Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-04-17 - MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE TECHNICAL PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE A regular meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee was held on Wednesday, April 17, 2002 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 326 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS CONSIDERED ACTION TAKEN LSP 02-16.00: Lot Split (Mahaffey, pp 489) Forwarded Page 2 PPL 02-2.00: Preliminary Plat (Clabber Creek Place, pp 322) Page 4 FPL 02-6.00: Final Plat (Yorktowne Square, Phase III, pp 214) Page 16 LSD 02-12.00: Large Scale Development (Bargo Engineering, Inc., pp 604) Page 21 LSD 02-14.00: Large Scale Development (Fayetteville School District, pp 443 Page 25 Forwarded Forwarded Tabled Forwarded STAFF PRESENT STAFF ABSENT Keith Shreve Kim Hesse Sara Edwards Ron Petrie Renee Thomas Kim Rogers Perry Franklin Fire Department 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 April 17, 2002 Page 2 LSP 02-16.00: Lot Split (Mahaffey, pp 489) was submitted by Dave Jorgensen of Jorgensen & Associates on behalf of Mark Mahaffey for property located at 2 N. Stone Bridge Road. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 24.87 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 22.79 acres and 2.08 acres. Edwards: Welcome to the Technical Plat Review Committee meeting of Wednesday, April 17, 2002. The first item on the agenda is LSP 02-16.00 for Mahaffey submitted by Dave Jorgensen for property located at 2 N. Stonebridge Road. The property is zoned R-1 and the request is to split a 24.87 acre tract into two tracts of 22.79 and 2.08 acres. Starting with our Traffic Superintendent, he did not have any comments. For parks fees, there will be $470 due for one additional unit and that will be due before issuance of a building permit. As of October 23, 2002 sidewalks are not required for lot splits. They will, however, be required at the time of development. Stone Bridge Road is a local street which will require a 4' sidewalk and a 6' greenspace. Dave, I need you to sign the application for the lot split as the applicant's representative. You need plat page 489 added to the survey. You need to get the right of way dimensioned from centerline and 20' from centerline is what is required for Stone Bridge from the Master Street Plan so I am not sure if that exists or if we need to have some additional dedication and then I am requesting the building setbacks. That is all that I have. Ron Petrie — Staff Engineer Petrie: Dave, you did a good job showing the septic and all of that, I appreciate that. My only question is the same situation with the water meter and service lines, we need to make sure it is going to be on this tract B. I am sure it probably just runs up the driveway but if you can verify that. Jorgensen: Ok. Petrie: That is the only comment I have. Edwards: Utilities? Sue Clouser — Southwestern Bell Clouser: I would like to ask for a 20' utility easement along Stone Bridge Road and that is all that I have got. Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 3 Mike Phipps — Ozark Electric Coop. Phipps: No comment. Johnny Boles — Arkansas Western Gas Boles: No comment. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: No comment. Edwards: Ok, you're finished. Do you have any questions? Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 4 PPL 02-2.00: Preliminary Plat (Clabber Creek Place, pp 322) was submitted by Mike Bender of Northstar Engineering Consultants, Inc. on behalf of Mathias Properties for property located north of Mount Comfort Road and west of Rupple Road. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 36.35 acres with 110 lots proposed Edwards: I should probably mention that we have pulled the lot split that the city was doing. We don't think we want to split it any longer so we don't need to worry about that. Phipps: What about Bowen? Edwards: Al-Madoun: Edwards: Kim Hesse — Bowen is administrative. The next item is PPL 02-2.00, Clabber Creek Place submitted by Mike Bender of Northstar on behalf of Mathias Properties for property located north of Mount Comfort and west of Rupple Road. The property is zoned R-1 and contains approximately 36.35 acres with 110 lots proposed. I am Shawki Al-Madoun. I will start with comments from Kim Hesse. There is some additional information required on the tree preservation plan and she wanted you to see the check list and the landscape manual. Additional trees may be required for preservation after a review of grading. Additional construction and design criteria for tree preservation are to be considered. Water, sewer and grading design, as well as easement location is required to preserve additional trees. Review check list for tree preservation requirements and revise plan for Subdivision Committee review. Landscape Administrator Hesse: Al-Madoun: Hesse: What I would like to do is with some of this grading, I need to check with Ron, but just by reviewing it, you are showing grading on lots that I don't know if it is necessary. Is it a cleanup kind of grading? Basically you are showing it preserved but we've got some grading happening there. I don't really think it is needed. Also, I want to look at these two trees here just to see the quality of those because it is possible by moving the sewer or the street, or working up something we would save those. Right now with sewer location those trees would not be savable. I will make an appointment with you and we can go look at them. I just need to meet with Ron and then we can go out and look. The only easement, and I just need to work with Ozarks, there is a possibility of Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 5 saving these trees. It just depends on how they are laying that out and I will work with Mike on that. If they are putting the pedestals in maybe they can run the wire elsewhere. That is all thank you. The mitigation is pretty high, we are talking $44,000. We could limit that by saving some trees. Edwards: Ok, as far as our Traffic Superintendent, the entry street off of Mount Comfort has two names, you will need to pick one name for it and then we need to designate where the street terminates and the creekside begins clearly on the plat so that we know where the address change is. He does want you to check all of the street names with the 911 coordinator, he does need to approve those. He wants to meet with you and determine that the sight distance at Mount Comfort meets the I.T. requirements. He is requesting calculations or to call him to schedule an onsite determination. From our Sidewalks Division, Rupple Road is a minor arterial, which requires a 6' sidewalk and a 10' greenspace on both sides of the street. They request that a 10' wide trail be constructed on the west side of Rupple Road to match the existing trail by Holt Middle School. Please construct the sidewalk at the right of way line which allows for a 36' street, a 10' trail and a 17' greenspace on the west side, a 6' sidewalk with a 21' greenspace on the east side. Brookside is a collector, which requires a 6' sidewalk and a 10' greenspace on both sides. They are asking that the sidewalk be constructed at the right of way line. Creekside, Cattail, Woodduck are local streets which require a 4' sidewalk and a 6' greenspace on both sides. Edgewater and Waterway are residential streets which require a 4' sidewalk and a minimum of 6' greenspace. Mount Comfort is a minor arterial which requires a 6' sidewalk and a 10' greenspace. Two access ramps will be required on each radius. Two access ramps will be required on each street corner, at T intersections a corresponding ramp shall be installed across from intersecting streets. A 24" strip of detectable warning should be installed at the bottom of the curb ramp to indicate the transition from the sidewalk to the street. Do you have anything to add? Keith Shreve — Sidewalks Division Shreve: I would just like to add that on Rupple Road the request is a 10' trail on the west side. That is a little above the requirements and we would be willing to participate in the additional cost of that at some point in the future. Al-Madoun: Along Rupple Road a 10' trail? Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 6 Shreve: Edwards: Al-Madoun: Edwards: We are asking for a 10' wide trail on the west side to connect with the trail by the school. We realize that is above the requirements so we would be willing to work with you on the additional costs. On the east side of Rupple Road across from the intersection of Brookside, Edgewater, and Creekside we would like an access ramp to that sidewalk. The rest of it really looks good. We like what you've done and appreciate that. That is all I have. From Parks, they are requesting that you clarify the park land dedication on the plat. It is 1/10 off. We will adjust that to meet the 1/10. They are requesting 30' by the north detention to the multi -use trail. They are asking for a 30' buffer. Steve Hatfield —Trails and Greenways Coordinator Hatfield: Al-Madoun: Hatfield: Al-Madoun: Hatfield: Al-Madoun: Edwards: Al-Madoun: Edwards: Al-Madoun: Well, what we would like is a 30' area between the end of your property and the start of the floodway so that we have a clear 30' corridor through that into the trail. On the north side? Yes, where your outflow structure is. We just need to make sure that we have a minimum of 30' between it and the start of the floodway. Ok, 30' basically on the west. Yes. Ok. They are also requesting that you show the 50' pipe from the outflow to the detention under the park land dedicated property. The pipe shall be placed at the correct elevation to allow future trail to be placed at existing grade and pipe to have a minimum 1' of cover. Show all wetlands, including wetlands in the floodplain and the floodway. That is in the works right now and 1 will get that to you. Can you get that for the next revision? Yes. Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 7 Edwards: They are requesting you show where the 20' utility easement is to be located. Kim, do you know exactly where that is? Kim Rogers — Parks and Recreation Rogers: They were going to have an easement between six and seven and I am not sure if that is still. Edwards: Just an access easement? Rogers: Yes. Also behind lots 1-14 there was au 1 y easement before and I don't know where that is. Al-Madoun: Yes, there is a force main in the back of these lots. Petrie: We'll need an easement shown for that. Edwards: My comment that I will get to but I will go ahead and mention it, between lots 6 and 7 we want that to say a public access easement. Rogers: Are you counting that easement as park of the parkland dedication? Al-Madoun: Not really but I think I should. Edwards: It is an easement so if you want to dedicate it you can count it in that acreage and that is up to them but you can't count an easement in your dedicated park land acreage. Al-Madoun: Let me get with the owners and 1 will meet with her about it. Rogers: We will meet afterwards. Edwards: Do you have any question on that Ron because I think it is intended for the lift station access. Ron Petrie — Staff Engineer Petrie: Whether it is an easement or actually a part of the parks doesn't matter to us. I would see the advantage of it being part of the parks just for the liability situation of the people owning it and maintaining it. Hatfield: That actually crosses the parks property to get to the lift station. Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 8 Rogers: We are going to have to discuss it further. Edwards: Have you included the lift station in your part, acreage? Rogers: He gave me the shaded part this morning. Edwards: The Parks Division is requesting that the developer erect park boundary signs. Parks will supply the signs, channel posts, bolts and screws. We do want to make sure that the property owner's association excludes the park land dedicated area from the covenants. Construction or dumping on park land will not be tolerated, the owner will be fined. I did want to add, we do need the park land dedicated area to be included in the boundary of the subdivision and to be requested as a lot within the subdivision for the legal description purposes. Rogers: I want to clarify too. Are you going to have the detention pond be like lot number 110 and then the park land be lot 111? Petrie: Right and then you will need another separate lot for the lift station. Al-Madoun: Alright. Edwards: You did say the intention was to get enough land not to have any parks fees? Rogers: Yes, we are working that out. Al-Madoun: .075 acres. Rogers: Actually .02725. Al-Madoun: I came really close. Edwards: From Planning and you can see the list on number two. I have listed 56, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 1, 2, 7, and 15, I could not find the lot width to be clearly indicated and it is probably on there just covered by a sidewalk or so small I can't see it so I need to make sure that that is meeting the 70' requirements and that needs to be on the plat. You need to add plat page 322. As I mentioned, the building setback line. There will be a limit, and we will have it added to the plat. Prior to final plat there will be no access allowed to Rupple Road on these lots 1, 34, 35, 53, 47, and 48. Are there any overhead utilities on this site maybe along Mount Comfort or anything? Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 9 Al-Madoun: Edwards: I believe there was an overhead power pole. We do require all new utilities to be placed underground and all existing under 12KV. The right of way for Waterway Drive, it looks to me and again, it is kind of hard to tell but there is property between the right of way and the subdivision boundary and we need the right of way to extend all the way to the subdivision boundary there on the west so that there is not a piece of land separating this from another subdivision which will allow access. I am not exactly clear but the right of way for Rupple Road is just not, I can't tell that is intended to extend all the way to the property line and we do need that to be the case. Al-Madoun: Actually, I'm at the right of way with the boundaries because there are discrepancies. The right of way will be a little bit off, it is not an even number. Edwards: Petrie: Right and that is fine, we just need it to extend all the way to the boundary. We are requesting that the sidewalk be built along Rupple all the way to the park property to allow residents and school children to access the park property on the sidewalk along lot 1. I did want to make sure that you are aware of a policy change with regard to subdivisions and that is that sidewalks must either be installed prior to final plat approval or they can be guaranteed but only through funds deposited in an escrow account with the city. Once 50% of the lots are developed, complete sidewalks for the subdivision has to be installed and we will require at final plat approval a contract requiring that. If you are interested in the ordinance I can get you that as well. From our Fire Department, there are two fire hydrants needed. One on Waterway Drive and one on Edgewater Drive. I think he wants them between lots 106, 107 and between lots 56 and 57. I think we have discussed most of these. The general, I won't read over that. The water easement looked ok. Number two had to be those fire hydrants we just mentioned. Number three, we need the waterline extended to the property line just to the north of lot 95. Four is just a statement of policy. Under sewer, I had a few comments on easements. The sewer line between lots 41 and 42 and 26 and 27, you can see on your drawing you left that sewer line right at the easement line. Our requirements are 10' from that line. If the line is deeper than 10' then we may need some wider easements. Also, we'll get to this later but in that area, 41 and 42, you have drainage and utilities. Our policy is to have two separate easements, a drainage easement and then a utility easement. Back to the sewer, that is the same situation between lots 6 and 7. It looks like we need a wider easement and a separated easement. Show the sewer Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 10 Al-Madoun: Petrie: Al-Madoun: Petrie: on the west side of Waterway Drive right at the subdivision boundary. That would require an offsite easement. Again, the same requirement, 10' from the sewer line. On the easement in the rear of lots 1-7 where you have the forced main, I think that easement is only scaling off to be 15' wide. I am sure that these guys want a minimum of 20' and the area is going to have a forced main so that needs to be 25' so everybody can get in there. Also, with the forced main we will need a 20' easement offsite leading to your connections to the gravity. That offsite area, I know we have looked at the onsite areas for wetlands but where this line is going to be needs to be part of the study. We need to take care of that. Did you say that you are studying all of the area? Within the subdivision, they are doing now the additional park area and I should have the report pretty quick from that. The subdivision boundary, serving the area with a forced main is already done and there are no wetlands in the area. Will the new study also have the detention pond area and the lift station? Right, that is correct. Ok. We have a requirement that all utilities extend to the property line for a stub out. We will request that the sewer line be extended to Rupple Road on Brookside Drive and then south to the subdivision boundary. Obviously what we are trying to do is to eliminate the lift station eventually and to not have to go in and tear up everyone's yard to get to it. If we eventually make that connection and that connection won't be a part of this. I have a question on whether the sewer you show between lots 41 and 42 can extend to the south and make that connection. What I am concerned with is around Holt School sewer and everything else is going to go all the way back here and then go all the way back. Can we shorten that distance quite a bit? It is not something that we need to know at this point but if you will look at that when you are designing that sewer system I think it would help. These are comments regarding the lift station and the forced main. I need an additional set of plans that I can give to our contractor at OMI who is studying all the lift stations. They may have some additional comments regarding the lift station and the downstream lift stations. We need to get that pretty soon. There is a charge of $4,300 for the purchase and installation of a SCATA system. We request that the access driveway be paved to the lift station and have the ability to turn around. We are not asking for a cul-de-sac, we just need to pull in and back out. The lift station area is required to be deeded by warranty deed to the city. OMI requires a 6' security fence around the deeded area. I would like to have a pig launch structure there. We need a fire hydrant Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 11 Al-Madoun: Petrie: Al-Madoun: Petrie: Al-Madoun: Petrie: Al-Madoun: Petrie: within 200' of this structure and what we will probably need to do is move the fire hydrant between lots 26 and 27 to 27 and 28 and just so you don't have any problems with distance, the fire hydrant shown to the north of lot 71, move that to the north of the intersection rather than to the south. Make sure on the final plans the lift station is 2' above the hundred year water surface elevation. The forced main will be C900 pipe with tracer wire and detection tape. What we have been requiring on forced mains is valve boxes be installed every 400' and at the bends, just the boxes not the valves so you can access your tracer wire, bring it up in the box. We've had a hard time finding forced mains when they go across country. Ok, just boxes and nothing else? Right. Then we have a standard sign that would be placed at those valves. The Water and Sewer Division has those. Six and seven are standard comments and unfortunately I did not have time to finish, I'm sure everybody else is happy. Grading and drainage and streets, I can get those to you tomorrow. Just some real quick comments. There is a 4" requirement. Minimum sewer line at curve radius will be at least 50'. It looks like you may have a problem on one curve just to the west of lot 19. Some of that might be on the borderline, like to the west of lot 52 so we would ask that you label, give all of your curve data on the plat and that is a waiver requirement so we would look at some revisions to that one curve. On the grading, if you will just let me meet with Kim, she would like to change the grading for some of the trees. Ok, if it is internally, the internal grading is not going to effect my comments one way or the other. I don't really foresee too many comments. The biggest thing I will have to work on is the streets and what we are going to do is make recommendations at Planning Commission for the street improvements. It is a pretty difficult thing. I am giving you 30' right of way here so I'm sure that should make everybody happy. Unfortunately that is a requirement no matter what. I can't take that into account. Are you proposing building a 36' wide street off of Rupple? It is 28'. I am going to give you credit for that. Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 12 Al-Madoun: Petrie: Al-Madoun: Petrie: Oh, you are going to give me the extra money? Right, if you are saying that we can make that part of the agreement. Let me get with the owner and get back with you on that. I know you don't have all the hard numbers and it is hard to make a decision without that but that is one thing I want to consider, possibly the trail too. That would probably be good too. Instead of getting money and keeping it for years it actually could be on the ground, that is always better. I will fax you my comments tomorrow morning. Al-Madoun: Thanks. Edwards: Shreve: Edwards: Keith, did you need to add anything? No. Ok, utilities? Sue Clouser — Southwestern Bell Clouser: Al-Madoun: Clouser: Petrie: Clouser: I would like to ask for a 20' utility easement along Mount Comfort with a crossing on Riverbirch Drive, six 4" conduits. Can I get those UEs marked after the meeting? We should go ahead and get them on the record and then we can mark it later. We will need the 20' UE on Mount Comfort with six 4" conduits from that crossing and then between 93 and 94 I will need a 20' UE with six 4" conduits across Woodduck Drive to connect to the utility easement between 96 and 109. Then a quad crossing between 102 and 103 to between 16 and 17 and I will also need a 20' UE extending between 17 and 15 and 16 so going north and south there to connect to the rear utility easement. The same thing, a 20' UE between 70 and 71 with six 4" conduits under Brookside over to run between 19 and 20 and then between 62 and 63 I will need a 20' UE with six 4" going under Brookside Drive over between 51 and 52 another 20' UE. Ron, did you address this 15' UE that runs along behind lots 86 all the way down to 58, that needs to be... I think that is the same issue all the way around the subdivision. We want 25' all the way around the perimeter right? Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 13 Petrie: I don't need 25'. Clouser: We need 20' so put a 20' UE around there. Al-Madoun: You have 20' in the back right now. Clouser: As long as we have 20' that is fine but we need 20' all the way around because I saw some 15' here. Phipps: It is labeled 15'. Clouser: Then along Rupple Road we need six 4" conduits from lot 58 to 47 and 53 to 35 and 34 to 1 and that also needs to be a 20' UE in there if it is not already. If there is any existing telephone facilities out there for anything that has to do with this project it will be at the owner/developer's expense and that is all I have. Mike Phipps — Ozark Electric Coop. Phipps: On this drive to the lift station, we will need six 4" conduits under that drive and I will need the load information, the motor size of that lift station. If it is three phase, if you can get that single phase it is going to save you a lot of money. If you get it three phase then I've got to get three phase all the way back there. That will be expensive. I need a 10' UE at all streetlights and is Perry here? How do they look? Have you moved any of them? Perry Franklin — Traffic Superintendent Franklin: They made all of the corrections that we pointed out before. Phipps: Ok, just a 10' UE and I will get with you later and show you where those are. Between lots 8 and 9, what is that going between there? Al-Madoun: That is storm drainage. Phipps: Is it going to be concrete? Al-Madoun: It is going to be sod covered pipe going to the pond. Phipps: It will need at least 5' of cover or we will have to put conduits underneath it. Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 14 Al-Madoun: You need 5' cover on what? Phipps: Al-Madoun: Phipps: Petrie: Phipps: Petrie: Phipps: Al-Madoun: Phipps: Al-Madoun: Phipps: Petrie: Over the pipes. We will need six 4" under that. Our primary goes down 48". So you will be going under my pipe? Yes. Is there any concrete drainage in here? I would say it hasn't really been determined yet. If that goes in we will have to have conduits under these, especially trying to get service to these homes. If we ever see that I would like it shaded and noted on there where we can sometime get those conduits in before they paved it. Mike, at this point I think you just need to make that general comment all the time because it is just not near far enough along to know and it is too late by the time you see the final plat. Exactly. What we generally do once we get everybody's comments, we get with utilities one by one and make sure I have all the crossings. That's a good idea. We need a couple more crossings. We need six 4" crossings from 26 and 27 over to lot 8. Is there any way we can move those crossings somewhere else? It is really getting crowded over there around 26 and 27. Yeah, we'll need a UE between 25 and 26 but we are going to have the 10' there anyway. A 20' UE between 25 and 26, six 4" crossings from 25 and 26 over to 8 and 9 and six 4" 41 and 42 to 52 and 57. That sewer Ron on 26 and 27 and 41 and 42 is going south? It is not sewer, it is a drainage pipe. Al-Madoun: It is a storm box. Phipps: The same way, we'll need six 4" under it if it has any cover and that is all I have. Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 15 Johnny Boles — Arkansas Western Gas Boles: The only thing more that I can add to that is lots 87-95 that the rear easement be changed from 15 to 20 also on that one. Basically anything that is a rear lot easement I would like to see 20' easements on. That is all I have. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: I agree with those easements and crossings. That is all I have. Edwards: Ok, we're finished. Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 16 FPL 02-6.00: Final Plat (Yorktowne Square, Phase III, pp 214) was submitted by Mel Milholland of Milholland Company on behalf of Peggy Bishop Irrevocable Trust for property located north os Stubblefield road, between Yorktowne Square, Phase I and Brookhaven Subdivision. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 14.12 acres with 30 lots proposed. Edwards: The next item is FPL 02-6.00 Yorktowne Square Phase III submitted by Mel Milholland on behalf of Katie Bishop for property located north of Double Field Road between Yorktowne Square and Brookhaven subdivision. The property is zoned R-1 and contains 14 acres with thirty lots proposed. We will start with our Parks Division. The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board recommended accepting money in lieu of land for this development on November 7, 1994. Parks fees are assessed in the amount of $14,100 and that is thirty units at $470 each. Milholland: Edwards: Milholland: Rogers: Milholland: Rogers: Edwards: Milholland: Shreve: Edwards: I have a question. Down at the bottom it says this fee is due before the issuance of a building permit. Does that mean that if the developer so chooses they can allow each buyer to buy it and then pay it? Actually, on plats it is due before we sign it. So it is not at the time of building permit. No. That is that last statement there. Sorry about that. From our Sidewalks Division, they are requesting a note added to the final plat that all retaining walls shall be sat back a minimum of 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. Note that first two lines? The note about setting the retaining walls back 2' and also that it should be noted on the building permit a full statement. There were no comments from our Traffic Superintendent. From Planning, the rear setbacks for lots 83 through 86 should be 55' and not 35'. I need you to fix that. I am asking that you add the square footage of each lot. Actually, it is on here. We are requesting that you label the Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 17 Milholland: Edwards: Milholland: Edwards: Milholland: Edwards: Milholland: Edwards: utility easement on the south side of lot 64. If it is a building setback, I think it is a utility easement but I'm not real clear. So whatever that is label that. Yes, label that. Also, we are requesting that you label the building setbacks between lot 64 and 65, 67 and 68, 69 and 70, 72 and 73, 73 and 74, 83 and 84, 85 and 86, 88 and 89, 75 and 76, 76 and 78 and 79 and 80. We have to issue a permit, I want to make sure that we understand what your utility easement is and what your building setbacks are. Ok, no problem. Then on lot 93 on the south side there is a 25' UE kind of bordering the property line. Could you label that if it is 12.5 on this side, label it from the property line in. Ok. Prior to the signing of the final plat we do require a project disk with all final revisions, completion of all required improvements or the placement of a surety with the city. Final layer or pavement or sidewalks are the only items which may be guaranteed. I don't think we have any of that. Sidewalks? Milholland: I think sidewalks are already built. Edwards: Milholland: Edwards: Phipps: Edwards: Milholland: Oh, are they done? Yes. Ok, good. Payment of parks fees like we discussed. All streetlights are required to be installed prior to signing the final plat. Are those in yet? They have paid for them and they may be in now, we are working on it at this time. Ok, great. Are they paid for? Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 18 Phipps: Edwards: Milholland: Edwards: Milholland: Edwards: Milholland: Ron Petrie - Petrie: Milholland: Petrie: Milholland: Petrie: Milholland: Petrie: Milholland: Petrie: Yes. That is all that I have. If they are not in you will need a copy of the check and a note that it is paid, is that correct? Right. On your last statement, you have revisions are due 4/16, is that 4/24? Yes, it should be 4/24, that Wednesday. Ok. Staff Engineer Just a few comments. As you know, we need that final inspection before we can move on to Subdivision Committee. I think they had one last week. You think they already had one? They had one last Friday. Ok. A question, you show a sanitary sewer back to a private residence, this existing house. That is a drafting error. It comes from the south and I did that, but I'm not sure if it is on there now. We got approval to do that from Don Bunn years and years ago. What is the drafting error? It actually comes from the cul-de-sac on Stratford. If you are going to show it make sure it is labeled as a public or private. Of course if it is public then we will need a 20' easement around it. I would request that you add a note regarding irrigation systems. If I remember right, we put in the 2" crossings and went through all that. I just want to make sure that you guys get credit for all that and it is documented on the plat that it is available. Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 19 Milholland: Petrie: Edwards: Sue Clouser Clouser: Milholland: Clouser: Milholland: Clouser: Milholland: Clouser: Just that a water meter was crossed or crossings? Crossings, however you choose to word it I'm not too particular on that. Of course you've got a list of all of our final documents that we need before we can sign the final plat, nothing new. That is all. Utilities? — Southwestern Bell The crossing that you have at Breckenridge Drive there, one 8", and three 4", that is for utilities also I assume between lots 92 and 64? Going across from the south boundary between 92 and 64? What are you asking me? The conduits that you show there, one is existing, I'm assuming that those are for the utilities? Yes. I just wanted to double check on that. That is really all I have. We tried to put in four conduits, one for each utility unless you needed something else. That is all I need, thank you. It looks good. If I see anything else on here I will call and let you know if something else needs to be changed Thank you. Mike Phipps — Ozark Electric Coop. Phipps: Milholland: Phipps: Milholland: Mel, I believe AEP has lots 64 through 69. The streetlight between 65 and 66, I moved it over since it was in our territory I just moved it over to the southeast corner of lot 79 at the intersection. You moved the light? The streetlight at 65 and 66, it now sits over on the southeast corner of lot 69 at that intersection. What that is, the territorial line divides those lots in two. The light is in our territory but our power is on the other side. I guess if that is ok with the city. Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 20 Franklin: Sure. Sargent: Did you move that one up between 68 and 69 also Mike? Phipps: Yes, it is sitting at the northeast corner of lot 78. We just took them all into our territory where I could serve them from instead of SWEPCO coming from the back to the front. That is all the comments that I have. Johnny Boles — Arkansas Western Gas Boles: No comment. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: No comment. Jim Sargent — AEP/ SWEPCO Sargent: No comment. Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 21 LSD 02-12.00: Large Scale Development (Bargo Engineering, Inc., pp 604) was submitted by Landtech Engineering, Inc. on behalf of Bargo Engineering, Inc. for property located at 1775 Armstrong Avenue. The property is zoned I-2, General Industrial and contains approximately 5.14 acres with a 20,000 sq.ft. building proposed for a warehouse. Edwards: The next item is LSD 02-12.00, Bargo Engineering, submitted by Landtech on behalf of Bargo Engineering for property located at 1725 Armstrong. The property is zoned I-2 and contains 5.14 acres with a 20,000 sq.ft. building proposed for a warehouse. Good morning. Presley: Todd Presley on behalf of Landtech. We will start with the comments from our Landscape Administrator. A preliminary landscape plan is required for Planning Commission review and a final landscape plan is required prior to issuance of a building permit. One tree is required for additional paved parking area and an additional tree can be required for the existing property. Trees are also required along Armstrong to meet commercial design standards. If existing conditions restrict planting between entrance drive and Armstrong trees have to be placed in the green areas between the buildings and the street. Just to clarify, the requirement along Armstrong is one tree per 30'. Kim Hesse —Landscape Administrator Hesse: If this ditch is not 2' you might have to do them here. Edwards: There were no comments from Parks. From Sidewalks, Armstrong is a minor arterial which requires a 6' sidewalk and a 10' greenspace. It does need to be added to a plan and add a sidewalk symbol to the plan in the legend. Shreve: We may have to work with you a little bit about the location of that sidewalk with the drainage. Presley: We've got to put the ditch there. Shreve: Give us a call and we'll meet with you on site. Presley: What is your phone number so I can have it handy? Shreve: 575-8291. Either Keith or Chuck. Edwards: From our Traffic Superintendent, street lights will be required every 300'. I am not sure what is out there so we need you to show the location of the Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 22 existing streetlights so we can determine if any additional ones are needed. Requirements for ADA spaces, one ADA space must be van accessible and that includes an 8' aisle and an 8' space so you might need to do some restriping there. Perry, on this Bargo Engineering, the location, we said the location of the ADA spaces were fine? Franklin: It is fine and those could be, I am going to check. I was going to try to go out this morning and didn't. If these are 11' spaces, that is what is called a universal, if they are then that is fine, they will suffice. If that is 11', if not then one of them needs to be 8'. Presley: What if we have 11'5", and 11' are we ok? Franklin: Yes. Presley: Ok, I'll check that. Edwards: I am requesting that you provide a letter stating what the existing and proposed uses of property is and the reason that I am doing that, I just need to verify zoning compliance. I don't foresee it to be a problem. It is just to know what they do there. I am requesting that you add adjacent zoning, add a legend and add a site coverage note. The site coverage is required to be 85% or less of buildings and pavements. Armstrong is a minor arterial, which requires that 45' from centerline be dedicated. Do you know if there is any additional parking lot lighting proposed? Franklin: No there isn't. Currently there is no street lighting down Armstrong but there are poles available. Whenever we make a decision to put lighting down through there then we'll do them. Edwards: Ok, so you don't need them to do streetlights right now? Franklin: No. Edwards: The next few comments are with regard to landscaping and replicate Kim's so I won't go over those. Pursuant to commercial design standards, and that kind of goes off what she said with the 25% expansion a 15' landscaped area shall be provided along the front property line. With the right of way dedication I think that we have a problem with that. We don't have enough room between the current drive so what we are going to have to do is one, we could move the drive. That is your option but, two, you could ask for a waiver of that by the Planning Commission, which would require this project to go all the way to Planning Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 23 Commission. I just need a letter saying "We request not to move the existing drive." I think that we can support that. Presley: That is with 15' landscaping? Edwards: Yes. From fire, there is an existing hydrant that should meet the requirement above unless the new building is proposed to be sprinkled, do you know if it is? Presley: I don't believe it is. I would have to check. Petrie: If it is, and you may be connecting into an existing sprinkler system, but if you've got a new connection that is when the requirement is 100' from the Fire Department connection. That is all that I have and Ron will go over his comments. Ron Petrie — Staff Engineer Petrie: I didn't receive a preliminary drainage report for this project. That is typically automatic tabling on a project. It will need to come back to Plat Review. I should mention it is not an option whether or not stormwater detention is required. It is required. So by ordinance it has to be a final design on the pond to make sure we have enough property space. We will have to come back to Plat Review after that information is submitted. Along with that fire line can you check to see if there will be any water services or sewer services or if they will just connect to all of their existing? Presley: I believe we are going to connect to our current services. Petrie: I went ahead and looked at the grading plan and just had some minor items that I will need you to add. Such as, a city map, with developer and adjacent property owners. This is the grading plan itself'. I know some of it is replicated on this but that is what the ordinance says. It has to be on the grading plan. Soil type, acreage and zoning and I think that is it. We will have to have the drainage report with the detention shown on the plan with calculations to back up. Edwards: The deadline for the next Plat Review is Monday the 22nd. You absolutely need your drainage by then. Petrie: We will need the plan by then and I don't see how you can do the plan without the drainage. I don't need the report itself by that deadline but I Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 24 need a few days to review it. The plans do need to be submitted and they need to show the detention pond. That is all I have. Sue Clouser — Southwestern Bell Clouser: Do you know if they are planning on office space in here? Presley: No. Clouser: To feed it then we will probably go to the existing facilities. I don't know how we feed the building presently but if you are not looking for any office space in there or anything, I wouldn't imagine you are going to have too many lines so we can work on that. You might want to give us a conduit, just stub it out so that we do have a way to get in there if we need to in the future. If there does happen to be anything buried out there that we need to relocate it will be at the owner's expense. That is all I have. Johnny Boles — Arkansas Western Gas Boles: No comment. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: No comment. Glen Newman — AEP/ SWEPCO Newman: Do you have any idea, just lighting load is all we are talking about? Presley: No I don't. Newman: As soon as you get it finalized we will need a load capacity for what they are going to have in there. All of our facilities are on the north side of the existing building and use that transformer. To the best of my knowledge we don't have anything on the south side down here where the building is going to be but if there were then it would be at the owner's expense to relocate it. That is all I need to say there. Otherwise, if we can get the load calculations I will check my transformer size and make sure that we have the capacity and that is all I have. Presley: Thank you. Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 25 LSD 02-14.00: Large Scale Development (Fayetteville School District, pp 443) was submitted by Geoffrey Bates of Crafton, Tull, & Associates on behalf of Fayetteville School District for property located at 1124 W. Cleveland Street. The property is zoned P-1, Institutional and contains approximately 5.41 acres with 58 parking spaces provided. Edwards: I would like to mention that item number seven has been removed from the agenda, I just didn't get a chance to take it off. The next item is LSD 02-14.00, Fayetteville School District. It was submitted by Geoffrey Bates of Crafton, Tull, & Associates on behalf of Fayetteville School District for property located at 1124 W. Cleveland Street. The property is zoned P-1, Institutional and contains approximately 5.41 acres with 58 parking spaces proposed. I am going to start with comments from our Landscape Administrator. Shrubs are required between proposed parking lot and Garland Avenue. Indicate size of proposed shrubs and trees, indicate method of irrigation. Seven trees total are required for the north parking lot. A complete landscape plan is required prior to building permit approval. Let me say those, unless you've got another one. Kim Hesse — Landscape Administrator Hesse: That includes the trees that were on here. When we met I believe I told you we need a tree every 30' so that is what the additional one would be for. Edwards: I want to be clear Kim on what you're asking. You are asking for the one per 30' plus the parking lot trees? Hesse: Yes. Edwards: And shrubs? Hesse: Right. The shrubs can go in those beds. Bates: Those are going to be one to thirty down through here? Hesse: Yes, and I think basically the three would meet that and then we need four for the parking so there would be one, two, three, etc. Bates: Ok. Edwards: For tree preservation, site analysis and analysis report are to be completed and tree preservation plans are to meet requirements. On site mitigation requirements must be indicated on the tree preservation plan. Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 26 Hesse: You will have to mitigate for that 2% that we are going to take out. I can get with you on that. Some of the stuff that you had on the checklist as n/a, we actually do need. That is why I mentioned the checklist, some of it was mitigation. We can just meet later on that. Edwards: From our Traffic Superintendent, streetlights are required every 300', show the existing streetlights on the plat. I would assume they are doing that as part of the Highway Department widening right? Bates: We are not having anything to do with that. The Highway Department is doing the ones along Garland, I don't know about Cleveland Street. Edwards: Do you just want them to show them along Cleveland? Bates: I don't remember seeing any streetlights. Perry Franklin — Traffic Superintendent Franklin: I think they are there but we can check for sure. Edwards: The 50 spaces in the parking lot off of Garland require two ADA spaces and one of those must be van accessible. Bates: Even if I put some down there how are they going to get up there because there is the retaining wall and stairs. Franklin: That is a good question to ask the ADA. Bates: There is one in this parking lot right here. Franklin: That is a separate parking lot, the ADA requires each parking lot. Bates: Even if they came over the existing grade, there is 20% or 15%. Edwards: You could put a sign, ADA space available. Franklin: That is something I think you need to talk to Steve about. There may be a hardship case, I don't know. Look at the Richardson Center, how did we do it? We went in and turned, turned, turned. We didn't get out of it because we didn't think they could get there. I am just saying that the ADA requires, this is a separate parking lot, it is not by the building, it is by the parking for parking lots. If you are going to park people here then an ADA person should also be able to park here too and get access to whatever facilities that are there. We don't know, just looking at this plan, Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 27 Edwards: Bates: Franklin: Bates: Franklin: Bates: Edwards: Keith Shreve we don't know that this person over there in that lot can even get over here inside that building. We don't know that. The ADA treats it as each parking lot. Sara, I'm looking at this and I missed something yesterday just big time. This 12' aisle here in that parking lot, I am going to have to go back and check my manual but I don't think that is wide enough. One aisle has got a 22' backout and the other has 12'. I'm getting ready to comment on that. Those are supposed to have been 15' and 24'. I don't know if that is a typo or if they just drew it in there wrong. Steve Cattaneo, if there are hardship issues about access then Steve, the Building Inspector, there are hardship cases in the ADA there are hardship case allowances and if there is no way you can get access to that part of the building then he may be able to allow you to waive that. I don't know. I know a lot of people have had to do it. We are looking at the same scenario behind the Federal Building right now. Their parking lot is 15' below the backside of their building but they are going to have to ramp it to get them up there because that is the only access those people have. I will research it too Jeff and get back with you. Ok. I may need to just go over there and look at it. I can meet you too if you need me to. From our Sidewalk Division, Garland is a principal arterial which requires a 6' sidewalk and a 10' greenspace. However, that will be constructed as a part of the Garland Avenue improvements by the Highway Depaitinent. Cleveland Street is a historic collector which requires a 6' sidewalk and a 10' greenspace and that will be constructed as a part of the Cleveland Street improvements. Sidewalks shall be continuous through the driveways with a maximum 2% cross slope and elevated 2% above top of curb. Remove lines representing curbs through the sidewalk section and the driveway from the drawing. Do you have anything to add to that? — Sidewalks Division Shreve: The parking lot that comes out onto Cleveland Street, is that entrance going to be constructed by the school and be permanent or do you know yet at this point? This small lot on Cleveland. Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 28 Bates: Yes, it should be. Shreve: Our main concern is we want the sidewalk continuous through that driveway at the 2% cross slope and 2% above the curb. You are showing curb lines through the sidewalk section, we would like those lines removed. Bates: Ok. Shreve: So it shows on the plan that the sidewalk is continuous. That was our main point behind that comment. Edwards: There are also two bicycle parking racks required. I don't know if you have a copy of that ordinance. It is a fairly new ordinance. I just need you to add them to the plan and point them out. From Planning, the maximum number of pages that shall be submitted with the next submittal is two. You can combine the tree preservation plan and the large scale plan and you can put the grading with it or you can put it on a separate plan. I just want to go over everything you can put on from the title page. This project is on top of city right of way. I included a copy of where our right of way is. I think you can tell. What we are going to have to do is approve this large scale subject to the approval of a vacation. No work will be permitted until that vacation is approved. The vacation will have to go to Planning Commission and to City Council with three readings so it is a little bit lengthy. I am requesting that you add adjacent zoning, add adjacent property owners, add plat page 443 and dimension the right of way from centerline for both Garland and Cleveland. Bates: Are all of the adjacent property owners not on there? Edwards: If they are I just need them added to sheet four. I asked you this, but I need to change my mind from yesterday. We do need you to show the playground and just for our informational purposes but future playground area. If you can convey to the school that that will require a conditional use because it is in an R-1 zone. Be sure that they are aware of that before they start work. Bates: Ok. Edwards: For parking, the requirement is for one space per 1,200 sq.ft. of classroom area. The parking numbers that you listed I think was for the entire square footage for the school, not just the classroom area, is that correct? Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 29 Bates: I just called them and asked them what the square foot of their building was. Edwards: Ok, so see if you can get an estimate on just the classroom area. Bates: I'm sure he doesn't know but I will ask. Edwards: I talked about a conditional use for additional parking above 20% that is allowed. The requirement for 45° parking is that each stall have a curb length of 12.5', that each stall be 19' deep. There is a two foot overhang, it can be used if topography allows to make them 17'. The aisle width must be 24'. Driveway width requirements are if it is a one way in, 15', if it is a one way in and one way out, 24'-27' and a one way out is 12'. Anything other than that, a waiver needs to be requested and granted by the Planning Commission. Do you know if they are proposing any parking lot lighting? Bates: I don't think so. Edwards: We do have a new lighting ordinance, that I don't know if it is completely passed yet but it does talk about the type of lights that need to be used so if that does come up there are some regulations on that. Bates: Since it is a school there shouldn't be anybody there after dark anyway. Edwards: I was thinking of PTA meetings or something like that, or games, I don't know. Bates: They have none. This is just an elementary. Edwards: Ok, do you know if there are any overhead utilities on the site? Bates: There probably is along Garland, I don't remember. Edwards: I just need you to show that and then put the voltage and I don't know if the Highway Department is doing something with that. Bates: I think they are working on all of that stuff. I have talked to the Highway Department some about it. Edwards: Has the right of way been granted already? Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 30 Bates: I thought they had come to an agreement. Whether they have done it or not I'm not sure. They have agreed on a price, whether they have paid for it and sold it to them I don't know. Edwards: We have both of these streets on the Master Street Plan which would require right of way to be dedicated as part of this project... Bates: I know, it is complicated. Edwards: I don't know the answer to that. That is all that I have. Ron Petrie — Staff Engineer Petrie: Bates: Petrie: Jeff, just a few minor comments on grading. I just need soil type, method of treatment and flow and disturbed areas. The proposed retaining wall that is on the final grading plan, I need that design, it looks like it is over 4' tall in some places. Also, we will require a handrail to meet the requirements. The drainage report, I did have a few comments on that. We will need some corrections or additional information. One thing that I am concerned about is when you looked at the predevelopment flows, you just took the whole site and gave me a flow. I think the problem is the predevelopment flows do not drain to one point. It looks like it sheet flows and then it goes off of this site. On your post development you're bringing the whole site, the school, parking lot and everything, you are forcing it back over to this comer and that is really not what happened in existing conditions. In effect, you are increasing the drainage through the property and concentrating it to one point. Changing it drastically it looks like, unless there is some more out there. It doesn't really show up but there is a creek that goes diagonally across through here so all of it is really running across to that creek that is going through there. It is on the north side. There is an existing 30" pipe going underground all the way through here and dumping out, getting all of this upstream drainage and there is a creek that water runs in all the time, all the way to Garland so all of this is running all into that creek. You've got the school and all of that is all sheet flowing and now the parking lot is going to get this water and bring it to this point and sheet all the way across. Bates: We can just super detain into all of that. Petrie: I need to think about it a little bit more. Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 31 Bates: There is no room to put a detention pond up here I don't think or do you want to just keep letting it sheet flow on off? Petrie: I still have to have a pre and post but I have to find a way to get the flow coming off the site at this point is going to be the same as predeveloped. Bates: I'll work on it. Petrie: I would be glad to sit down and go over some scenarios, it is something that we can work out. On number three, I reiterated the requirements of where we need to see the flow, where it comes onto the site, where it goes off the site, if you can look at that specific requirement, § 1.2 to make sure we get the flows at the proper points. Bates: Petrie: I guess one thing that is kind of confusing to me is it all sheet flows now and then of course we are going to increase the runoff because it is going to be asphalt and you require detention so that makes us concentrate the flow. Are you supposed to super detain, over detain it? How do you normally deal with that? I think there are several options. One thing you are meeting is if the guy downstream is real upset because you changes how it discharges although the overall quantities will do the same. As long as that guy accepts it and he is ok with it I don't care. I have seen some situations where you almost have a channel with overflows all the way down the property line to simulate a sheet flow coming out of the pond. There are some things to be creative and make it work. Bates: Ok, we can try something. Petrie: Or you can get with the Highway Depaitwent and track it down through the highway, something like that. Bates: Ok, I have no idea what kind of drainage they are going to use. Petrie: I don't either. We may have some preliminary plans in our office but I am not too familiar with them. The southern parking lot, just by looking at the contours, it looks like the water will leave the parking lot, veer off site and then veer back onsite so I am a little concerned about that. Bates: It really doesn't if you are out there. This line is really built up so it keeps it all in between the building if you go out and look at it. Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 32 Petrie: Just so you know, the final drainage report, and I know you have submitted it as a final drainage report but I didn't really review it that way because I knew we had some issues here. We will require the hundred year water surface elevation be shown. I will need you to verify it won't leave the property. Bates: Ok. Petrie: The detention pond standard requirement is a concrete top channel that connects your inlets to your outlet structure. The drainage manual requires it be sodded. This is where we look at velocities and getting back to predevelopment conditions. Lastly is something to consider. Do we need any special barrier fence or anything around this detention pond since we have small school children around. I think that is something that the Planning Commission will want answered from me. Edwards: How deep is it? Bates: It is about 6' deep but it is only going to have water in it when it rains. The kids are not supposed to be outside when it rains. Petrie: But they dismiss school and you've got kids everywhere walking home and that could be a danger to one of the neighbor kids. That will come as a discussion item. If you can come up with an answer to that question you should consider that. Bates: I'll get with the Superintendent. Petrie: That is all that I have got. Edwards: Utilities? Sue Clouser — Southwestern Bell Clouser: I would like to see along Garland, since it is a state highway a 15' utility easement. The state has got really tough with letting us in their right of ways now. Edwards: I just want to clarify, that new right of way is going close to the building isn't it? Bates: It is right next to the building. Edwards: Is there 15'? Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 33 Bates: 16', it scales. Clouser: I don't know if you guys want crossings underneath those drives? Boles: 1 don't have anything in there. Clouser: Well, I don't have anything either but I would like them built in there because if we need them they will be there, 4" under all the drives along Garland and the new utility easement on Cleveland is fine to have it in the right of way. That is all. Franklin: I think it would be smart if the school system did like Connie did over at the soccer fields. They should at least run some conduit for those islands incase they do get downstream with street lighting in the future. It would be a very minimal cost at this point to get some conduit out in the parking lot under those aisles that would be there in case they ever did install lighting. That is what we did with Parks. Johnny Boles — Arkansas Western Gas Boles: I really don't have a comment related to this project. Ron, do you know where the city stands on the Cleveland Street project? Petrie: I don't know. Boles: I have met several times with city staff and made some recommendations but I haven't heard back from them so I didn't know if that was going to happen this year. Franklin: t think they are going to bid it next month. Petrie: I think they are proceeding on. At one point they decided to wait until the Highway Department did Garland Street but I think they have decided to move on. I can't say I know all the details of that project because I am just not involved. I can find out an answer. Boles: I will talk with you after the meeting. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: The closest thing we have is on the south side of Cleveland, an easement west that I don't think is going to be an issue. We do go into this school and I can't tell you where it is but Cox Communications provides free Technical Plat Review April 17, 2002 Page 34 cable in the classroom to all schools so if anything has to be relocated it will be at our expense. That is all I have. Glen Newman — AEP/SWEPCO Newman: I think everything, I know our main circuit is on the south side of Cleveland. We do have a couple of poles that sit over there and it may be that these are poles that need to be relocated. We will do that. If it needs to be relocated it will be at the school's expense. Clouser: I would like to add that comment also. If any of our facilities need to be moved it will be at the school's expense also. Newman: Are they going to require any lighting inside the parking area or do we know? Bates: I don't know yet. Newman. We have two poles on the south side of this and a pole here and then there is a pole about half way down the street but I believe it is out of the construction area. That is all I have. Edwards: Ok, we're adjourned.