HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-03-27 - MinutesTECHNICAL PLAT REVIEW
A regular meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee was held on Wednesday, March 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 02-15.00: Lot Split (Rogers, pp 401)
Page 2
LSD 02-10.00: Large Scale Development (Guido's, pp 401)
Page 7
FPL 02-4.00: Final Plat (Pine Valley Phase V, pp 363)
Page 17
FPL 02-5.00: Final Plat (McMillan Estates, pp 441)
Page 22
STAFF PRESENT
Keith Shreve
Kim Hesse
Sara Edwards
Ron Petrie
Renee Thomas
Kim Rogers
Tim Conklin
Shelli Rushing
Perry Franklin
Forwarded
Forwarded
Forwarded
Forwarded
STAFF ABSENT
Dennis Ledbetter
Solid Waste
UTILITIES PRESENT UTILITIES ABSENT
Jim Sargent, AEP/ SWEPCO
Mike Phipps, Ozark Electric Coop.
Sue Clouser, Southwestern Bell
Larry Gibson, Cox Communications
Glenn Newman, AEP/ SWEPCO
Johnny Boles, Arkansas Western Gas
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 2
LSP 02-15.00: Lot Split (Rogers, pp 401) was submitted by Al Harris of Crafton, Tull
& Association, Inc. on behalf of Sam Rogers for property located at the northwest comer
of Salem Road and Wedington Drive. The property is zoned R -O, Residential Office and
C-1, Neighborhood Commercial containing 8.36 acres. The request is to split into two
tracts of 4.77 acres and 3.59 acres.
Edwards: Welcome to the Wednesday, March 27th Technical Plat Review
Committee. The first item on the agenda is a lot split for Rogers
submitted by Al Harris of Crafton, Tull & Associates for property located
at the northwest corner of Salem Road and Wedington Drive. The
property is zoned R -O, Residential Office and C-1, Neighborhood
Commercial containing 8.36 acres. The request is to split into two tracts
of 4.77 acres and 3.59 acres. Good morning. Back in 1998 there was a lot
split processed for this 1.61 acre tract. As a requirement of that lot split no
future lot splits could be done, they would have to go through a
subdivision. What we need to do is we can go ahead and continue on with
the process, but we are just going to need a new application for a
Preliminary Plat. By having a Preliminary Plat that will mean you will
have to go through Final Plat.
Conklin: I didn't realize that Al. I apologize, when you met with me it looked
simple to me but it wasn't simple when we looked in the file.
Edwards: I am going to start with Parks, there are no comments from Parks. From
Sidewalks, there is a 4' sidewalk on Salem and a 6' on Wedington. If any
sidewalks are damaged due to construction, repairs will be required at the
developer's expense. New sidewalks, driveway approaches or access
ramps shall meet UDO requirements. From Planning, there will be fire
hydrants required at the time of development so we want a note added to
the plat that says fire hydrants will be required.
Harris: That is when we actually develop the lots to sell them?
Edwards: Yes.
Conklin: When large scale development occurs.
Edwards: Many of these conditions are continued over from the lot split so you can
just continue on.
Harris:
A question for you, do you know if that other lot split was ever finalized
or anything?
Edwards: Well, Arkansas National Bank is there now and they own the property.
Harris: The assessor still shows it as one parcel when I looked up the number.
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 3
Petrie:
Conklin:
Edwards:
Harris:
Edwards:
Phipps:
Edwards:
Ron Petrie —
Petrie:
Probably nobody ever filed the plat for this.
Surely the deed is filed for the bank, for the property owned by Arkansas
National Bank. I would be very surprised if it wasn't.
Next, there shall be a note added that states that the entire 9.93 acre
original parcel shall be limited to only one monument sign. I did provide
all of this to you in writing on the third page. Also, a note that says that all
development shall comply with the same design theme as Arkansas
National Bank. A note that no curb cuts will be allowed on Wedington or
Salem. There are existing driveways that will be the access point for this.
A note shall be placed on the plat which states that a public street will
have to be built entirely by the developers of tract A-1 and A-2. The
construction costs will be proportionately shared based on acreage. The
right-of-way, pretty much you match the previous plat as far as the right-
of-way, all of that had been dedicated with the lot split so you are showing
a 5' dedication, future 40' dedication, 15' dedication, if the plat hasn't
ever been filed that hasn't actually ever been dedicated so we will need to
dedicate it with this. On Wedington that 15' needs to be by Warranty
Deed. We may have a problem if Arkansas National Bank didn't dedicate
that we may have to go back and fix that or at least file the previous plat,
that would work.
Ok.
Also, at the time of development there will be a fee assessed for Salem
Bridge based on the projected traffic of whatever develops there. I do
need setbacks added to the plat and there is overhead electric on the site,
do you know the size of it?
Off that site it is 14.4.
Ok, that is fine, any new electric will be underground.
Staff Engineer
One thing that we discussed was getting the sewer to tract A-2 so that is
going to require a sewer extension. On your plans it is showing sanitary
sewer, I just want to make that clear that that will have to be put in before
the Final Plat. You are showing an 8" waterline along the highway. I
have included in that packet a copy of our as builts. That 8" waterline is
abandoned and there is an 18" waterline that is outside of the right-of-way,
there are easements involved with that, I want to make sure that's clear.
Under other I have the same question about ownership on all of this. I
think Sara has covered that. The right-of-way on Wedington Drive you
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 4
Harris:
Sue Clouser
Clouser:
Edwards:
Clouser:
Conklin:
Clouser:
Conklin:
Edwards:
Clouser:
Harris:
are showing 40' existing right-of-way, when they did that widening some
right-of-way was acquired, it is no longer 40' that is shown on these as
built drawings. My last comment on this is you are showing future
detention areas, I think those can be removed but I think it would confuse
the matter on these later developments. Obviously, everything now has to
have detention. Al, do you have any questions?
No.
— Southwestern Bell
Clouser:
Mike Phipps
Phipps:
On the west side there I don't know if this, to me it is a problem, you have
a 20' utility easement but a 10' building set back.
You need to change that.
It doesn't sit right. Is that normal?
He is showing a set back based on zoning and he is showing a utility
easement based on utility easements. Our ordinance states you can't build
over a utility easement.
So it is not a problem?
It is typically not a problem but we can change it.
Change it to the 20'.
Do you know what is going to be going in here yet?
No, he is just going to sell them. He wants it to be two large lots where he
can sell it to somebody else and let them develop.
Ok, that was the only comment that I had.
— Ozark Electric Coop.
Larry Gibson
Are we extending that 30' set back all the way through on that proposed
road? If we do, we would just want to make it a 30' set back and UE all
the way through there, just continue it on where it stops here. That is all I
have.
— Cox Communications
Gibson:
I agree with that easement. We have also got overhead and underground
just about almost completely surrounding this property so if we have to
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 5
relocate anything it will be at the owner's expense. That is all that I have.
Conklin: I would just like to make one statement regarding the issue of this future
road. We would like to recommend not to ask for any right-of-way
dedication at this time until future development occurs. Until we can
understand more clearly how this entire property will be developed. I am
concerned, just based on our conversations with Sam Rogers, this site is
fairly small compared to other shopping center sites which we have not
required public streets to bisect the sites. I am willing to make that
recommendation to the Planning Commission to lets not acquire any
additional right-of-way or have any streets built that could impact the site
significantly in the future.
Edwards: But we don't know for sure if that has been dedicated right?
Harris: I don't think the plat was ever filed.
Petrie: On the lot split, even the lot split that may or may not have been filed only
showed the right-of-way up to this point. Is that correct?
Conklin: That is what it looks like to me. Just on this drawing, that this 40' right-
of-way dedication, this is future on this one.
Petrie: The lot split in my file showed that stopping right there. I don't know
about the actual one that was filed.
Harris: I didn't work on this originally and I am not really sure what it was. Do
you want me to just leave it? I have got all kinds of drawings that show
different things.
Conklin: Leave it as is for now. That is our recommendation.
Harris: He would prefer that.
Conklin: Because just like Spring Park with Home Depot out there, the number of
times we had to redo the easements for Mall Ave. and I just want to avoid
that since we don't know what is going to be built on this piece of
property.
Harris: Hopefully it is just one developer.
Conklin: It would be nice.
Petrie: If they don't dedicate this right-of-way, utilities have asked for an
easement along there.
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 6
Phipps: Not if it is not going to be there. If it comes back through that they are
cutting the street through another way then we will get an easement then.
Harris: If they come back through with a large scale you will see it again. I doubt
that they will have the street cutting through there. If anything, they might
have a street come in and turn down the tract or another configuration.
Conklin- We replatted Spring Park so many times it is hard to even figure out what
is going on out there. The easements were at different wrong locations
and in my opinion, it is easier to plan your easements and things when you
have an actual site plan sitting on the ground.
Harris: You just need me to resubmit a Preliminary Plat?
Conklin: Yes. Thank you Al.
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 7
LSD 02-11.00: Large Scale Development (Guido's, pp 401) was submitted by Mike
Anderson on behalf of Engineering Design Associates on behalf of Mark Bariola for
property located on Steamboat Drive. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare
Commercial and contains approximately 1.023 acres with a 4,275 sq.ft. restaurant
proposed.
Edwards: The next item is a large scale development submitted by Mike Anderson
of EDA on behalf of Mark Bariola for property located on Steamboat
Drive. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains
approximately 1.023 acres with a 4,275 sq.ft. restaurant proposed.
Conklin: Good morning Andy.
Feinstein: I am Andy Feinstein with EDA, I have Fred Watts with me today.
Edwards: Shelli is going to go over your comments from staff.
Rushing: You don't have anything from Parks. From Landscaping, she is asking
that we indicate the method of irrigation and show limits of edging of
landscape beds per ordinance requirements. There is a note at the bottom
there. On Traffic, he commented that at least one ADA space needs to be
designated van accessible. Additional ADA spaces can share the same
aisle. That is all we had from Traffic. On the next page we have
comments from the Sidewalk Administrator. A 6' exists along Steamboat
Drive which meets requirements. If the sidewalk is damaged due to
construction, repairs will be required at the developer's expense. New
sidewalks, driveway approaches, or access ramps constructed in the right-
of-way shall meet UDO §171.13. The sidewalk shall be continuous
through driveways with a maximum of 2% cross slope elevated 2% above
top of curb. Driveway approaches shall be constructed of Portland
Cement Concrete. An inspection is required prior to the concrete pour.
Two bicycle parking racks are required per Ordinance 4293.
Feinstein: We show one.
Rushing: There is one, he is asking for two.
Feinstein: Two racks or a rack that will accommodate two bicycles?
Rushing: He is asking for two racks.
Feinstein: Chuck, on your comment for the bicycle racks, how many bikes per rack
are you suggesting we accommodate there?
Rutherford: The ordinance says one rack that can hold two bicycles when you are
parking 25-30 spaces. If you have 31-60 you are required two racks.
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 8
Feinstein: Ok, can we do a single rack that will hold four bikes?
Rutherford: No, two racks that will hold four bikes.
Conklin: We have design standards for bicycle racks and you have only one option
for your bicycle rack.
Rutherford: Here is a copy of that ordinance Andy.
Conklin- It is a proven rack that the University uses which helps prevent vandalism
to bicycles and allows bicycles to be easily locked up the rack. It is user
friendly. A lot of research nationally went into this bicycle rack.
Feinstein: Ok, two that hold four each. We will do it.
Rushing: From the Planning Division, all the submittal requirements were fine,
zoning requirements were fine. Plat requirements, we would like for you
to indicate the building height. Dimension the right-of-way from the street
centerline. The centerline is located here but it didn't have the dimension
on it. You need to dimension and label the south building set back line.
Feinstein: Ok. It is there, it is just not...do we have a side set back in a C-2?
Conklin: Which direction are you going to?
Feinstein: To the south.
Conklin: There should be none.
Rushing: Streets look good. Parking, I counted 39 spaces and you state 41.
Feinstein: It is probably our table needs some revisions, it was a last minute layout
change.
Rushing: You will also need to request a waiver for the parking increase.
Edwards: Andy, that is a conditional use. You will need to fill out a conditional use
application and pay a $100 fee. There is a letter required with that
application. What we are looking for is the number of seats and the
number of employees.
Feinstein: Ok.
Conklin: Is Guido's a chain?
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 9
Feinstein: They are trying to be I think, but not yet.
Conklin: So you don't have any data from other Guido's?
Edwards: They have another store in Tontitown I think.
Conklin: I encourage you to get us that information and I encourage you to go take
photographs of your parking lot at certain times showing all parking
spaces being utilized as evidence of how much parking you need for a
similar sized restaurant. Is this similar in size?
Watts: Forty spaces more.
Conklin- How many parking spaces do you have up in Tontitown?
Watts: I think we have 25.
Edwards: That might not help.
Feinstein: Do you foresee any problems?
Conklin: We are supposed to have evidence that you need this much parking. Now
we have approved additional parking for Golden Corral, Olive Garden,
almost every restaurant that comes in but we base it on their past
demonstrated needs for parking.
Rushing: Also, this requires a loading berth, 10' x 25'. I didn't see one on this.
Feinstein: How about if I just designate a section of this driveway as loading area?
Conklin: Shelli, you have found an ordinance that we haven't really addressed that
often. Do plan on how you load and unload trucks coming into the site.
We need to talk more about that internally.
Feinstein: Is it actually required on that?
Conklin: Not now.
Rushing: Kim already mentioned the method of irrigation for landscaped areas.
Parking lot lighting must not exceed 35' and must be shielded and directed
downward. The dumpster space needs to be 12' wide. On other
comments here, the entry sign needs to be labeled it looks like it was
started and then there is a line coming out.
Feinstein: That is a dimension that shows 10' off the right-of-way.
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 10
Rushing: That needs to be labeled and I just want to just point out that only indirect
lighting may be used. If you could dimension the wall sign. There is a
note there about requesting a waiver, that needs to be a requested
conditional use as Sara mentioned. If you could just describe the trash
enclosure materials and then provide a detail of the parking lot light
fixtures. Describe the building materials, we just need to make sure that
they comply. That overhead electric line, is that existing? What size is it?
Sargent: It is 12,470.
Rushing: Just a couple of comments on the architectural design, there is a brick
design on the bottom, if we could bring a brick design up into the upper
portion where there is just a solid concrete, if we could just pull that
design up a little bit.
Key: Do you want more brick on that side?
Rushing: What is this material?
Key: That is all E.F.I.S.
Rushing: If possibly the brick or the tile design could be incorporated into that a
little bit more to provide a little bit more texture in that area.
Key: We will look at articulating that a bit further. We initially had looked at
doing brick bands but due to material constraints we were faced with brick
with the E.F.I.S. material so we decided to leave it down at the lower
elevation so we wouldn't have the additional steel supports at that higher
elevation. We will look at that further.
Rushing: Ok. Provide a front facade for the south of the building because as you
drive in here you are going to be able to see.
Edwards: In the Design Overlay District you have to have front facades facing all
streets. Really this facade s for a good part facing the street. We need to
look at articulating that as well to make it look like a front.
Key: The south facade?
Conklin: When you say front, side, rear, you can also add directions.
Key: The front is the northwest and the side that we've shown you is the
southwest. I don't know if you are speaking of the southwest or the
southeast, which is the rear of the building. That is the southwest.
Rushing: The southwest.
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 11
Key: We will be adding awnings over the windows and the door there and there
is a patio space shown outside.
Conklin. Just a suggestion from a non -architect, is there any way to see this arched
feature to make it look more like a front? Is this dryvit?
Key: That is E.F.I.S. It was our intent to face the building to the access drive
and Steamboat Drive at that point we are perpendicular to that so this side
is considered more of a side. Obviously it is facing...
Conklin: Everybody driving down this road, what they are going to see as they are
looking north, they are going to have a more difficult time seeing that.
Key: Again, we can look at articulating that facade more but we don't want to
give the impression that there is an entrance on that side.
Feinstein: I am sure that you will keep in mind that because the Overlay District
requires landscape screening it won't be as prominent. They will have to
look through landscaping.
Conklin: That requirement is not designed to hide the building, it is to hide parking.
Key: In effect, the building is also obscured to some degree but we can simulate
that arch at the southwest side of the building if that is your request.
Conklin: This is the standard line I've been trying to use, if you are calling this a
front, and we are trying to make other things looks like the front, replicate
architectural elements or features onto this side of the building, that is my
suggestion. Planning Commissioners have typically asked for a wrap
around type approach when they are highly visible.
Key:
We are, and that is why we are wrapping the brick and the block and the
E.F.I.S. around all four sides. I understand your comment and we can
emulate that arched feature on the sides of the building so that they appear
more as fronts. We will try to do so without drawing too much attention,
with the sign being on the front of the building only that is going to have a
full screening of the roof, with the materials above and the cooler will be
wrapped around with the masonry as well. I have got a rear elevation
which is not rendered accurately, it is not showing this little fascia here
that it actually will have, see it is actually showing the roof a little here.
That will be obscured by the same kind of fascia as is on the side of the
building to obscure all the roof equipment, exhaust fans, that type of thing.
Conklin: Let me make one more suggestion. On your freezer, using the same kind
of materials that is on the side of your building so it actually blends in so it
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 12
is not just sticking out the back.
Key: What we are proposing to do is to wrap that and put an E.F.I.S. material.
We weren't planning to put a masonry veneer base on this.
Conklin: Is this what it is going to look like?
Key: Yes.
Conklin: My suggestion is that you take the same materials and make it actually
blend in so it doesn't look like it is just attached to the building.
Key: Ok.
Edwards: It is probably a good idea to go ahead and get all four side color elevations
for Subdivision because that helps a lot.
Key: We will get them to you with the brick added and the arches added and
whatever else you think we need.
Feinstein: He is picking colors and materials from a recommended list, do you
require samples of those at Subdivision Committee even if they are from
the recommended list?
Conklin: Let me just tell you that in the past when I have said no the
Commissioners say yes so that is why I am trying to be more clear and up
front with telling you what I think needs to be done because applicant's
are saying "Why didn't you tell me?" I do appreciate the arched feature
because that does go along with other buildings in that development.
Rushing: Ok, that is all we had from Planning. From the Fire Department, there is
an existing hydrant on Steamboat and then if it is going to be sprinkled the
fire hydrants need to be within 100'. Ron?
Ron Petrie — Staff Engineer
Petrie: Will the building be sprinkled?
Key: No it is not going to be.
Petrie: Ok, you are showing on your water to come off this line off the adjacent
property and so everybody is clear that line doesn't exist. For that line to
exist they are going to have to proceed on with the hotel and put that in
and that line has to be accepted by the city before we can make a
connection to it.
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 13
Feinstein: We understand. The latest word we've gotten is that the hotel is trying to
pull some permits and hopefully within two weeks they will be breaking
ground. I was wondering if there was any activity in your office with
plans or anything like that?
Petrie: They were approved a long time ago.
Key:
Petrie:
In just checking with the permit office, they told us that Planning and
Engineering had still not signed off on the permit. We were wondering if
there are issues.
Not with me. The only thing they are waiting on for me is a
preconstruction conference and actually issuing a permit and then I could
sign off on the permit.
Conklin: What are they waiting on for you Sara?
Edwards: This is a good point for me to bring up to you guys too. What I require
before I can sign off on a permit is an easement plat and a guarantee and
those are the two things I am waiting on for them.
Feinstein: That is minor stuff. The buyers are comfortable with that situation. They
understand that there is some risk involved.
Petrie: There is water all along the frontage on the opposite side of the street so
worst case scenario you would have to come under and set it there. That is
not that big of an issue. On my comments, I did receive the application,
Planning had that. You are showing doing some grading on the adjacent
property to the south and to the east so I will just need written approval
from those property owners that they will accept that otherwise they will
need to be set back 5' from the property line. I have got you a list of the
things that you will need to show on the grading and drainage plan.
Number one, I did see that while I was sitting here so you can mark that
off.
Feinstein; I will label it on the grading plan.
Petrie: I was just looking at the grading plan, I didn't really look at the large
scale. I need some revised calculations on drainage. When the
subdivision was built they used a runoff coefficient of .75 for the whole
thing. What you guys used was a runoff coefficient of .9 just for the
developed area, it didn't even include the whole site. We have to conform
to what was approved because we have detention ponds right down from
this. The whole drainage system was designed for tat .75 so we need to
conform to it or provide some type of additional detention on this
property.
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 14
Feinstein: Ok, we'll go back and look at that.
Petrie: That is all that I have.
Sue Clouser — Southwestern Bell
Clouser: Do you know if there is a 10' utility easement off property on the east side
over here?
Feinstein: I'm not sure.
Clouser: I'm sorry, on the south side over here.
Feinstein: Yes, I believe there is another easement adjacent to us.
Clouser: The only other thing is along the utility easement on Steamboat Drive, you
show one 4" sleeve. I imagine the other utilities will probably want a
sleeve under there and I need one so you probably want to make that four.
Feinstein: Four 4" sleeves?
Clouser: Yes, and I will need a sleeve to the building out on Steamboat, we prefer
two 4" if possible. That is all I have.
Jim Sargent - AEP/SWEPCO
Sargent: Utility easements look ok. We have got the existing overhead utility line
in the back. We will need low end voltage information. Right now I
intend to probably serve it all through that existing overhead line. The
question I have is we will need to know the height of the dumpster and
where it is sitting on the fire line and make sure that is not going to be a
hazard.
Feinstein: Let me ask the architect, do you have a preference with bringing the
electric in overhead or underground?
Key: I believe it has to be underground for current standards.
Conklin: It has to be underground.
Feinstein: Ok.
Conklin: You have a pole back here along the east?
Sargent: Yes, we will probably be putting an overhead transformer back there and
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 15
then going in a ditch underground. That is kind of what I've got in mind
at this point.
Feinstein: Right here?
Sargent: Yes.
Conklin- What size lines are those?
Sargent: 1,247 KV, that is all I've got.
Larry Gibson — Cox Communications
Gibson: If you could furnish us a 2" from that same pole that the electric is going
to serve from in the back to the building within 3' of where the electric
meter is and put 36" radius sweeps on each end we would be good to go.
Feinstein: Ok.
Edwards: I have a couple more comments. I don't remember for sure but I thought
that when the hotel went in they were required to build a sidewalk to this
site so that people staying in the hotel could walk to this restaurant. We
need to explore that and if so, you will need to connect that.
Conklin: I would highly recommend that you consider that and if it is not
coordinated with the hotel I could imagine that people staying at the hotel
would like to walk over to the restaurant. We have had this discussion
with McDonald's.
Feinstein: I have looked at their file and saw that they requested a waiver to not be
required to do the cross connection and that was granted due to the cul-de-
sac.
Conklin: I am not asking for the cross connection, just for the sidewalk. I would
recommend a sidewalk.
Feinstein: Ok.
Conklin: That would be user friendly.
Feinstein: We can go to the property line and hope that they come to us. That is all
we can do really.
Edwards: Also, I wanted to make sure that you knew that we had revised our
driveway widths. Twenty-four is fine but you can do up to twenty-seven
if you would like to for your truck traffic. Lastly, the address is going to
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 16
be 1290 N. Steamboat.
Conklin: Since you brought that up Sara, just looking at your circulation in your
parking lot, I have to question, I'm not sure what size trucks you have
going to your facility but Denny's on Hwy. 62 had a horrible time getting
their trucks in and making these turns. You might want to make sure that
this is one way over here or maybe drive in this way and go the opposite
way of the direction of your circulation. I question whether or not they are
going to make that turn if they are really going to follow this one way
drive.
Feinstein: Just inside the entrance?
Conklin- Yes, Do you know what I'm saying? The one way is going this way and
theoretically I could see the truck getting in and making this loop but I'm
not sure if you can, I don't know what size truck.
Feinstein: Just short delivery trucks but we will look at those.
Conklin- The city ended up building an intersection down the street from
McDonald's because the sidewalk was broken up and they couldn't get
around the island just off of Wedington just on this road, Steamboat.
Depending on the size of truck, we are trying to educate ourselves to make
sure we don't make those mistakes today.
Feinstein: It would help, we've got the room to go 27', that is a good start right there.
That would help open this road up. Is there anything else?
Edwards: That's it.
Conklin: Thank you very much.
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 17
FPL 02-4.00 (Pine Valley Phase V, pp 363) was submitted by Al Harris of Crafton, Tull
& Associates on behalf of BMP Development for property located at 2726-2840
Wildwood Drive. The property is zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential and contains
approximately five acres with six lots proposed.
Edwards: The next plat is FPL 02-4.00, Pine Valley Phase V submitted by All Harris
of Crafton, Tull & Associates on behalf of BMP property located at 2726-
2840 Wildwood Drive. The property is zoned R-2 and contains
approximately five acres with six lots proposed. From our Parks
Department, parks fees have been paid in the amount of $5,250 so that has
been done. There are no comments from our Traffic Superintendent.
From Sidewalks, Wildwood is a local street which requires a 4' sidewalk
and a minimum 6' of green space. We are asking for a note on the Final
Plat that all retaining walls be set back a minimum 2' from the right-of-
way and all retaining wall construction shall be on the building permit and
have the approval of the City Engineer.
Harris:
Edwards:
He wanted to bond the sidewalks too.
You will have to have that in before we sign the Final Plat. From
Planning, and Ron is probably going to comment on this too, the finished
floor elevations are inadequate, they should be 2' above the BFE, you've
got the BFE, you just need to add 2' to that. Set backs are 25', 8', and 25
unless taller than 20' then set back increases. What I am looking for is a
note on the plat that the set back increases with height so that is what I am
looking for so that any buyers are aware.
Harris: Is that on here?
Edwards: It is right there, I didn't get the note on there that tells you what the set
backs are.
Harris: So you want that added to the plat?
Edwards: Yes. I also want a note that lot six will require large scale development
approval by the Planning Commission.
Conklin: That is because it is over an acre.
Edwards: Almost two acres. Do you know if streetlights are in here?
Harris: I know that there is at least one up there. I will check on it.
Edwards: If they are not in we require proof of payment on that before we will sign
off on the Final Plat.
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 18
Conklin:
Harris:
Conklin -
Harris:
Conklin:
Harris:
Conklin-
Harris:
onklin-Har is:
Conklin:
Harris:
Conklin:
Harris:
Conklin:
Harris:
Conklin:
Harris:
Are there restrictive covenants for this subdivision?
He doesn't have any right now.
Is he proposing to have any?
I am not sure.
The neighborhood is very interested in having covenants that match
previous phases of Pine Valley. I can't make BMP do that but you can
send that message to him that the residents would really appreciate having
covenants for the subdivision that match Pine Valley.
I wasn't involved in the Preliminary Plat, what are the reasons for these
shared access easements, do you remember?
No.
Mark has asked me if he could take them off and I said probably not since
they are on the Preliminary Plat.
We can research it and see what was going on. One other message I will
deliver from the neighbors out there. This four-plex right here on lot six, I
am curious if he really wants to do a four plex or if he is doing a four plex
because of the lot frontage. If he doesn't have adequate lot frontage to
make those two duplexes, if you could ask him that question and if so
there may be some method, I'm not sure what that method would be but
we can look into finding out if there is a way to allow two duplexes there.
They just want to see two duplexes?
The neighborhood would rather see two duplexes than a four plex. Once
again, everything else is duplexes there and then we have the four plex.
The only reason I can see is that you don't have the street frontage for
duplexes on that one.
I think that is what it would be.
You can find out from him. Is that Mark?
Yes.
That is all I had on that.
That shared access, he would like to limit that. I assumed it was required
because you didn't want anymore curb cuts.
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 19
Edwards:
Ron Petrie —
Petrie:
Harris:
Petrie:
Ron?
Staff Engineer
Al, do you know if they have done the final inspection on this sanitary
sewer?
All the manual tests, I'm not sure about the final inspection. I can give
you as builts.
Just keep in mind that we need that final inspection before it goes to
Subdivision. We had some comments and conditions regarding the future
grading permits. What I would like to see is a standard note to label any
areas that are over 15% and add a note that if there is any grading over
15% for the flood plain, that requires a grading permit. Of course, the four
plex, if that is what is going to be, requires a grading and drainage permit
no matter what. If you could add that requirement to the plat. You have
my comments in the packet. Sara mentioned the floodplain, if you could
label the 100 year water surface elevations in the creek, that is a
requirement of the drainage ordinance. So if we could get the finished
floor labeled and the water surface. We ask that you add a benchmark to
the subdivision. Just scaling off on the plat it doesn't appear that there is
10' between the sewer line and your easement, you may want to check that
and widen that front easement in order to get the 10'. There was an
assessment in the amount of $3,360 for improvements to Salem Drive by
the Planning Commission, that will need to be paid before the Final Plat.
Number seven, there was also an assessment for sewer improvements in
the Hamestring Creek Basin, that assessment has been discontinued and
you will not be charged for that assessment. Number eight, those are the
standard items we will need before we can sign the Final Plat. I will not
go over those but they are standard.
Sue Clouser — Southwestern Bell
Clouser:
Harris:
Clouser:
Harris:
We will probably end up needing an easement along the front property
line and we will need conduit under those driveways if we decide to feed
from the front.
At this time or before they build their duplexes?
Anytime before we lay our cable if we decide to go that route, which I am
sure we will. We will need a 4" conduit under those.
We will need to add a note to the plat because he won't be building those
driveways himself.
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 20
Clouser: That is fine, as long as it is recorded.
Harris: So one 4" conduit?
Clouser: For telephone, I don't know if the other utilities need them.
Phipps: You better put four under there.
Mike Phipps — Ozark Electric Coop.
Phipps: Al, between us and SWEPCO we are not sure where that boundary is. I
think it is SWEPCO and they think it is us. If it does fall in our territory
my closest point is about 400' to the west. Somebody would have to
acquire a 20' easement on Henbest all the way back to my access point.
Edwards: Who serves the rest of the subdivision?
Sargent: We serve the south.
Conklin: You guys can't work it out?
Sargent: We will figure out exactly where the territory is.
Conklin: You can't swap territory, these little sections like this?
Sargent: Not without approval.
Phipps: It all depends on where the boundary line is and where the meter is set.
You can split a house in two depending on which side the meter is in and
who serves it. Looking at it, they are going to have to build up front on
this thing the way it drops off. I will run back through it and have our
draftsman look over it.
Sargent: I will do the same thing. I looked the other day and ours showed the
boundary line right there back on Wildwood Drive.
Phipps: Mine showed it 100' north of that. I believe those street lights are in.
Sargent: I just don't remember those.
Phipps: That is all I have, we will get back with you Al.
Harris: Ok.
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 21
Larry Gibson — Cox Communications
Gibson: We have facilities on both sides of this actually and we would like to also
front service it on these lots. If you would, to the west of lot 1, I would
like to see if there is an existing easement on the back of this property over
to this property.
Phipps: I am sure there is.
Gibson: I think there is too, if you would, just note it on the plat. That would
probably be our closest location to come from, actually our best. I am
almost positive, there is a fence line there and some fields there and then
this shoots straight through. I am almost positive there is an existing
easement there.
Phipps: There is not one on the north.
Gibson: On the south side there.
Phipps: If it is, our cable could run right beside SWEPCO, be 10' apart. That 20'
on the south side is full, we can't get in there.
Gibson: That is all I have.
Edwards: We are finished.
Harris: Ok, thank you.
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 22
FPL 02-5.00: Final Plat (McMillan Estates, pp 441) was submitted by Steve Hesse of
Engineering Design Associates on behalf of TFJ Nominee Trust for property located at
the southeast corner of Wedington Drive and Futrall Drive. The property is zoned C-2,
Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 27.48 acres with 10 lots proposed.
Edwards: The next item is FPL 02-5.00 submitted by Steve Hesse of Engineering
Design Associates on behalf of TFJ Nominee Trust for property located at
the southeast corner of Wedington Drive and Futrall Drive. The property
is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately
27.48 acres with 10 lots proposed.
Feinstein: This is a bond for the sidewalks and a draft copy of the Bill of Assurance.
Edwards: These are basically covenants in the form of a Bill of Assurance?
Feinstein: Right.
Edwards: From Parks, no comments. From the Traffic Superintendent, no comment.
From Sidewalks, they are asking for a table with street name, street width,
right-of-way width, green space width, and sidewalk width to be added to
the plat. Add a note to the Final Plat which states all retaining walls shall
be set back 2' from the right-of-way and shall be on the building permit
and have the approval of the city. The Fire Marshall did want to reserve
the right to change this comment, there is a comment of 500' between the
spacing.
Feinstein: Excuse me, can I go back to the sidewalk comments?
Edwards: Sure.
Feinstein: Chuck, there is an 8' greenways trail coming along our drainage way. Do
you want that in the table as well or does that just sort of stand off by
itself?
Rutherford: Well it would be good to have it in that table. It helps everyone involved
when they pull the Final Plat. One comment along that line, I think we
agreed on a 20' access easement for that trail.
Conklin: So the trail is actually in a public access easement, the public could walk
on it.
Feinstein: Ok.
Rutherford: Ron, is that correct?
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 23
Ron Petrie — Staff Engineer
Petrie:
Feinstein:
I don't have a preference, 20' is what we discussed.
Ok, so we could just relabel one of these drainage easements as access and
drainage easements, I would think that would cover that. That would
actually give you 20' from the center of the trail to the sites.
Petrie: You have a 20' buffer and a 20' UE so you can't just label it 20' utility
and access easement because the trail is not in unfortunately.
Feinstein: That is true. Ok, so we need to dedicate another 20' centered on the trail
is what you are asking.
Petrie: You could make it 40', whatever you want to do. As long as the trail is in
it.
Feinstein: Ok, that is an important comment.
Edwards: We couldn't read where the fire hydrants were but the requirement is
every 500'.
Conklin: Ron, she said 500' again and at Planning Commission you said it is 300'.
Petrie:
I think Dennis is having a hard time because he can't see the fire hydrants
on this plat and I have a comment about the water and sewer, you can
hardly see it. That should have already been addressed by now. It is not
500'. It should be every 600'. He is saying 500' from any building is
what he is saying.
Edwards: He says hydrant spacing.
Conklin: We will figure that out internally for you.
Edwards: I think if we can figure out where the fire hydrants are it won't be an issue.
Feinstein: We will get that for you.
Edwards: From Planning, you have got a set back of 25' with no parking. In a C-2
zone that is not how it reads. You can get a 25' reduction with additional
landscaping. The only zone that does it that way is the R -O zone. I would
like you to change that to 25' with set back reduction on your set back
note on your zoning.
Feinstein: Take out additional parking between with city approved set back
reduction. Ok.
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 24
Edwards: Prior to Planning signing the Final Plat the LOMA will have to be
approved by FEMA, we will have to have proof of that. For that reason,
we don't need the old floodplain lines on there, I just want you to show
your revised. I have right-of-way shall be dimensioned from centerline.
Although, now I see Wedington dimensioned up there.
Feinstein: It is quite obscure but near the intersection of Futrall we do have it
dimensioned.
Edwards: I see it, that is fine. Futrall, you don't have the right-of-way at all shown
on there so you may add a note.
Feinstein: That is really the Highway Departments land.
Edwards: Right. The thing is that it is labeled as a collector on the City's Master
Street Plan. Maybe you could just find the total highway right-of-way and
then maybe you could dimension.
Petrie:
The only thing we need to verify is the place where it is closest to the
right-of-way along that whole stretch and to verify the closest that it meets
our minimum standards.
Feinstein: The center of Futrall Road to our right-of-way?
Conklin: Let me just look at this if this is drawn correctly. We will see what we
told you last time at Preliminary Plat and we will honor that decision.
Petrie:
It is a collector, we just need to make sure we have 30' from centerline at
least.
Conklin: It looks like you probably do.
Feinstein: Ok.
Edwards: Signs have to be set back 10' from the property line and it looks like
neither one is so you need to move those back.
Feinstein: Ok.
Conklin: What is on this monument sign?
Feinstein: I think it will say McMillan Estates.
Conklin: It is not a joint identification sign? It is just an area identification sign,
McMillan Estates. Make sure you check with Inspections, the sign
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 25
inspector prior to building any signs.
Feinstein: Ok.
Petrie: I didn't pick that up but you are showing that monument sign sitting on
top of the sewer line, you need to locate that elsewhere.
Feinstein: Once we pull it 10' off of the rights of way we should miss it.
Petrie: The sewer line is cutting across the street, do you see that?
Feinstein: Right, that little spur we did there. Ok.
Edwards: Addresses should be added to the Final Plat, you can get that from Jim
Johnson.
Feinstein: We talked to Jim, he wants to wait until these start to be developed so he
will know how many buildings per lot.
Edwards: Ok that is fine. Are street lights in already?
Feinstein: No.
Edwards: What we require is proof that payment by certified check with a receipt
from the electric company.
Conklin: Is this Ozark?
Sargent: No, this is SWEPCO.
Edwards: You can get them a receipt right?
Sargent: I think Glenn Newman has been working with you on your lights.
Feinstein: Exactly. If the city is ok with that the owner is willing to do that. We
prefer it that way as would SWEPCO.
Edwards: A requirement of the Preliminary Plat was that a common design theme
should be established for this subdivision prior to Final Plat approval.
Have you discussed that?
Feinstein: Let me get back with him and see if he has a theme. Is that a requirement
for plat approval?
Edwards: Maybe, I haven't read these but there may be enough in here and you can
just go through and call it out on a page or a half of page or something so
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 26
that the Planning Commission can have that.
Conklin: It can be general, it doesn't have to be very specific is what I recommend
to the Commission.
Feinstein: Ok. Would you have samples of the similar CMN?
Edwards: Theirs were actually covenants.
Conklin: Wedington, what we just did with Guido's.
Edwards: They actually outlined it separately too. I also want a note added to the
plat which states that no access will be allowed from Wedington to Futrall,
surely they won't try but we just need a note.
Feinstein: That is with the exception of lot 8 correct? We should be allowed access
into lot 8 from Futrall.
Petrie:
I do remember that being a condition of approval. They are allowed one
access from Shiloh to lot 8. One driveway only. That is what the
condition said.
Feinstein: So the note will have an except in it, except one entrance on 8.
Conklin: The off ramp, does that go into Shiloh?
Edwards: No, it is separate.
Conklin: Perry is not here but I assume we are going to put signs here saying "One
Way", "Do Not Enter" or something like over here, I'm not sure. This is
one way going north.
Feinstein: Right, that may even be across the road. That would be on the plat but it
needs to be on the ground.
Conklin: I just wanted to bring it up because I can see it now.
Feinstein: I am surprised that the Highway Department when they granted these
access permits didn't catch that.
Conklin: You want some signage out there.
Feinstein: We don't want folks turning left that is for sure. Maybe we will put two
red dots so they do not enter.
Conklin: Can you check with the Highway Department and see what they are going
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 27
to do so we don't have anybody get killed going south on Futrall?
Feinstein: Yes.
Edwards: I am also asking for a note to be added that no free standing signs be
placed on lot 10. City Council must accept the dedication of streets and
will do that after thee Final Plat is filed just so you are aware. I am also
asking for a note that lots 7,5,3, and 1 will be considered to have fronts
facing Futrall and Wedington with regard to building facades and
articulation.
Feinstein: Ok.
Edwards: That would've been anyway had that lot 10 not been between them. That
is it.
Feinstein: this lot 10 common area, I am a little at a loss whether there will be a
P.O.A., if not can the owner take care of it?
Edwards: Can the developer always maintain lot 10 as opposed to a Property
Owner's Association?
Feinstein: He may have intentions to establish a P.O.A. but if he decides not to then I
am just trying to see what his options are if there is not a P.O.A.
Petrie: I don't care.
Feinstein: He just maintains it?
Conklin: As long as it is clearly stated.
Petrie: According to your Corp. permit they can not maintain it.
Feinstein: There is a little conflict there.
Petrie: In my mind whoever owns the property is responsible for it.
Feinstein: Right.
Edwards: Is the trail on that piece?
Petrie: No, I don't think so.
Feinstein: No it is not.
Conklin: Ron, the maintenance of the channel bottom when the willow trees start
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 28
growing...
Petrie: The permit says that they can not cut those trees.
Conklin- So it is going to turn into a natural area.
Petrie: That is the theory.
Feinstein: Is your comment about lot 10 maintenance even relevant then?
Conklin- I think itis relevant, trash.
Feinstein: Anything outside of the floodway, there is some part of lot 10 that the
owner may still need to maintain. I will just say P.O.A./ owner, just in
case.
Petrie: They haven't had the final inspection yet, is that correct?
Feinstein: I don't know, I could get you an answer really quick though.
Petrie: That is ok.
Rutherford: I don't think they have.
Petrie: We just have to have that before we go to Subdivision Committee.
Feinstein: Ok.
Edwards: Before we schedule for Subdivision Committee. I just want to make that
clear. It can't be the day before Subdivision Committee.
Petrie: If it is scheduled they will call me and ask me if they can proceed.
Feinstein: We can schedule it right now. Let me find out where they are out there. I
think they need the sidewalk moved.
Petrie: Ok. Speaking of the LOMR, Sara said that we need that before we can
sign the Final Plat so that would also mean you need a revised flood plain
certification note. This certification is saying that these lots are in the
floodplain. They won't be in the floodplain if it is accepted. Make sure
you change that. Also, you are discussing anticipated issuance of a map
revisioning, that kind of wording needs to be changed too.
Feinstein: Which one is that?
Petrie: The second paragraph on your floodplain study. The last paragraph it says
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 29
"The anticipated issuance of a letter of map revision." It should say
"There has been a letter of map revision accepted by FEMA as shown on
the Plat." Or something to that affect.
Conklin- On lot 8, your flood plain line dead ends right into that front utility
easement. Is there floodplain on lot 8?
Feinstein: No.
Conklin: Why is that line there?
Feinstein: That is the way the model derived it to handle this headwall coming into
this.
Conklin: The map that we get from the LOMR, is it going to show floodplain on lot
8 with that line right there?
Feinstein: No.
Conklin- It won't? That line will be pulled back?
Feinstein: Yes.
Conklin: Ok, right now it shows floodplain on lot 8.
Edwards: Will you go ahead and continue it across Futrall where it is going to come
out so that that is clear?
Feinstein: Across Futrall?
Edwards: Yes, you did it up here.
Conklin: You did it on Moore and you have this line dead ending right here at lot 8.
Feinstein: I don't know if I can answer that because I am not sure how far the study
extended. We could probably take it to the middle of Futrall.
Edwards: Right. It just needs to match up to the old one, the hundred year
floodplain at some point.
Conklin: I guess my statement here is you are saying there is no floodplain on these
lots and we have floodplain on these lots then it is not a true statement.
Feinstein: Point well taken.
Conklin: That was the point of all that discussion I had just now.
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 30
Petrie:
Number three, the 404 permit requires that there be a deed restriction filed
in the courthouse. They have specifics on what that deed restriction needs
to be but that deed restriction needs to be called out on the plat very
clearly to indicate where are the limits of that deed restriction will be. A
portion of these lots will be in that deed restriction is my understanding.
That is very similar to what we had to do on CMN.
Conklin: Ron, are these lots allowed to discharge into that deed restricted area when
they develop?
Petrie: Yes. We don't have the issue of wetlands like we did on CMN where we
had wetlands and then the creek.
Conklin: I'm just curious.
Feinstein: This is a new one on me too. Deed restrictions are intended to keep
people out of that floodway area, is that the intent of that?
Petrie: You need to read that permit, that permit specifically says what you need
to do. Don't get me explaining the Corp's requirements. It just needs to
be shown on this plat where it is clear that nobody can touch these areas.
Conklin: That was my question about discharge. If you have something on lot five
and some type of pipe or concrete swale going down into the bottom of the
channel, how that all coordinates. I am not the engineer, I will let you
guys figure that out.
Petrie: We have got pipe systems, we've got open ditch, we have drainage along
the street, the infrastructure is in place.
Conklin: Ok.
Petrie:
As a requirement of the drainage ordinance you need to show the hundred
year water surface elevations, actually label the elevations. You've got
the finished floor elevations on the plat, I didn't check those specifically.
Feinstein: Do you want the actual section line with that elevation so as we show it on
our grading plan?
Petrie:
Yes. I am trying to think of what the grading plan shows. It is similar to
what FEMA shows on their maps. I didn't add this on there, but we would
need a couple of benchmarks to be filed with this.
Feinstein: Ok.
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 31
Petrie:
My comment about water and sewer, if you could get a little better line
type we would appreciate that. If you would add a note that all open
channels, ditches, swales located outside the street right-of-way will be
privately owned and maintained by the property owners. There is a form
here.
Feinstein: What about this public access along the sidewalk, does that complicate
item six? Is that right-of-way?
Petrie: That is discussing channels, ditches and swales.
Feinstein: Where we have channels coming underneath that sidewalk, who owns
that?
Petrie: In my mind that is not an open ditch, that is a drainage structure, it is a
part of the Swale. According to the Highway Department for the permit
that you guys took out in our name, this form needs to be resubmitted to
the Highway Department. I don't think you need to do anything to the
form. If you could send that with a letter saying it is complete and all of
that. The easements that you are showing on the Marinoni property. I
know that you guys have a signature block down there but I am concerned
with the legality of that. We have had some offsite easements in
document form and I think that is really how we need to do the right-of-
way on this. We need to have a separate document to call out the
instrument number and just show it that way. By dedicating any right-of-
way or easements outside the boundary I don't think legally they can do
that.
Conklin: I would agree with you because it is not part of the subdivision.
Petrie:
It is not part of the subdivision, even if they sign the plat what are the
rights to what they are signing? There is nothing called out there. It is
going to be called out in this form.
Feinstein: Ok, so the two areas where we have shown additional right-of-way
dedication you want separate instruments on those?
Petrie: I think I have to.
Conklin: Do not file those instruments without the city reviewing them.
Feinstein: We have gotten into that habit.
Petrie: The drainage easements, I have them right here, these are two easements
that were dedicated. I don't think they were ever filed. I think you gave
us original copies.
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 32
Feinstein: I think those were just for your review.
Petrie: No, these are the original signed ones.
Feinstein: Ok.
Petrie: I will give these to you, you can have them filed, recorded but we need
them back. We need the original documents back.
Feinstein: I understand.
Petrie: Under other are the standard items we need in order to sign the plat. I
want to point out that the grading ordinance does require all disturbed
areas to be revegetated, not just driveways, the whole plat. That is all I
have.
Feinstein: On the right-of-way, you don't need a graphic to go with it? You just
want documents like this?
Petrie: You can remove all survey descriptions, you can show it just as batch line,
instrument number, drainage line, so on and so on, you don't have to
describe it on the plat. You've got it shown.
Feinstein: I guess my question was about the additional off site rights of way.
Petrie: You can remove all of these legal descriptions for them. I would still
show them with maybe a different line type that is not so close to the
boundary of the subdivision. Just show them, don't describe them and
have a leader point.
Feinstein: That is described by a separate document?
Petrie: Right, instrument number and so on.
Feinstein: We can do that.
Edwards: You want right-of-way one, two, and drainage easement descriptions
removed?
Petrie: Yes, they are not necessary.
Feinstein: Ok.
Petrie: Anymore questions?
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 33
Feinstein: Probably but I think I'm ok for now.
Sue Clouser — Southwestern Bell
Clouser: I would like to see a 20' utility easement, is that a problem for you for
something? We have existing cable there and it is almost impossible for
us now to get into the State Highway's right-of-way. If we are going to
place any cable right in there we are going to have to have a utility
easement.
Feinstein: There was an additional right-of-way dedication, does that not solve your
problems?
Clouser: We need a 20' utility easement all the way down.
Petrie: I don't want to be picky here, but according to the Federal government,
the Corp. of Engineers, you can't do anything right here.
Clouser: That's what I wondered if they can't give us a utility easement in the
Corp's.
Petrie: No, that is going to be completely undisturbed.
Clouser: If you can give us a utility easement where you can.
Feinstein: It will probably be on the east of the box culvert.
Clouser: I wondered what was going on. The highway has got right-of-way in
there, does the Corp. control the right-of-way too? Is this the Corp's line
here?
Petrie: It is actually to the right-of-way is my understanding.
Clouser: I will need a 4" crossing up at the mouth of Scissor Tail there, that
McMillan Drive on the south side crossing Scissor Tail. We are probably
going to feed these lots at the front.
Feinstein: We have placed conduits at the south of Scissor Tail, are those not
adequate?
Clouser: I imagine that they are adequate except we probably are not going back
there. I will need them up where McMillan Drive is at.
Feinstein: That could be problematic.
Clouser: Why is that a problem?
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 34
Feinstein: Because it is all built.
Clouser: Oh, ok, that would make it a problem then. If we need to get under there
we can bore there. That is fine, you can leave it how it is. That is all that I
have.
Jim Sargent — AEP/ SWEPCO
Sargent: Glenn Newman is the engineer on this but he had a meeting he had to go
to. In the rear of lots 4 and 6 you are showing a 10' utility easement, we
really need that to be a 20' utility easement through there.
Feinstein: Ok. We might have that mislabeled. We show 20' south of it.
Gibson: It shows 20' south of it.
Sargent: We would want to end up with a 20' all the way through that.
Feinstein: Lots 4 and 6?
Sargent: Number two also.
Gibson: All along the back perimeter needs to be 20'.
Sargent: I don't know what all you have talked to Glenn about but we would also
need you to put in conduits for our electrical to each of these lots.
Feinstein: I guess I thought I heard somebody say that you would be putting the
conduit in and billing the client.
Sargent: That is an option that we can do. Get with Glenn on that.
Feinstein: I think he was reluctant to do anything until he saw what was coming in.
Sargent: Right. Get with him on that. You talked with him on the street lights, I
think that is all he has got for you.
Larry Gibson — Cox Communications
Gibson: Street crossings look fine, easements are fine as soon as you change these
to twenties, that is all I have.
Feinstein: Ok.
Edwards: Also Andy, real fast, I want you to take this off. It should be done. There
Technical Plat Review
March 27, 2002
Page 35
is a quarter section line running down through here. I would just like it
gone. If you would like it on there you need to label it.
Feinstein: Ok.