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.