a front east elevation, it must
look like a front, it must be articulated, I am not going to design it for you
but this is what I found is the easiest thing with Golden Corral and others.
If this is what you would call a front, I think we're all in agreement, this is
a front, that needs to look like that, the north needs to look like that. I just
want to make sure that everybody is aware that what you would consider
the front and what you think is good to make it look like a front, that needs
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 29
to be replicated on the other sides of the building. The Planning
Commission will require that.
Edwards: Also, for our Commercial Design Standards, and Shelli might have
mentioned this and I missed it, but you are required to have cross access to
the west so that cross traffic can come from whatever develops to the west
over to this property so you need to make your driveway extend up to the
propertyline.
Petrie: There is cross access right now.
Edwards: To the west?
Petrie: Yes.
Edwards: You need to look at that since there is an existing.
Conklin: Have we looked at the materials allowed in Wedington Place? This is a
question for my staff.
Rushing: Yes.
Edwards: There is a list of materials that are required for this subdivision.
Ingalls: Can I have a copy of those?
Edwards: We can get you one. I think the buff brick is ok.
Rushing: They have a list of exterior finishes, the buff is fine. Dryvit is either
emerald white or monastery brown.
Ingalls: We've got some dryvit called out.
Edwards: I don't see a color.
Conklin: Has he considered going two-story in order to help site constraints since it
is an office building?
Ingalls: Is that an option we can look at?
Conklin: Yes, you said he wants this size of building. Your whole design has been
designed for 14,875 sq.ft. then you backed out from there to see what you
can have. Yes, I think that would be an option.
Ingalls: What would be the height restrictions?
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 30
Conklin: Six stories, 75' high.
Edwards: Ok, Ron?
Ron Petrie — Staff Engineer
Petrie:
I was just going to ask that you show your water and sewer service lines,
what you are proposing now is your meter locations. Will this have a fire
sprinkler system within it?
Ingalls: I'm not sure what code is. Usually anything over 13,000 is required to be
sprinkled.
Petrie:
Ok, if that is the case, I just want to make sure you're aware of a
requirement that we will need you to add a fire hydrant within 100' of
your fire department connection. Other than that, I didn't get the
preliminary grading plan or drainage report so I obviously didn't have a
whole lot to review.
Conklin- Is detention going to be required on this land?
Petrie: Detention has been provided.
Ingalls: The drainage, if I'm right Ron, isn't the curb inlet on the northwest comer
of the site and it has already been figured for flow coming to this site,
coming to that conduit?
Petrie:
Their engineer did that. You still have to meet the preliminary
requirements for a preliminary drainage report. You need those seven
items. You still need the preliminary drainage report.
Edwards: Utilities?
Jim Sargent — AEP/SWEPCO
Sargent: These easements will be fixed when you get those easements over here. I
would like to end up with a 20' easement along Wedington Drive and also
we need a utility easement along Tahoe. We would expect to come
overhead from our overhead line on the south side of the street to a pole to
your property and underground from that point to where the transformer
would be. We would expect the developer to install the conduit and
transformer pad. That is all that I have got.
Larry Gibson — Cox Communications
Gibson: Where AEP jumps across Hwy. 16 there with that new service pole,
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 31
probably in that southeast corner there somewhere. From there, I would
ask for a 4" from that location extending north to within about 4' or so of
their transformer location, just sweep them up with a 36" radius sweep.
From that pedestal location/transformer location, the 2" from the building
to that location and I agree with the easements I think they are going to
be set, that is all I have.
Sue Clouser — Southwestern Bell
Clouser: I agree with the easements on the south and east. If the parking lot ends
up going across the utility easement, taking up most of it.
Ingalls: We are going to be required to have 15' landscaped here.
Clouser: It will be the same thing on Tahoe also?
Ingalls: Yes, they mentioned that that will be a requirement.
Clouser: Then I would want a 4" conduit under the drive and then depending on
where you want, I don't know if you are going to want to locate phone
facilities inside or on a rear or side wall, but I will need two 4" conduits
either on Hwy. 16 or over to Tahoe.
Edwards: Keith, do you want the sidewalk pulled back any?
Shreve: There is a 6' greenspace along Tahoe, along Wedington is existing.
Conklin: You may also like to consider parking for your building in the behind
instead of the front to give you more room to have the 25' setback with
landscaping on the front property line if you have no parking.
Ingalls: They could enter from Tahoe and go around.
Conklin: That would be from Tahoe too if you landscape from the building to the
front property line 25' where you setback. That helps sometimes.
Ingalls: Ok. Is that all that everybody had?
Conklin: I think we're done.
Edwards: Thank you.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 32
LSD 02-7.00: Large Scale Development (Dandy/Schmitt, pp 524) was submitted by
Glenn Carter of Carter & Associates on behalf of Brian Dandy and Robert Schmitt for
property located at the southwest corner of Fletcher Avenue & Rodgers Drive. The
property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential and contains approximately 1.01
acres with 9 units proposed.
Edwards: The next item is LSD 02-7 for Dandy/Schmitt submitted by Glenn Carter
for property located at the southwest corner of Fletcher and Rodgers
Drive. The property is zoned R-2 and contains 1.01 acres with nine units
proposed.
Carter: Good morning, I'm Glenn Carter.
Newman. Is this the Hometown project?
Edwards: We're just starting over from scratch and this is all new.
Newman: I bet he doesn't want to hear they're starting over from scratch.
Carter: I have to admit, I wasn't real anxious to hear that but I was happy to hear
that we are now presenting a plat with less density that is more likeable
and tolerable to the community and to the city and something that is not
just so jammed tight in there. I think they've got a pretty nice
development going in here now. I hope you think the same.
Conklin: It is an improvement.
Edwards: From Parks, this development has not been before the Parks and
Recreation Board as required. We are going to put this on the March 4th
Parks Board meeting, even though the submittal deadline has expired.
Carter: We appreciate that.
Rogers: Did you receive that letter? Do you know if they are going to be
recommending land or money in lieu?
Carter: Yes. I have talked to the property owners and they are requesting to pay
money in lieu of land dedication.
Rogers: There are nine units, is that correct?
Carter: We will know March 4th how much that will be.
Rogers: Yes.
Carter: That letter, actually I've called that in, it has been typed, it is waiting for
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 33
my signature to fax over.
Rogers: Ok, thank you.
Edwards: From our Traffic Superintendent, streetlights are required every 300' at
intersections and at the end of the street. I don't know if there is just not
one existing or if one needs to be added.
Carter:
I didn't label it very well and I'm sorry. There is one up there at the
entrance and we'll get a label up there on that thing. I will put it in the
legend.
Edwards: Ok, that will probably help us. He wants you to check with Building
Inspections regarding ADA issues. He says your parking layout doesn't
make sense. There are cars behind each other and we've talked about that.
He does want you to check the sight distance at the entrance using an
I.T.E. method and he wants you to call him about that, although we think
it is probably going to be ok once we clear some brush out of there.
Fletcher is a local street, which requires a 6' sidewalk and a 6' greenspace
as shown, so we're in good shape. Add bicycle parking, one rack is
required.
Carter:
Let me make a comment there. I don't mean to make it sound like I'm
complaining or anything but I labeled this Lighton Trail and one of the
Planning Commissioners told me to label it Lighton Trail because there is
a sign at Summitt that says Lighton Trail and there is a sign at Rodgers
that says Lighton Trail. That is why I did that, I realize this was taken
through initially and called Fletcher Street, even we refer to it as the
Fletcher Street project.
Conklin: Have you gone up there and looked at those signs?
Carter: That is what I'm saying. There is a street sign right there, maybe I should
show that but right there where Summitt Avenue comes in, there is a street
sign that says Summitt Avenue and Lighton Trail, there is a street sign
down here that says Rodgers Drive and Lighton Trail. There are street
signs out there, I don't know how you all feel about that, I will do
whatever you ask, but a Planning Commissioner asked me to do that.
Anyway, lets move on.
Conklin: We will figure that one out Glenn. Ok?
Carter: Ok. Didn't you have a recent experience with changing street signs?
Conklin: We're not done with that yet. It is going to the Council on Tuesday night.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 34
Carter: I will be sure and watch.
Edwards: Ok, from Planning, we didn't get a disk on this project yet. That is no big
deal, I just need it sometime before permit. I am just going to bring up the
building setback issue once again. 20' must be setback an additional one
foot for each foot in excess of 20' and we talked about the gabled end and
how that equates with that rear setback and the side setback. You just
need to make sure which way the roof faces and we'll have to check with
Bob on that probably.
Carter: Is that a comment in here?
Edwards: Yes, that is a comment There is a 20' rear setback that is not shown. I
would like that added.
Carter: A 20' rear setback? Ok.
Edwards: I am a little bit concerned about the garages. Where you are showing the
parking there is not adequate length for a garage. I just want that revised
to show an adequate car length.
Conklin: You are showing a 10' garage.
Carter: Oh, garages are deeper than that.
Conklin: They better be driving small Civics or something. Is that just a drafting
error?
Carter: That is a drafting error.
Conklin: Ok, they need to be at least 20' long, the garages.
Carter: I didn't catch that. While I was working on this, I had another guy draw
all of those and make me a block and I inserted it. I forgot to tell him and
I'm sorry.
Conklin: The driveway lengths too, not just the garages, the outside too.
Carter: Yes, they need to be 19' stalls.
Conklin: Yes.
Edwards: Which, where this especially creates a problem is parking spaces 17, 18,
21 and 22 where those are not 19' long, which is going to cause blocking
of the dumpster. We don't think the trash truck will be able to get in there
because cars are going to be parked in front of it and with that we thought
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 35
maybe it could be moved between the two duplexes on the west side
possibly. I have got his comments, I didn't get it in here, which I need to
get to you which states that they need a 12x16 concrete pad. His name is
Travis, he said he had talked to you, so you understand that. He didn't
realize until I was talking about the parking spaces that this location is
going to be blocked, so that is probably not the best place to put it.
Carter: Yes, we are having difficulty with that. Did you say 12x16 or 18?
Edwards: Let me get you his comments, I'm not 100% sure. Do you know if they
are going to use any parking lot lighting?
Carter: I don't know, I think they are but I don't know off the top of my head.
Edwards: Ok, we need to check on that and the type. I've got Kim Hesse,
Landscape Administrator's, comments. I will just read it to you. Due to
the fact that this is a revised design with the combination of both parcels
she will need additional information to complete her review for Planning
Commission and file records. We will need a tree preservation plan that
reports the square footage of the existing and preserved canopy, show the
remaining existing trees and the edges of their canopy. You will need to
show preservation fencing in areas where we can save remaining trees,
such as the perimeter of the site and the area along the northern and
northeastern boundaries. Originally, each of the previous developments
were required to plant eight large trees, for this combined effort, she will
keep with that initial recommendation and require a total of 16 large shade
trees with 6,400 sq.ft. and please feel free to contact her if you have any
questions.
Carter: Ok. I read that and understand that.
Conklin: Glenn, what is this paved area on the south right here by the detention
pond?
Carter:
It is just a turn around for those people to back out and go out in the last
unit. It doesn't need to be that big probably. We might reduce that
because there is no need in making it that big if it is going to decrease the
pervious area.
Edwards: You could plant another tree there.
Carter: We could and reduce our detention pond. Whatever it comes to, I don't
know, I'll run the numbers.
Carter: It wasn't intended to be additional parking.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 36
Conklin:
Carter: Right. It would be ok for turnarounds for 14 and 16 to back out into it and
go.
Edwards:
It is not going to work because your parking is going to be blocking it
most of the time.
I will say, I have talked to the neighbors and once again, I do have a
concern about guest parking and that kind of thing. You might tell Bob he
might want to have a response to that and consider that.
Conklin- One thing that I looked at yesterday was your aisle length is pretty big. I
don't know how wide it is in some places, but there might be some
opportunity for some parallel parking in some of these areas.
Edwards: That is depending on what we do with the dumpster.
Conklin- I thought you might want to consider that.
Carter: We might consider coming out with more green and less pavement, that
would probably be desirable. There are places that there could be parallel
parking. Do you have any information on parallel parking?
Conklin: t think it is 22' length, 8' or 9'.
Carter: That is added onto your aisle width and your minimum aisle width is 24'?
Conklin: You have lots. You could draw new lines here without causing anymore
pavement.
Carter: I need to work on that a bit. I believe you are right, I think we've got too
much asphalt and we could probably close that down a little bit and they
could still have room for additional parking if they need it. It is our
understanding with the parking, we've got what we're required.
Edwards: Yes, you do.
Carter: We've got more than we're required but we don't want to go over.
Edwards: Yes, you don't want to need a waiver. You might have a response for the
property in between and the garage.
Carter: We are required 27, what can we go, 20% over?
Edwards: Yes, you've got 30.
Carter: We could do 32 and that would be our 20%. That might help.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 37
Conklin -
Carter:
Conklin:
Edwards:
Conklin -
Carter:
Conklin:
Carter:
Conklin:
Edwards:
Carter:
Edwards:
Ron Petrie
Petrie:
Carter:
Petrie:
I think that is one of the big concerns that the neighborhood has expressed.
They want us to have more parking?
Yes because there is nowhere else to park. You can't park on Lighton
Trail.
There will be no parking signs on both sides of Lighton Trail.
The city has agreed to put signs up on both sides for no parking.
Do you think, in order to make this more palpable, should we go on and
ask for more parking?
If you can figure out where to put it.
Would you guys like to hear that or would that be a problem asking for a
waiver? If I were to do this, I narrow that lane down and I show parallel
parking all the way up through there, and add say six spaces.
I don't know. See what you can come up with. That is a concern that has
been expressed and I think we need to address it. These are three bedroom
units and maybe there might be multiple cars going to each unit.
The one thing that I was thinking, and I'm not going to make this a
requirement; but on these single units, there is no parking outside of them,
only in the garage. I was thinking Bob could make part of his lease that
they must park in the garage and there would be no other spaces available,
they would be limited to two cars or that kind of thing. That might help
the neighbors too. That is an option. If they have three cars we may have
a problem.
Ok.
That is all that I have.
—Staff Engineer
You are showing water meters in front of every one of these units.
Yes, you want them up front?
The only way you can achieve that is if you extend the public main down
through here. We will need to see those water meters at the right-of-way
and then you can extend your service lines across. Either way would be
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 38
Carter:
Petrie:
acceptable, if you can figure that one out. We need some joint use
agreements because we've got several items going back and forth across
propertylines, two different property owners. In regard to the detention
and in regard to the sewer, a private forced main, a private lift station and
just access. That all needs to be addressed, particularly who is going to
maintain what. Who is responsible. If that lift station goes out and we've
got it flowing down the hill here, who is going to get out there and fix it?
Other than that, the grading, you are only showing the grading within this
parking lot. I am sure that they are going to have more grading by the
houses, for the sidewalk, it just looks incomplete, if you could show me all
the grading that is needed, that way I can check for setbacks and stuff like
that.
In particular, the detention pond, the way we've got it is setback 5' from
the line.
It is just not matching that. I don't know if you are going to have to grade
to get these houses in, what that is going to look like. If I can get a new
application form, I do not need a separate review fee but this is more or
less a new project. I need a new application. It looks like you've got an
old note regarding the retaining wall on the west side, you can remove
that. Will the parking lot itself have curb and gutter?
Carter: Yes, it will have to.
Petrie:
Carter:
Petrie:
Ok, the detention pond, I need that concrete pilot channel through there.
Go ahead and show where your outlet structure is going to be and on the
grading plan, as far as the report, just two things. If I could see a map that
shows the offsite drainage area and then just a table that summarizes.
You've got most of the information, I just need a table, A, B, C, and D. It
is very simple, very easy to reference and it is required.
Can I show you the drainage areas on an 8 'A x 11 sheet to be included
with the final report? If I do them on here it is just going to blow this
away. Believe it or not, they are on here but you just don't see them.
Maybe they are not on your plot, yeah they are. But if I hatched them so
you could see them then you couldn't see anything else so I will fix that.
Only I need to see that in the report. Lastly, it is just the Planning
Commission determination of improvements to Fletcher or Lighton, or
whatever you want to call it. We will probably recommend an assessment,
as we have discussed, or due to the density of this, I will have to get some
subjective traffic numbers to look at that and make an assessment. It will
be up to the Planning Commission to make that determination. That is all
I have.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 39
Carter: Is that assessment concerning whether we build now or just pay money?
Petrie: Yes.
Carter: Is the distance between the building and the pond a problem?
Petrie: I think you've shown it 20' right now.
Carter: Ok, no, 20' didn't work. I revised the pond and submitted it. There is a
problem with going 20' between these buildings I thought, I might be
wrong about that but I thought there was a problem getting those buildings
closer than 20'. In addition to my thinking that, the owner doesn't want to
get them closer than that. To make the pond big enough so that I have the
same volume, my software designs a rectangular pond and what I shoot
for is I may change the shape of it but I keep the same volume and I keep
the same head over the outlet pipe so I've got the same exit flow. In doing
that, I ended up with 16' from the building. Do we need a request for a
waiver or is that something that can be approved?
Petrie:
It has to be a waiver granted by the Planning Commission. I need a
request. Lets get back to this building. Sara, do you know is that a
requirement that they have to have 20'?
Edwards: No, 10' is the minimum.
Petrie: We're talking about 4' when you ask for a waiver.
Carter: Ok, he had the building further down than that when the owner gave it to
me to deal with. I told him I moved it up until they were 20' apart and he
said he couldn't make it work if I got closer than that. I need to talk to
him, so ok. I just wanted to get your feeling on that and I will get back
with him to see if we can't stand four more feet. I don't see what it is
going to hurt.
Petrie: Ok. Otherwise, we just need a letter with the application.
Edwards: Utilities?
Glenn Newman — AEP/SWEPCO
Newman: I will need an easement on, is this a tree preservation area that runs along
the back of the south half of the west propertyline?
Carter: It is a detention pond there. Then there will be 20' between the building
and the pond.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 40
Newman: Well, I'm talking about along the west propertyline, the 12" cedar tree, is
that a tree preservation area that begins there and goes all the way south?
Carter:
Yes it will be. We are going to revise our tree preservation plan and we
are going to show that canopy as preserved and we are going to have to
put up tree protection along there. I guess that would be a problem with
utilities?
Newman: What I would propose to do then is maybe get a utility easement along the
west property line south, at least however far we can go down south along
the west property line, stop there and what I will do is locate my
transformer at that area from that point it would become
developer/customer owned facilities to the building south of there and we
would do the same thing over on the east property line, come down half
way or so to the 20' utility easement, stop it and then run services. It
would be your conductor ditch from that point to the building.
Hesse: Could we have the transformer between the buildings? The whole
perimeter of that property is preservation area.
Newman: I can do that but all of their servers and conductors and everything would
cross the driveway, parking angle and all of that stuff.
Carter: We would just have to have conduits to everything.
Newman: Yes. We can, are there nine units? We can attempt to locate the
transformer in front of the green area.
Carter: Or between the buildings.
Newman: That just builds a lot of stuff for people to run into on dark nights.
Carter: On the east side, for those three units, it looks like, well, no, I will have to
look at that canopy and see what we've got.
Newman: Most of the time in an apartment complex like this people request that the
utilities be in the back. Those transformers and poles have a tendency to
run out in front of people when they are driving in late at night or early in
the morning.
Carter: Can I take another look at that and get with you and work that out?
Newman: Yes. If we go along the rear then we will need an easement down to
however far we can go without being in conflict with the tree preservation
area. If we go in front then we will need an easement across there to
designated locations that are out of the way and are inconvenient.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 41
Hesse: It can't be next to the building?
Newman: Yes, it can be next to a building, the only thing that I know of as far as
utilities is they can't build a building or structure on an easement so as
long as they are outside the easement then I guess they could put it there.
Hesse: There might not always be a 10' clear space around the building so it
could be...
Carter:
Well, we're up against an 8' setback. I am looking at the east side right
now and I am thinking about coming down that, we're eight, we would
have to move out another 12' from that building, which would be 20' just
to get past that.
Newman: Yes Sir.
Carter:
Let me look at that and see what I can do there. It may be that we could
get an easement to work on that side, take care of that and then we will
build closer.
Hesse: You could go down the center for one side.
Newman: If we go down the center for one side we could find a place to come down
and go right across and have the transformer location and then it would be
customer conductor, ditch and facilities from that point to each unit.
Larry Gibson — Cox Communications
Gibson: There would be enough room in there through this greenspace in front of
the building where you've got your trees and landscaping, would there be
enough room in there for a transformer and a cable TV pad?
Carter: There would, but I just don't know if he wants to put them out front.
Gibson: I understand.
Newman: When you start padding out transformers, one or two power pedestals, and
telephone and gas, you've got a little cluster there.
Carter: We need to work on a utility plan.
Newman: I will tell you what we will do, as far as we can we will try to follow the
same route as electric does. The idea that Glenn had, coming down so far
with the 20' UV and then the customer furnish the conduit from that
location to the building.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 42
Carter:
The other thing that is going to affect this plan here is I am going to
change this pavement out, reduce the pavement and increase the
greenspace, this little pointed thing is liable to turn into an island that
comes further up. We may be able to come down to there with a
transformer pad and the owner might put conduits to the backs of
buildings and you would have to have your pad for each building. Is one
transformer pad required for each building?
Newman: No. Nine units, ideally we would probably want to put two transformers,
one coming down and then go across and put one on either side of the
drive or the parking area there. One big transformer might work.
Carter: We have five on the east and four on the west.
Newman: Yes Sir.
Carter: Ok. That may be the best solution is to come down this property line.
That is still a property line, there are two properties, we could go 10' on
either side, we could come down to that point and then run conduits over
to the backs of these buildings. This greenspace between these two small
buildings is going to be, I am going to have to grade this and show you the
difference, but it is going to be quite a bit higher than the pavement. I
don't think to the point that we have to have a retaining wall, at least I
hope not, maybe a little bit of one around the edge of the buildings but that
will be high enough that there is enough grade separation that there won't
be anybody driving up there. They won't be able to get up there. We will
curb and gutter and a 3:1 slope, it will be hard for anybody to get to. The
same with these buildings, there is quite a grade drop.
Gibson: With that location there, it looks like they did mount a transformer on that
building space you are talking about from there south to these other two
buildings down here, could you come out of the back of it and come back
around?
Carter:
We would probably have to come down to this little pointed space here. It
is probably going to end up being something like that and we might put a
pad out there and he might be able to service these four in the back.
Gibson: You can copy me on that, when you come to an agreement of where your
transformers are going to be, copy me on this and I will do my honest best
to get ours in the same location. We will try to make it fit.
Newman: Find out if he has any preference with the utilities in the front or back but
it is a pretty good cluster of facilities. You can't hide them.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 43
Carter: You can't screen them or fence them?
Newman: You can but it has to be 4' from them and in front of the transformer I
need 10'. It can be in a parking lot or a driveway, but I need 10' open
area. Those guys don't like to get very close to that voltage when it goes
off.
Carter: I maybe could put some shrubs around it or in front of it or something to
block it from the front.
Newman. It has to be an open area that they can open up and use 8' sticks and being
able to work.
Carter: You have to have 10' of clearing?
Newman: Yes Sir.
Carter: Alright, Larry, do you have a phone number where I can reach you besides
the main line?
Gibson: Yes. 717-3765. The only other thing I had was across this front entrance,
we do have a high count fiber optic cable buried on the south side of
Fletcher or Lighton or whatever you want to call it. It is 30" to 36" deep
and it services the majority of Fayetteville.
Carter: Is it really that deep? When I was up there it looked like it was really
shallow.
Gibson: It is supposed to be 30" to 36". They boared all of that with a directional
boar, they boared the whole south side of that easement there.
Carter: t noted it but I will make another note.
Hesse: I think it is kind of shallow. I think they hit a lot of rocks and I know at
the corner of Rodgers it is shallow.
Gibson: What you may have seen right there is where they started our boar but
they came back and put that down and then brought the boar from the
other direction to that point. It may have been coming out like this from
where they were boaring.
Carter: Well we are aware of it and we will watch for it.
Gibson: That is the only thing I have.
Sue Clouser — Southwestern Bell
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 44
Clouser: Glenn, you have a 20' UE, where is that?
Carter:
It runs along the corner of this around to here. We made a 20' UE up to
here and we stopped because that is not our property, it is Center Street
right-of-way. We don't give any easements out there, we don't have any
control over that. I guess they are there or you could use the right-of-way.
Clouser: Right.
Carter: All we have to do is just be careful and not hit their lines.
Edwards: We don't plan on constructing a street there.
Clouser: That's right. I remember now. If you want to go down the middle or
whatever you decide to do, as long as you give conduit wherever there is
asphalt and then I would need to set two pedestals, one for either piece of
property and whether you want to put them here and here or here and here,
that is fine but then you will need to bring those conduits back over.
Carter: Ok, what size conduits do you need?
Clouser: For these residential, a 2" conduit will be fine because we will just be
putting service for that back here.
Carter: Is electric and cable the same?
Newman: Yes.
Clouser: The main conduit that you bring in from the asphalt to the pedestals, that I
would prefer to be 4", so 4" from the pedestal and then 2" from that point
to the homes that we will be serving.
Carter: Ok, so they need to provide that to the pedestal?
Clouser: Yes, if it is under asphalt.
Newman: That will be customer. I am talking about from the street to the pedestal
from the transformer.
Carter: From Lighton Trail?
Newman: I will provide that with the cable and the conduit down to the transformer
and from there whatever your electrician decides he needs to
accommodate his wire size.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 45
Carter: Ok.
Newman: It will be your ditch, cable and conduit from that point to each individual
meter.
Carter: That's the way you do it?
Clouser: We will need you to provide us a conduit if it is under asphalt whether it is
in a utility easement or not, we need it provided and then we need a 2" to
each of the dwellings.
Carter: Larry, do you need that 2" from the street down provided by us or not?
Gibson: We are kind of like SWEPCO, from Lighton Trail down to the first point,
we would probably just go ahead and furnish our own cable and conduit
and then from that point to the building it would be the customer's
expense.
Carter:
I will look at it and see if there is any other way to do this but it seems to
me like there is not a possible way to do it. When we start moving this
over to get 20' it gets into the whole design. Over here we've got trees
that we can't take out so it doesn't allow us to get back to these buildings.
Unless you hear different, that is probably what you are going to see next.
Edwards: Thanks.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 46
LSP 02-12.00: Lot Split (Wilson, pp 482) was submitted by Alan Reid on behalf of
Troy Wilson for property located at the SE corner of Holtz Drive and Palmer Avenue.
The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 0.38
acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 0.19 acres and 0.19 acres.
Edwards: Ok, we are going to go back to item number three, which is the lot split for
Wilson submitted by Alan Reid on behalf of Troy Wilson for property
located at the SE corner of Holtz Drive and Palmer Avenue. The property
is zoned R-1 and contains .38 acres. The request is to split into .19 and .19
acres. Good morning.
Reid: Good morning.
Edwards: This is Shelli Rushing, I don't know if you have met her. She is a Planner
in our office, she is going to be going over your comments today.
Rushing: From our Development Coordinator, as per a legal opinion dated October
23, 2001, sidewalks are not required for lot splits, so you don't need to do
any sidewalks. Sidewalks will be required at the time of development.
Holtz Drive and Palmer Avenue are local streets which will require a four
foot sidewalk and a minimum of six feet green space. We do not have any
comments from the Traffic Division. From Parks and Recreation, there
will be a parks fee in the amount of $470 that will be due prior to
receiving a building permit. On the next page is the Planning Division
comments. We have got a couple of things.
Edwards:
Reid:
Edwards:
Rushing:
Edwards:
Ron Petrie —
Petrie:
Do you want us to contact you or the contact, Mr. Wilson, with any
questions?
You probably should call me.
Ok.
The Master Street Plan is fine, we just need the new address provided on
the final plat.
Ok, Ron?
Staff Engineer
Just a couple of quick comments. Where this existing waterline is along
the south boundary, our standard condition is for a 10' UE from the line
and more or less from that south boundary, so we need to get 2' more of
easement on that. I just had a general note where this existing water
surface is, it will not be able to serve tract A like it is doing now, just so
you are aware of that for the record.
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 47
Reid:
Petrie:
Ok. I can just put a note on the plat. If you look, I have got a 6" waterline
to serve this tract A from now on.
It would be best if both of them, if somebody is going to have to pay to get
a tap across the road, they probably could make that a double for just a
very small amount of money and set two meters right there. That is the
best and then it puts the meter out behind people's houses. That is the best
ideal situation. Obviously, this one exists now so I am not saying you
can't use that for tract B.
Reid: Ok.
Edwards: Does anybody need any easements?
Glenn Newman — AEP/ SWEPCO
Newman: I think I'm alright, I think I am along the front. We will have to relocate
though.
Sue Clouser — Southwestern Bell
Clouser: At Palmer Avenue, can we show that 25' building setback and UE
continuing across there because going west to east, that is just a building
setback and not a utility easement. Can you make this continuous here on
this side?
Petrie: I made that same comment on that 10' because it doesn't show to extend
all the way back to that southeastern boundary.
Larry Gibson — Cox Communications
Gibson: I think we are ok.
Reid:
I will just extend that easement on down. Let me ask you about sidewalks,
is there not something in place that they can do money instead of
sidewalks? Is there an ordinance in place that allows that?
Edwards: Yes but we are not requesting sidewalks.
Rushing: Not until somebody develops it.
Reid: Right, but what I'm saying is there are no sidewalks on any of these streets
right now.
Edwards: There is an ordinance in place and they can decide at the time of permit
Technical Plat Review
February 27, 2002
Page 48
what they want to do. He has to go out there and make a determination. If
he feels that for some reason it is not needed right now, yes. It is $3.00 a
sq.ft. is our ordinance requirement, which is what it costs us to build. If
you hire a contractor you can usually get it done cheaper so most people
are more willing to build a sidewalk unless there are topography problems.
Reid: It is $3.00 a square foot? That would be like $12 a running foot for a 4'
sidewalk.
Edwards: Ok, thank you.
Reid: Thank you.