Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-07-31 - MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE TECHNICAL PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE A regular meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee was held on Wednesday, July 31, 2002 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS CONSIDERED ACTION TAKEN LSP 02-39.00: Lot Split (Krushiker, pp 558) Forwarded Page 2 LSD 02-21.00: Large Scale Development (Nelms, pp 249) Tabled Page 5 LSD 02-22.00: Large Scale Development (Premier Wine & Spirits, pp 177) Page 13 PPL 02-14.00: Preliminary Plat (Mission Place, pp 370) Page STAFF PRESENT Sara Edwards Matt Casey Kim Hesse Renee Thomas Keith Shreve Ron Petrie Forwarded Forwarded STAFF ABSENT Travis Dotson Danny Farrar Perry Franklin Kim Rogers UTILITIES PRESENT UTILITIES ABSENT Larry Gibson, Cox Communications Mike Phipps, Ozark Electric Coop. Glenn Newman, AEP/ SWEPCO Johnny Boles, Arkansas Western Gas Sue Clouser, Southwestern Bell Jim Sargent, AEP/ SWEPCO Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 2 LSP 02-39.00: Lot Split (Krushiker, pp 558) was submitted by Erin Rushing on behalf of Narendra Krushiker for property located at 6214 W. 6`h Street. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 5.02 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 1.45 acres and 3.54 acres. Conklin: Good morning. Welcome to the Technical Plat Review Committee meeting of Wednesday, July 31, 2002. We have five items on our agenda. The first item of business is LSP 02-39.00 for Narendra Krushiker, it was submitted by Erin Rushing for property located at 6214 W. Sixth Street. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 5.02 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 1.45 acres and 3.54 acres. Good morning Erin. Rushing: Good morning. Conklin: Sara is going to start out. Edwards: Starting with Parks, no comment. No comment from Solid Waste. No comment from Traffic. No comment from Sidewalks, sidewalks are not required on lot splits. From Planning, we need you to add a floodplain reference and I am looking for a dimension for the newly dedicated right of way. That is all from us. This is Matt Casey with Engineering. Matt Casey — Staff Engineer Casey: We are requesting additional easement around the existing fire hydrant on the west side of lot one. It appears that there might be less than 10'. We would like a minimum of 10' from the water line and fire hydrant. Also, there has been some discussion with David Cotter of CEI about a loop being made when these lots develop. We would like to go ahead and see the layout of the proposed waterlines, show the location and dedicate the easements at this stage and then go ahead and do the construction when the lots develop. Rushing: Do you know if this line that is running along the back of this building is private right now? Casey: There is some debate about that. We need it to be public, the water and sewer. At this time there are water meters coming off of it. We need to go ahead and locate that at this time so that when that loop is proposed we will know what we've got. It looks like the meters are located but if we could get the lines shown on there as well. Rushing: Probably what will happen is we submitted a Property Line Adjustment prior to this. Probably what we will do is just put it on that one if that is ok. We will show it on here as well. Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 3 Casey: Ok. Rushing: We will probably dedicate the easement with the property line adjustment. Casey: As long as the easement gets dedicated. Conklin: Just one thing Erin, lot one, I would like to add a condition on there that access be limited to the common access easement from Hwy. 62 so that will be the point of entry to lot one. Rushing: So no access off of Hwy. 62, you want that access to be off? Conklin: Yes. I would like to limit the curb cuts on Hwy. 62. Why don't you talk to your client and if there is an issue with that with something that they are proposing we probably need to know about that prior to Planning Commission. That is all I have. Glenn Newman — AEP/SWEPCO Newman: We have an existing overhead three phase line, 12,000 volts on the east property line of this. Any relocations or adjustments would be at the developer's expense. It looks like we have easements all the way around the thing so we will be alright there. That is all I have. Johnny Boles — Arkansas Western Gas Boles: Erin, are you showing any easement paralleling Hwy. 62 that maybe I'm overlooking? Rushing: Additional easements? Boles: Utility easements in general. Rushing: I have 10' on lot one. Boles: Ok, would you mind increasing that to 20' please? Rushing: Sure, no problem. Boles: That is all I have. Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 4 Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: We are joint usage on that north/south three phase line that AEP has. I have got the same comments, any damage or relocation will be at the owner's expense. Sue Clouser — Southwestern Bell Clouser: We have cable on that same pole. I would also like to request an easement to this existing building. Crossland just called me and they want us to remove cable here for construction and I would like to have an easement coming off this existing easement, going east behind the building here so we have an easement going here. I don't know how they are going to divide this when they are remodeled. This 28' is just access easement, I wouldn't need the 28' but would it be a problem to get 10'? Rushing: Yes, that is not a problem. Clouser: If anything does need to be relocated it will be at the owner's expense. Conklin: Do any other utilities or staff have anything? Erin, one thing that we will need is the Highway Department requires us to get by separate Warranty Deed any additional right of way dedicated to the city so we will need that dedication on a separate Warranty Deed in order to be able to give that to the Highway Department. I think that is everything. Thank you very much. One other question, the two houses that are on lot one, are those going to be demolished? Rushing: As far as I know. Conklin: Ok. Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 5 LSD 02-21.00: Large Scale Development (Nelms, pp 249) was submitted by Phil Hagen of Crafton, Tull & Associates on behalf of Nelms, LLP for property located west of I-540 and east of Hwy 112. The property is zone C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 7.28 acres with a 907,194 sq.ft. parking lot proposed. Conklin: The second item on our agenda is LSD 02-21.00 for Nelms submitted by Phil Hagen of Crafton, Tull & Associates on behalf of Nelms, LLP for property located west of I-540 and east of Hwy 112. The property is zone C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 7.28 acres with a 907,194 sq.ft. parking lot proposed for the Landers Auto Dealership. Good morning. Edwards: Basically all these comments are in writing. I will start with our Traffic Superintendent, he had no comments. No comments from Parks. As far as Fire, he is requesting more width for the entrance into the parking lot and I believe you have talked to him about that. From Sidewalks, Highway 112 is a principal arterial, which requires a 6' sidewalk and a minimum of 10' green space. They are requiring completion of the sidewalks along Highway 112 and are also requesting that a sidewalk symbol be added to the plat. Hagen: I say that won't be a problem but we do have the drainage across there. Shreve: At this time we are not asking for a bridge to cross the creek. We just want to get closer to it than the existing sidewalk is now. Hagen: Take it to it and then stop or go ahead and continue on the other side? Shreve: Well, does your property actually cross the drainage creek? Hagen: I think it does. Shreve: At this time I would say stop on this side. We have a letter from Mr. Nelms willing to build a bridge at sometime in the future for the property to the north develops. At this point we just want to get closer to the creek. Conklin: You just want the sidewalk extended to the north as close to the creek as possible without going into the creek? Shreve: Yes. Hagen: Ok. You want that constructed now? Shreve: Yes. Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 6 Edwards: From the Landscape Administrator, an analysis drawing and analysis report is required for this project. Please indicate what is to be proposed in the tree removal areas and provide a general indication of health and structure of trees to be removed and saved. A tree preservation area is to be delineated for preservation into the future. A complete tree preservation submittal is required prior to any decision by the Landscape Administrator. The site analysis and analysis report is needed along with clarification of improvements proposed within tree removal areas. A clear delineation is also required for areas to be preserved for tree canopy. Conklin: We are having some trouble trying to determine the actual extent of the project and the project boundary. Mr. Nelms would like to have an answer today with regard to the remaining property and being allowed to remove the trees without development on his property back to the north to be able to have a display area for the cars. As staff we are going to sit down and determine how to proceed. Hagen: He just wants to make sure that the 20 acres that he is going to give he is getting credit for. Conklin: He wants to get that all set up today. We really haven't done that for other developers. Ordinances do change and someone has 40 acres that are wooded that we haven't come in and gave them approval that in 2002 we are going to set up what trees you have to save when development comes in. We would rather see the development, that is what we are trying to deal with. We are talking about the wooded area directly north all the way to Hwy. 112. Edwards: From Planning, we need a site coverage delineated on the site plan. There is a requirement in the Overlay District that maximum coverage is 75%. Also, we require that all streets be dimensioned from centerline so we can verify that we have the correct right of way on 112. Add plat page 249 to the plat. You can put that somewhere near the signature block. That is a city referencing system. We also need an indication of the type and height of lighting proposed. There was a variance granted for the lighting on the existing dealership and we need to know if it is going to be the same or different or if you are going to need a variance on that again. In the design overlay district the requirement is 35' tall maximum and only sodium light fixtures are allowed. Conklin: I think they are using metal halide lighting so you can see what color of car you are buying at night. You might want to ask for a variance for that. Edwards: Do you know if they are requesting any new signs? Hagen: No, not at this point. Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 7 Edwards: Also, there is a minimum 25' green space at the property line and it looks like you have got dimensioned that you are including a curb in there. Conklin: You just need to go back and look at it. It looks like you are using the edge of the curb. Edwards: All new utilities will be required to be underground. Do you know if there is any existing overhead on the site? Hagen: No. Conklin: The utilities will all be underground. Edwards: I just want to double check, we need the floodway and floodplain shown. Conklin: Will there be work done in the floodway? When I say work I understand the property crosses in there. Hagen: We have hired a wetlands expert. Regarding the permitting, we are going to do a bridge structure, an actual bridge. That is at the Corp's suggestion so we don't have to disturb the creek. Conklin- There is a regulatory floodway through this area, which is FEMA, separate from the Corp. The bridge structure will require a floodplain development permit . Any grading or other work within the hundred year floodplain, including the display area, will require that permit. Any work within the floodway will require a no rise certificate showing that the base flood elevations are not going to be increased. You have to have zero rise within that floodway. I recall that when they originally came through there were some concerns about vehicles being under water during the hundred year flood event. It looks like these vehicles are a few feet under water and the flood area, based on elevations out of that area. I don't know if that is acceptable or not. That is something to bring back to your client and ask about. I don't know if you have seen the floodplain information but it looks like some of the surface elevations where your drainage intakes are, they will have 2' of water above them that will probably get in the cars. I don't know if that is acceptable. What I heard was that the insurance company doesn't like water to get in brand new cars and getting cars in the hundred year floodplain. I am not trying to be funny, I am just throwing out past findings. You might want to check that before it is all said and done. Hagen: We calculated that and with our new field surveys and I checked that and the survey. Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 8 Conklin: Do you want to change the map? Hagen: We are not asking for a map revision from FEMA on that. Our client is aware of the situation. Conklin: In your opinion the 1999 study is actually at higher base flood elevations than what is out there. Hagen: They really didn't take any cross down here, none of that was really studied. The information we provided has shown that it may be lower. Conklin: Did you use the same methodology? Hagen: Yes. I actually got the flood study from Sara and added the cross sections. Conklin: At this time they feel like they wouldn't want to take care of that, modify the floodway and floodplain boundaries? Hagen: No, we are going to try to leave that creek in tact. Conklin: What I am saying is that you have a new study. Hagen: They do not want to submit to FEMA at this time. Conklin: Really? Ok. Bates: It is a year long process. Conklin: Can you submit the study to the city and the city could submit it to FEMA possibly? Hagen: They intend on doing that, just not at this time. They need six months to tackle that. Conklin: Ok. That is good news. Hagen: He owns everything free and clear so it is not really a title issue. Conklin- You mentioned that he hired an environmentalist specialist to do a wetlands delineation, when will that be complete? Hagen: I actually just received it this morning. Conklin: Are there wetlands in any of the areas that you are developing? Hagen: No. Just the channel of course. Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 9 Edwards: Will you put a note on here or something? Conklin: Can we get a copy of that study for our file? That will probably go into Matt's comments with regard to detention and best management practices for storm water quantity and quality runoff. Matt Casey — Staff Engineer Casey: I did have a few issues. I would like to table this item until we can get some additional information about the discharge to the north. The current discharge from this box culvert under the highway is coming to the west and into this channel and the proposal is to reroute that to the north. We don't have any information about what is going to happen at that point and how it is going to affect the neighbor, the 112 drive in. We would like to get all that information so we can make a decision on whether to support that or not. I have a few minor comments. The wetlands on there, we wanted certified. If there are some to the north where you are discharging it, our ordinance states that you cannot alter the quantity or quality of the water discharging into the wetlands. That is one thing to consider in discharging that to the north. Drainage report states that these culverts are coming through this ditch here and that a FEMA study was used. A FEMA study is not done the same way as the drainage criteria manual. Specifically we require you to design the culverts as if there were existing conditions upstream. We won't allow a higher flow than we would allow in the zoning that you are in. Riff wrap is not allowed under our drainage ordinance. There is a policy from Jim Beavers in our drainage manual stating that and identifying the approved methods. If you need a copy of that I can get that for you. Also, we have not received an easement plat yet and we would like to get that from you as well. Hagen: I will get that submitted. Conklin: You were talking about the original Nelms project right? Casey: Yes. Edwards: It just hasn't been filed? Casey: It is filed, they just never came by and gave the city a copy of it. Edwards: What we require is twelve. Hagen: You require twelve for this submittal? Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 10 Conklin: Casey: Edwards: Conklin: Petrie: Conklin: Hagen: Yes, so we can get it in our records and down to GIS so we can get all the easements done on the map. You should provide twelve easement plats. What that does is it puts your deadline for resubmittal to August 5th and puts you at the August 14th Plat Review meeting. I think it would be helpful to clarify, does this project stand alone or is it the entire piece with the trees up there? We are going to have to make some big decisions here on how we deal with that. We have to have all the calculations for site coverage and preservation of tree canopy and we will have to get with you on that. There are wetlands through that whole area. I don't know if you are going to get tree preservation if that is all wetlands. That is true. Is the delineation done up from that part too? Yes. Initially there was some concern on that. The last 20 acres had four or five acres of wetlands. I don't have his detailed report where it is delineated up there. I asked him to break up the bottom part where we are doing improvements right now and he stated in this report that there are no wetlands. We are dealing with the north part separately. If you need to look at it all, we can look at it all at this time. Conklin- We will let you know what we would like to see and how we would like you to handle it. Were the curbs any higher? Around the island. I have a question. This piece is owned separately from this correct? No. It is all together? The deed is that this is a tract, this is a tract, and there is a third tract. Ok, the rezoning you are requesting is where? I believe that is tract three. Ok, utilities? Hagen: Edwards: Hagen: Edwards: Hagen: Edwards: Hagen: Edwards: Jim Sargent — AEP/SWEPCO Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 11 Sargent: This piece here, what is in section 34 is in SWEPCO's territory and everything west of there is in Ozark's territory. We don't currently have any facilities on that side of the interstate with Fulbright Expressway there. As long as this parking lot lighting is the only load we would be glad to let Ozark serve that load. If other things come along in our territory then we might want to service it. Mike Phipps — Ozark Electric Coop. Phipps: We have existing power approximately 750' west of this parking location. If we have to extend service to this for a transformer for these lots, I don't know if they are going to use existing power to run these lines or if they want a separate transformer set. The developer will bear the cost of that expense to that. Once we get to section 34, it will have to be metered section 33. I can't bring that transformer into SWEPCO's territory there. Any underground that needs to be run will have to be run back to that meter point into section 33 right on the section line. Looking at what they have, I would say they are probably going to use their existing lighting power just to put this in. That is all I have. Edwards: Mike, we have lost our map that tells us which areas are SWEPCO and which ones are Ozark. Do you have anything like that that we can copy? Conklin: I tell you what, you get us that map and we will put it into our GIS system and we can get that into our web page stuff that we have out and we will give you a copy. How is that? Phipps: Ok. Conklin: If you have the legal description I can have John put it in there and that way everybody can get it and we can get it back to you. We will even give it to SWEPCO. That would be a benefit to everybody. Do either of you have it in digital format yet? Phipps: I am sure we do. Johnny Boles — Arkansas Western Gas Boles: No comment. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: No comment. Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 12 Sue Clouser — Southwestern Bell Clouser: Conklin: If we have anything in there in these existing utility easements that will have to be moved to accommodate the paving, that will be at the owner's expense. That is all I have. The mylar should be filed over at the county. Worst case scenario you can go over there. Hagen: That is where I got this one, they didn't have a big one. Maybe they did and they just didn't make me a copy. Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 13 LSD 02-22.00: Large Scale Development (Premier Wine & Spirits, pp 177) was submitted by Mel Milholland of Milholland Company for property located at the northeast corner of Joyce & Hwy 265. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 2.0 acres with an 8,050 sq.ft. building proposed. Conklin: The next item on the agenda is LSD 02-22.00 submitted by Mel Milholland of Milholland Company for property located at the northeast comer of Joyce & Hwy 265. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare and contains approximately 2.0 acres with an 8,050 sq.ft., single story building proposed. Edwards: From our Traffic Superintendent, he is requesting that you show the streetlight locations every 300' and at the intersection for Joyce and Hwy. 265. Milholland: Is that just along 265? Edwards: We require them every 300' and so you need to show where they are. There may be additional required. Milholland: Ok. Conklin: Is the electric over 12 KV? Phipps: Yes, it is 14.4 KV. Conklin- With the lights that go up, will those be on the poles then? Phipps: Yes, they can be. You mean the entrance off 265? Conklin: The streetlights, I was wondering if the streetlights are going on the existing poles with the electric lines or are we putting new poles up? Milholland: They can use existing poles? Phipps: Yes. Conklin: The poles are space out how? Phipps: I really can't tell here, out through there, 250'. Milholland: Usually no more than 300' apart. Phipps: If I do not have one at the entrance I can set a pole in that line at the entrance and then we can do the semi -cutoff cobra head. Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 14 Conklin: Go ahead, I just wanted to clarify that. Edwards: Perry is also concerned about the site distance on Joyce. He thinks that there may be some vegetation removal required in order to provide the site distance to the north. From the Fire Department. All drive in areas should be 20', unobstructed width is required. There are two new fire hydrants on the plat, one is there and one is existing. From Solid Waste, the Solid Waste and Recycling Division requests the dumpster site be expanded to at least 20' wide by 10' deep. This will allow for the future expansion of business recycling. Please contact our department for roll -off service during the construction phase and upon occupation for regular service. Te Solid Waste and Recycling Division is the only dully authorized hauler of waste within the city limits by city ordinance. He is requesting that you inform your client of that before construction. From Sidewalks, Crossover Road is a principal arterial, which requires a 6' sidewalk and a minimum 10' green space. Joyce is a collector which requires a six foot sidewalk and a minimum of ten feet of green space. The sidewalk along Joyce is not on there and needs added. Conklin: See right here Mel, you need a sidewalk along Joyce. McClain: I thought we asked to pay money in lieu. Edwards: We are getting there. The required sidewalks shall be constructed for this project. Cash in lieu of construction is not recommended for this project. Please remove note number three. Milholland: It says the sidewalks are required to be constructed? Conklin- Yes, staff is not in support of that waiver. Milholland: Isn't that a waiver option? Conklin: You just can't get a waiver anymore. You have to pay. You either build it, pay for it now, or you give us money. We don't want the cash, we want the sidewalk. Milholland: When we talk about sidewalks, lets talk about streets too at the same time. We are not going to build the street until the future and I thought why put a walk in that is going to have to be torn out when you build the street. Edwards: We are not in support of the not building the street either. We do want to talk to you about it. We don't have a determination of what improvements we are going to support. We will work with you to get a rational nexus method on that but we are not going to support taking cash either because we only have a five year holding period for improvement money, to spend Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 15 the improvement money and we don't think the improvements will be done in that time period so we will want the improvements. Milholland: Are we talking about the extension of Joyce? Edwards: We are talking about the widening of Joyce. Conklin: How wide is Joyce where it comes back to the north? Milholland: It is wide enough for two cars to pass on. I don't think we have it on here, we can put it on here though. Edwards: Ok. Conklin: Ron, do you have anything to say about streets? Petrie: I can tell you that we don't have a recommendation at this time Petrie: The way we are leaning is to stay away from the intersection of Joyce and 265 and probably widen Joyce to the eastern property line, just stay away from that intersection. Milholland: It is just the north/south section you are talking about? Conklin: Yes, where it narrows back down. Casey: You might have to relocate that tree that is in there. You would have to relocate the traffic signal to improve the intersection. Milholland: If you line up with a four or five lane street to Zion, you are talking about starting right here? Petrie: That is what we are working on. If you have got a proposal we will consider it as always. Milholland: Do you need that before Subdivision Committee? Petrie: Yes, we need some time. If you have a proposal we need some time to be able to kick it around. Conklin: Once again, we are giving you the opportunity to make your proposal to us so we can react to it and have Planning Commission and Subdivision Committee react to it. Once you get the street width on there, that will be kind of interesting too. I am not sure, are we talking curb and gutter or just widening the street? State fire code requires a minimum 30' wide street for access. Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 16 Petrie: Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: What is that classified as? It is a collector right now. This is a collector so the minimum street width from centerline is 20'? 36', 18' on each side. Once again, we talked to you prior to this about if you want to do your own type of study or find information out of what you think a liquor store will generate and if 75% uses Hwy. 265 and 25% uses Joyce, split the traffic out 50/50 or whatever you want to make your proposal. We will look at that and base it on the rough proportionality formula for rational nexus. That is for the offsite improvements is what you are saying? Street improvements, yes. We do recognize that there is more than just this one particular project. We want to be fair to your client. Basically just do a traffic study on what it would cost. We want to treat you equally and at this time it is kind of difficult trying to determine what you should have to do. You need that before Subdivision? Conklin- It would be nice to get that so we can talk to the Subd about it. Milholland: Edwards: McClain: Edwards: Milholland: Ok. vision Committee It also is required that the sidewalk be continuous through the driveways with a maximum 2% cross slope and elevated 2% above top of curb. As part of that, you need to remove the lines representing the curb between the sidewalk and the driveway approach. Driveway approaches shall be constructed of Portland Cement Concrete with a broom finish. Textured, stamped or exposed aggregate concrete is not allowed within the street right of way. That brings me to this question. Is this concrete and this asphalt, is that why it is shaded differently? It is asphalt. You might add that to your legend. Also, two bicycle racks are required. Where is the location? Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 17 Conklin: Edwards: Shreve: Edwards: Milholland: Hesse: You have them shown right here. Down near the ATM machine. Is that ok Keith? That is ok with me. From our Landscape Administrator, since all of the existing trees are within the right of way dedication area, tree preservation is not required. Do we need to put that on the plat? Yes. Milholland: Ok. Edwards: Milholland: Conklin- Milholland: Edwards: Hesse: Edwards: On the landscape plan, all of this information can be added onto the site plan. A Preliminary Landscape Plan is required for Planning Commission review and the Final Landscape Plan is required prior to building permit. Trees and shrubs are required along Joyce. A detailed landscape plan will be required for her review prior to building permit issuance. All items on the Final checklist is to be complete at that time. More variety in tree selection is suggested. In case you didn't catch what she is saying, there is a 15' landscape along the street. That is along all streets? Right. That could be done at the time of permit? We need it shown on the plans for Planning Commission. Basically everything on the preliminary drawing needs to be on the final plan. There are no comments from Parks. From Planning, add plat page 177. Add a floodplain reference. Crossover shall be dimensioned from centerline for the new right of way. Crossover right of way must be dedicated by warranty deed. All other right of way for Joyce can be by easement plat. Your site coverage note does not appear to be accurate. It has got green space at 63% of the site. Just from looking at it, it doesn't look right. I am asking that that be recalculated. Conklin: 1 think there is a slight problem in your 55,000 sq.ft. Take a look at that. Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 18 Edwards: Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Conklin - Edwards: Milholland: Edwards: Milholland: Conklin: I am also requesting on this that you describe the lighting to be used on the plat. On the drive thru, that type of driveway design is hazardous to pedestrians. What we are suggesting is that you merge the drive thru into the aisle and move the crosswalk further south. You can put a railing here that can prevent pedestrians from walking out where they can't see from the building. This is based on McDonald's corporation getting sued by people getting hit by cars coming off the side of the building. If you look at any fast food restaurants you are not allowed to walk beyond that building into the drive thru lane where you could get run over. Basically just move the crosswalk over is what you are saying right? Yes. Do you really need that turn out right into the aisle width of the parking lot? I thought that would be safer. I am kind of getting into your business a little on this. I will let you be the expert. I am just looking at this, having this many turning movements, people backing in and out and everything. It would be better just to have your drive thru lane come back. I am not a traffic engineer though, that is just what I was looking at. We can lay this out and take a look at it. I see what you are saying. I think originally they had the exit up here. I am not sure how much pedestrian traffic you are going to have walking into a liquor store. It has been proven to be unsafe. Where do you put the rail in? Normally they have a rail that comes out about 3' so pedestrians can't jump out in the drive thru lane. You are showing a "V" shaped double monument sign. I don't know if that is ok with our sign ordinance. I didn't check, I just want you to verify with the Community Code Enforcement division. You are saying that we can't have the "V" shape? I don't know. I don't have a problem with it, I just don't know. You need to know what the sign is going to look like? Yes, we need elevations. Milholland: Ok. Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 19 Edwards: Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Edwards: Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: It looks like you have got a 30' driveway up here. Our maximum is 27'. If you think for truck traffic you might need more, make a proposal and ask for a waiver on that. Or you can request a driveway with two lanes going out, a right, left and a 15' in that gives you 39'. I am not sure what kind of trucks you have but that is also important. The trucks would probably be a pretty good size. You could do that and get them in and out. I would probably need that for space for the trucks. I don't see a radius on here for your driveway. All utilities must be placed underground. Cross access shall be provided to the north. What that is, is a requirement of our Commercial Design Standards. I would like to have that added. With this cross access, these trees are being planted, probably lining up this drive, it needs to be constructed. It is required? Yes. Like the Olive Garden. Ok. We are going to go over the Commercial Design Standards. The front elevation I think meets our Commercial Design Standards. The west elevation probably meets our Commercial Design Standards, there is no guarantee with any of the other Commissioners, what they may think. The east elevation does face a street. Elements that are on the south and west elevation need to be added to that elevation. I think the architect, who I have heard speak before, has said some type of wrap around facade treatment on all four sides since this lot has three sides that face directly to the street. The north side will be very visible from part of 265 so this north elevation is unacceptable and will not be approved or recommended for approval by staff. You are telling me these two here don't. Yes. Those need to have something that looks like a front on them. Ok. Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 20 Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Conklin: Milholland: Edwards: Matt Casey - Casey: Milholland: Casey: Milholland: Casey: Conklin - Casey: Petrie: Casey: If your architect has any questions please have her give me a call and I will be more than happy to talk to her about it. Since she is a Planning Commissioner I am sure she will. I am just following her lead. So this east elevation... It is not acceptable. I will put call Tim. That is all that I have. Matt? Staff Engineer A copy of our grading checklist was included with the submittal and there were several notes on it addressing the checklist items. Those notes need to be added to the plan. We also need a note stating that the detention basin will be sodded. We would like to see some sort of trickle channel discharging from the parking area into the detention basin and from there to the outlet structure and then some kind of swale from the outlet structure to the pipe. Right now it is just discharging out. For the drainage report, we need a summary of that off the table showing the pre and post development flows generated on the site and the total flows leaving the site. Matt, do you need these before Subdivision? Yes. I also want to point out that the culvert design is not required in the preliminary but it will need to be designed using the "C" value for fully developed conditions upstream. That is under the driveway entrances? Yes. The Highway Depai intent, did they ever do 265? I don't know. I don't know, it was their responsibility. The drainage report states that the detention basin could be a dry pond or a wet one, we would like to know that because that will affect the detention Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 21 design and at the preliminary stage a final detention design is required so we need one or the other. Conklin: If it is wet will there be a fence required around it? Casey: No. It is for storage, it doesn't have water in it all the time. Milholland: What we are saying there is that in wet weather we will have it but in the dry season it is probably going to dry up on us but it will be adequate for detention. They want water in there to get it above ground. They want a wet one but I don't know that for right now that we would have enough water to keep it from drying up in the summer time. We won't know until we try. Otherwise, they are going to have to put a meter there and run water into that. Casey: I thought the drainage report eluded to that. Conklin: My question is dealing with the sidewalk adjacent to the pond. I don't want to see a chain link fence put up in that corner. Milholland: I don't want to put one up there. I think you asked if it was required. Conklin: I was concerned because sometimes you have to have a fence with a certain slope and a sidewalk and I just didn't want a fence. If it is going to be fenced it needs to be a decorative fence. Casey: There is a note on the plans regarding a sewer extension and the city will not be participating in a cost share for that. It also gives us an alternate that a septic system may be used. I would like to go ahead and see the location of the proposed septic system and show the actual design size of that so I can see where it is going to fit. I am sort of concerned about the amount of space to put a leach field on this property. Milholland: It will be a small tank and the leach field will be small. I don't know that we can get the design by then. We can use a line link to show what it is. If it doesn't perk out he will have to put sewer in anyway. Casey: If that is the case we need more information about the sewer extension. Milholland: We have the sewer location that we think would work. We will have to spec it out and try it. The city was out there working on that line a couple of times last week. Also, there is a 36" culvert underneath the road so we may be able to get under there. It is cost prohibitive for the sewer if the city won't participate in that. He would prefer to have the sewer but you are talking about $60,000 or $70,000 just for a few people. Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 22 Casey: One thing I might add, we might participate in a cost share in upsizing the line from the required 8" to a larger size. Milholland: But only maybe. I was looking at long term east of the bypass. Casey: That is all that I have got. Mike Phipps - Ozark Electric Coop. Phipps: We need to show a 20' easement along 265. You are showing a 30' UE along Joyce. Milholland: We are showing 30' right now but if it is not needed we can move that back to 20'. Phipps: We can make it 20'. Milholland: I think along the front there is a 25' building setback. Phipps: Since you have a 25' building setback, lets make that UE too. Milholland: We are showing Joyce to require 55' and over here we are talking about Joyce requiring another 35', is that right? Conklin: Yes. Milholland: We will make a building setback on 265 also a 25' UE and we'll have a 20' UE on the west side going north/south, will that be ok? I think the south end of this tract is pretty much wrapped around with an easement anyway. I understand why it needs to go across there though. Phipps: If there is any relocation of existing OECC facilities, that will be at the owner's expense. Johnny Boles - Arkansas Western Gas Boles: Mel, we have a transmission line on the east side of Joyce Street on Dr. Knox' property so we could tap that line at any location and come under Joyce Street to service this property. Milholland: Can you come in where we have got the conduits shown up there at the northeast corner of the building? Boles: Yes. Along there anywhere but the meter will probably be placed in the green space out at the street and not at the building. Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 23 Milholland: We might relocate that if we have to use a septic system, but it will be at that northeast or southeast corner. Boles: That will be fine. Larry Gibson - Cox Communications Gibson: Phipps: Gibson: Milholland: Gibson: Milholland: Gibson: Phipps: Milholland: Phipps: Milholland: Gibson: Milholland: Gibson: Milholland: Phipps: Mike, were you going to feed this from the front or the back? We can come off 265 because that is where our three phase is and this will probably be three phase. I take it for granted that it is going to dip from overhead to underground on 265 and then go back to the building. Whatever pole they service the electric from, we will need a 2" from there into the building. Are you going to go into the building or the back of the building? The meter is going to be on the outside? It sure is. Somewhere about 2' or 3' from the meter. That west corner would be a good spot for a meter too. We have the dock back there with the truck backing up. Move it down to the north side of the building. We have a dumpster and a mechanical equipment area back here. We prefer to put it back here where this is at. We will run the conduit over for you. That is fine. Just get me from that pole. Whichever one they service from, which I am sure is going to be the south side. What size of conduit? 2" with a sweep. What kind do you need Ozark? that will be up to the electrician. It will be up to them to run the conduit, the wire and everything from the building out to the pole so I can't say Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 24 Conklin: Milholland: Phipps: Conklin: because I don't know what size wire they are going to run down through there. I will take a 4", I will pull mine in the same way that they are going. I am going to put you down for a 4". It won't be my conduit or wire. It is going to be a private electrician, a private line. It is owned by your client and is going to be run out from the building to a pole. Whatever the electrician needs to do to meet code, get it in there. Milholland: Can I put a conduit in for him Mike and then let him put in whatever he wants to? Phipps: Conklin: Phipps: Conklin: Phipps: Conklin: Milholland: Gibson: I am just trying to keep you from holding up construction. I can't tell you what size conduit he needs, I don't know. How much conduit size do you need when you run your cables underneath the street? 4" but I push a 2" conduit through it. It can't be any bigger than running a regular line down the street right? Well, no if he runs a 350 he might need a two or he might want two threes. I am just curious. I will put 'to be decided by the electrician.' Mel, the only other issue I've got is where this driveway is right here, there hasn't been any driveways or anything in there before except for that little fruit stand that is there, I am a little bit concerned about our clearance. We need to maintain about 15' across that driveway. The only other option we've got on this would be to go underground because we can't go closer than 40" to power so we would have to dip underground from pole to pole if that is an issue. If you want to find out for sure, if you can stake that driveway from curb to curb I can go out there and measure and I can tell you within an inch the clearance on it. I will be glad to do that for you and I will go out there and measure it. You may want to consider putting some conduits underneath that driveway right there. If we do have to move it, it will be at the owner's expense and it will be a lot cheaper than having to boar underneath that. Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 25 Milholland: McClain: Clouser: Gibson: Milholland: Conklin: Miholland: Gibson: Miholland: Gibson: Milholland: Clouser: Milholland: Clouser: Milholland: Clouser: Milholland: Clouser: Milholland: Clouser: We will mark it and put what size conduit you are going to need. We already put a six pack in there. I see them now in the utility easement there. Hopefully it is not going to be an issue but we can't go up any higher Do we have to replace those poles? Are they your poles? You will be putting all new utilities underground. Why don't we just go ahead and put four 4" conduits in there? That is fine. It is just going to save you some money if we do have to dip that underground to get clearance under the driveway. When they widen the highway you are going to have to move your line, that is what I am thinking. I understand where you are coming from but what we need to do is be concerned about that driveway now. If you start this project pretty soon then we have to have some concern. We will stake the driveway under the line. Does anybody else want in there? I would like to have one of those 4" conduits under there. Right now there is one conduit there unless someone else calls. Are you going to leave this here? I think we are going to move that back out closer to the right of way. But you will have one in there for me. One here, that is all future right of way. One within the utility easement. We have that one about a foot inside the utility easement. Ok, good. As long as we are in there, that is good. I will have a 4" conduit from the building like you talked about with power and then I will have a conduit from the driveway and I will need a pull string in the Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 26 conduits. We are requiring pull strings in all of our conduits now. When you place the conduit just make sure that they put a pull string in there and the ATM, they are going to need phone lines out there I would imagine too. Milholland: You guys don't put your own pull strings in? Clouser: No. Our contractors charge a tremendous amount of money if there are no pull strings. It is a lot cheaper while the electrician is out there to get those pull strings. We need to figure out what we are going to do for this ATM. We will need just a 2" conduit, if you can build that off the easement on 265. Milholland: All the way across the parking lot here? Clouser: Yes. Milholland: You have got 4" conduits here, 4" conduits here. Clouser: Well, then you have got it built already. Milholland: Does the electric come out here? Conklin- Yes. Electric over to the ATM machine. Phipps: They can meter it there. They will have to run their own wire up to our overhead. Milholland: You are going to require separate meters for that? Phipps: Yes, it would be a separate meter but I won't need an easement because it won't be our wire running over there. Conklin: They are probably not going to be paying for the phone or the electric for the ATM machine. Phipps: No, it is usually separate. It will pedestal meter at the ATM. Milholland: You have that going back there behind the building right? Phipps: The ATM will probably be single phase, this building will probably be three phase. You will probably have two different voltages there. Milholland: So where would you put the facilities? Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 27 Phipps: Gibson: Phipps: Milholland: Phipps: Conklin: Milholland: Phipps: Clouser: Milholland: Clouser: Milholland: Clouser: Milholland: Clouser: Conklin: Gibson: Clouser: owner's I can't see where my next pole is. I see one power pole but I don't see the other. There is one probably half way between this one and this one. Yes, I would say somewhere there. From the ATM to the nearest power pole. Just those two 4" conduits across those drives straight across the right of way to the easement is all the conduits you will need? You are asking me again, I don't need conduits Mel. Those will be provided by your electrician. He is going to take the wire from the ATM machine and try to hook it over to these poles underground. Then you are coming across and go up that pole right? He will. I will hang a transformer on a pole. If you should show those conduits extending all the way rather than have them break up here. Just extend it. It looks like there are two pieces of conduit there. We left it there because of the green space. Just bring them over instead of breaking it up in there. Ok. 1 will need a #6 bare ground outside the building for the liquor store and I will also need one for the ATM so the electrician can put that in when he puts conduit in. Ok, is that something that the electrician will know? Yes. That is all I have. Are we done? I want to make sure you are aware that if we need to relocate anything it will be at the owner's expense. I do need to add that if we need to relocate anything it will be at the expense. I don't think we have anything over there though. Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 28 PPL 02-14.00: Preliminary Plat (Mission Place, pp 370) was submitted by Geoff Bates, P.E. of Crafton, Tull & Associates on behalf of CTC Ventures, LTD for property located north of Mission Blvd. and east of Charlee Avenue. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 3.27 acres with 10 lots proposed. Conklin: The last item on the agenda is PPL 02-14.00 submitted by Geoff Bates, P.E. of Crafton, Tull & Associates for property located north of Mission Blvd. and east of Charlee Avenue. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 3.27 acres with 10 lots proposed. Edwards: We are going to start with our Sidewalks Division. The proposed 24' wide street and 50' right of way allows for a 4' sidewalk with a 9' green space on both sides of the street. He recommends moving the sidewalks back to the right of way line and enlarging the green space to 9'.The necessary grading from right of way line to right of way line for sidewalks shall be done as part of the street construction. The proposed curb flume discharging water under the sidewalk shall be designed so that the sidewalk is continuous over the flume. Steel plats in the sidewalk will not be allowed. The sidewalk along Mission should extend from the north property line to south property line and be set back to the new right of way line. Access ramps are required at the intersection with Mission Boulevard. Detectable warnings are now required when constructing or altering curb ramps. A 24' wide strip of detectable warning should be installed at the bottom of a curb ramp to indicate the transition from the sidewalk to the street. Driveway approaches shall be constructed of Portland Cement Concrete with a broom finish. Textured, stamped or exposed aggregate concrete is not allowed within the street right of way. The sidewalk shall be continuous through driveways with a maximum of 2% cross slope and elevated 2% above top of curb. From our Traffic Superintendent, he is going to get with you and go out to the site and make sure that the ITE sight distance requirements are met at Mission Blvd. If we can't meet the site distance requirements we are going to recommend denial. I will just kind of wait and see what happens. Bates: Ok, so I need to go see Perry? Edwards: Yes. From our Landscape Administrator, an analysis drawing and an analysis report is required for this project. Plans are to represent the true diameter of the canopy of all trees. A chart detailing the species, size, health and priority rating of each tree is required for review. As with all proposed development projects, an initial review is strongly recommended. If off site trees exist with canopy coverage on the proposed development, those trees are to be located on the plans and protected during construction. A complete tree preservation submittal is required prior to any decision by the Landscape Administrator. Te site Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 29 analysis and analysis report is needed along with indication of health and priority rating of existing trees. A clear delineation is also required for areas to be preserved. Canopy may not be counted as preserved in rights of way or utility easements. Areas to be graded may not be counted as tree preservation. Hesse: We might need to recalculate the tree preservation. I don't think you counted the trees toward the back. Bates: I don't know if there are any trees back there. Oh, ok, there are a couple back there. Hesse: There is a place where you don't show any trees but there are five or ten trees going back there. Bates: Ok, we will check it. Edwards: From Parks, this is going to the August 5`h Parks Board meeting. They are requesting a representative from your firm to be at that meeting. Dedication will be .25 acres and money in lieu will be $4,750 for ten single-family units. She will present the minutes to us after the meeting. From Solid Waste: The Solid Waste and Recycling Division support this request with no recommended changes. Please contact their department for roll -off service during the construction phase and upon occupation for regular service. The Solid Waste and Recycling Division is the only dully authorized hauler of waste within the city limits per ordinance. From Planning, lots four thru seven shall be dimensioned at the 25' building setback line. They shall be70' wide at this point. I don't think that they are going to come out wide enough. We do require that they be 70' when developed. Mission needs to be dimensioned from the centerline. 55' from centerline is required to be dedicated by warranty deed. All utilities shall be placed underground. Are there any existing on the site? Bates: Not that I know of. Edwards: If there is any existing under 12 KV you will have to go underground but you didn't show any. The sidewalk construction for the existing home along Mission shall be constructed prior to final plat approval. The Hatcher lot shall be included as lot number eleven because it is part of your description. Also, sidewalks must be installed prior to final plat approval for the entire development or they can be guaranteed by money invested in an escrow account only. No letter of credit or bond will be accepted. There is a requirement of total installation by the time that one half of the lots have dwelling units. That is a policy change that I wanted you to be aware of for when the final plat comes in. Revisions are due the 7th by 10:00 a.m. Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 30 Matt Casey — Staff Engineer Casey: I just wanted to point out that all the grading should be setback a minimum of five feet from the property lines unless written permission is submitted from the adjacent property owners. We are also going to need an additional drainage easement along the side of lot four for the drainage to get to those drains in that area. We are also requesting a 12' gravel access drive back to the detention pond for maintenance and we will need an access easement to that from the street. Bates: You want an easement for this for the swale. Casey: Another comment may address that. We are also going to require that a pipe be installed instead of the swale another easement can be on top of that and the driveway can be along that. The pipe will have to be sized to carry a minimum of the ten year storm event with an overflow swale on top of the pipe to carry the overflow up to the hundred year storm event. Bates: A gravel access drive? Casey: It can be adjacent to that. Bates: What kind of easement? Casey: Just enough to accommodate the 12' drive as well as the swale. Again, on this project, offsite areas draining onto the site are shown to have an undeveloped "C" factor. The drainage criteria manual states that the storm water runoff shall be computed on the total drainage basin assuming full development of the area in accordance with the zoning designation at the time of development. Bates: Casey: Bates: Casey: When you come on this, it is running off the site, we are going to direct it to the pond. I will check that. Any improvements made based on those offsite flows will need to assume the full development. Also, the report states that the multipliers were used to determine the runoff. Ok, I will check that too. Under water and sewer, we need a 12' gravel access drive back to the two manholes to the west of lots four and five. Is there someway you could reroute that and use the gravel access drive going to the detention pond to also access these, that would be acceptable. Angle the proposed sanitary sewer right here at lot five, the minimum angle is 90°. Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 31 Bates: It looks like it is 89.5°, we will straighten it up. Casey: You need to provide an easement a minimum of 10' from the proposed sewer line. It appears that on lots four and five there may be less than that. If there is 20' there it needs to be centered, it looks like there is only 15' there, so we need 10' minimum from that line. Bates: Ok. Casey: Also, a 10' separation between the proposed water and sewer. Right here it looks like it is pretty close. On the streets, the angle that the proposed street centerline intersects with the existing street, Mission, shall be 90°. Bates: You don't have a minimum angle, they all have to be 90°? Casey: Our policy is 90°. Bates: That's it? Casey: Yes. Edwards: Did you mention that we wanted the detention pond on its own property? Casey: I couldn't find anything in our drainage manual to support that. Conklin- Typically the person that buys lot four, I don't know if they want to buy the detention pond too, since it is going to be maintained by the POA. Bates: That whole thing is going to be an easement. Casey: It is all easement back here, but it is still a part of lot four. Conklin: Lot four will be buying it. What I have seen is that they create a lot for the detention pond, label it unbuildable and the POA maintains the pond. Casey: That is not a problem since it is off the street, as long as we have got that 12' access. Conklin: Yes, we have just done that to accommodate. Bates: Ok, I will work something out. Edwards: Utilities? Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 32 Jim Sargent — AEP/ SWEPCO Sargent: Casey: We do have an overhead secondary that comes across the street and serves that existing house. That will have to be converted to underground. I have got it kind of laid out for front lot line service for this. We will need a conduit under the street between lots eight and nine. If you extend that lot line between eight and nine across the street there. The developer will pay the overhead underground cost differential on this. We will figure out what that is and let you know what that is. If there is any other relocation other than what we mentioned about the house, it will be at the developer's expense. I have got one more thing to add. The detention pond shall be sodded and also needs a trickle channel from the outflow pipe to the storm sewer. Johnny Boles — Arkansas Western Gas Boles: Bates: Boles: If this existing line has to be lowered it will be at the owner's expense. Also, I need a 2" casing crossing this proposed street to the property line between nine and ten. Same place? No, his was eight and nine, mine is nine and ten. That is all that I have. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: Bates: Gibson: You can put me one in at the same place where AEP is between eight and nine, if you will put a 4" in there please. One question on this detention pond down here. Is that 30" plastic existing? No. So we won't have to worry about relocating anything in that corner. Give us a couple weeks notice before you break down on it or get ready to do it and we will be ready to go. That is all that I have. Sue Clouser — Southwestern Bell Clouser: Edwards: If we have to relocate any of our facilities that will be at the developer's expense. I would like if I could to have them cap those in. That's another thing, sometimes by the time we get there they are filled with dirt. That is all I have. Ok, we are adjourned. Technical Plat Review July 31, 2002 Page 33 Meeting adjourned: 10:37 a.m.