Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-08-28 - MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE TECHNICAL PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE A regular meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee was held on Wednesday, August 28, 2002 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS CONSIDERED ACTION TAKEN LSD 02-21.00: Large Scale Development (Nelms, pp 249) Forwarded Page 2 LSD 02-23.00: Large Scale Development (Hampton Inn, pp 558) Forwarded Page 10 LSP 02-40.00 & 41.00: Lot Split (Cowan, pp 455) Page 21 LSP 02-42.00: Lot Split (Harkins, pp 298) Page 25 STAFF PRESENT Matt Casey Kim Hesse Renee Thomas Keith Shreve Tim Conklin Danny Farrar Forwarded Forwarded STAFF ABSENT Sara Edwards Perry Franklin UTILITIES PRESENT UTILITIES ABSENT Larry Gibson, Cox Communications Glenn Newman, AEP/ SWEPCO Mike Phipps, Ozark Electric Coop. Sue Clouser, Southwestern Bell Johnny Boles, Arkansas Western Gas Jim Sargent, AEP/ SWEPCO Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 2 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 zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 7.28 acres with a 907,194 sq.ft. parking lot proposed. Conklin: This is the Technical Plat Review Committee. It is Wednesday, August 28`n The first item of business is old business, LSD for Nelms submitted by Phil Hagen of Crafton, Tull & Associates. The property is located west of I-540 and Hwy. 112. It is zoned C-2, they are asking to develop a 907,000 sq.ft. display area for Landers Auto Park on 7.28 acres. I am not sure, 907,000 is probably the whole thing. It is 7.28 acres. Good morning. Here are staff comments with regard to your project. I will start out. Going over the City Planning Division's comments with regard to submittal. The Landscape Administrator still needs the site analysis drawing for tree preservation. That will need to be submitted. Under zoning everything is adequate. Plat requirements, you do need to add the plat page to the plat if it is not shown on there. I couldn't find it. It may be on there somewhere. Street requirements are adequate. Front and side landscaping, we need to take a look at Kim Hesse, our Landscape Administrator did have a landscape plan showing the trees on center every 30'. We do need that as part of the overall package that will be going forward to the Planning Commission. They will want to see that to make sure that that landscaping is being added in there according to our Design Overlay District. Also, the parking lot lighting, do you know if they are going to light the display area and if so what kind of light and the height of the lighting that will be used? Hagen: I have been talking to the architect, he is going to give me that information. I am sure we are going to have to ask for a variance like they did on the first phase. Conklin: My guess is that you are probably not going to use the sodium, you will use the metal halide lighting. Staff is in support of changing that to the metal halide to get the white light. The additional comments, it is our understanding that there are no signs proposed on this Large Scale Development proposal. Hagen: That is correct. Conklin: The waiver requested will be the lighting as far as we can determine. All utilities will need to be underground. My understanding is that there is no existing overhead on this site, is that correct? Hagen: That is correct. Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 3 Conklin: Ok. The floodplain and floodway, you are showing those areas. Just on your plans, it looks like you are showing some grading within the regulatory floodway in a couple of locations down on this southwest end and up in this area. Anytime you work in the floodway that changes the floodway boundaries or floodplain boundaries. You do need to do a letter of map amendment based on fill. Are you still planning on doing that or are you going to pull that out and pour that fill within the floodway? Hagen: Down here is where we are actually excavating. We are not doing any fill I believe. Conklin: Ok, I guess I didn't read that correctly then. Is that right? Hagen: We are just trying to make sure that this water gets out so there will be a swale there. Conklin: Up in here there looked like there was some work possibly being done, a curb right at the edge. With regard to your crossing of the regulatory floodway, we will need a no rise certificate. That certificate needs to be based on the methodology used to develop the FIRM map published by FEMA. My understanding is that you have looked at the model that the Corp. of Engineers developed as a part of the flood hazard study and that you have provided some additional cross sections and you believe that the flood elevation levels are actually lower than what is shown on the FIRM. However, the bridge crossing, the culvert crossing, will need to be based on the existing Corp. model. I am not sure how that works with regard to if it is going to back water up or not. I am not opposed to you using your more detailed information if you want to submit that to FEMA for a letter of map amendment based on more exact data in this area but I don't want to be using methodology based on what you have come up with cross sections with lower base flood elevations and then actually have a FIRM model that actually has a higher water elevation. Does that make sense? Hagen: No. I am not clear on what you're saying. Conklin- If you are going to show the amount of water going under the culvert based on your new calculations, based on that methodology, and you are designing the water to pass through there without backing it up and causing an increase in the base flood elevation, I want a letter of map amendment filed with FEMA so you can use that data. Hagen: I am using the Corp's data, I am using the flows and everything from the Corp. I am taking the Corp's model and putting those crossings in it and showing that it is not increasing with the Corp's model. Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 4 Conklin: Ok, I wasn't sure how that changed. When you looked at it and you thought the base flood elevation was lower if you changed what variables you changed to show that the water level is lower in this area. Hagen: I took their models, their flows, and everything and just plugged in our crossings. Conklin: Ok, I just wanted to clarify that because if you changed the methodology then I would have a problem with that. Hagen: Not at all, we used their exact model and put it in there. Conklin: Ok. I would still recommend, I think it would be in the best interest of your client to do a letter, clean it up and get it taken care of. The floodway actually is not even over the current channel. It is not correct, we know that today. Hagen: I think so too. We would be willing to commit to doing that. We would request that maybe that doesn't hold up our building permit in order to do that, we would like to do that at the same time. You are right, it is incorrect through that whole area. Conklin: The site area coverage that is including the future phase out lot, is that correct when you look at the amount of impervious surface? Hagen: Yes. Conklin: We will have to check that and keep up with that when that develops and make sure that you maintain the amount of open space that you are required in the Design Overlay District of 25%. Something that I did not comment on, I would like a calculation on the amount of open space in the Overlay District on this site where that line is to make sure that it does meet the Overlay District's 25%. Hagen: Break it out separately? Conklin: Break it out separately. I want it on here. I want to make sure that we are meeting every ordinance. Your site does include areas outside the Overlay District and I don't want any problems by the time we get to Planning Commission with regard to someone saying "You only have 24.1% open space." Have the wetlands been delineated where the current display area will be developed and are there wetlands in this current display area that is being developed and are those shown on here? Hagen: I have provided you with two different reports. One for the 28 acres and one for the current area and the only place wetlands were found was in Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 5 that channel. We are using a prefabricated bridge so we aren't disturbing that anymore. Conklin: Ok, so the wetlands that are existing will not be disturbed? Hagen: That is right. It is going to be part of the requirements. Conklin: Ok. The future Phase II that you are showing for tree removal. Hagen: That is entirely out of where the wetlands have been delineated. Conklin: There are no wetlands in that area? Hagen: Right. Conklin: Ok, good. Mr. Nelms has reviewed this plan with regard to the tree preservation area easement surrounding this future Phase II? Hagen: I don't know if he has seen this current version of it but we have discussed it and he is in agreement with it. Conklin: Ok. We did meet with him and I just want to make sure that what we are reviewing today is not apt to be changed after Nelms, your client, looks at it. Hagen: No it won't. Conklin: Ok, great. That is all from Planning. From Perry Franklin, our Traffic Superintendent, no comment. From Parks and Recreation, no comment. From Solid Waste, no recommended changes to trash pickup. From our Fire Department, you were going to work with them to get more width in the entrance and in the parking lot because the fire truck needed to get in there. Hagen: I widened those areas that they are talking about. I don't know if they recognized that or not but they are considerably wider than when we first discussed this. Conklin- I don't know what that means with more width. I am not sure if that is a foot or ten feet, yesterday he didn't say anything when we met in house so I think it is probably ok. Casey: What kind of width do you need Danny? Farrar: 20'. Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 6 Casey: They are showing 25' here. Conklin: That should work. Hagen: We have opened those couple of entrances up a little bit. Conklin: Thank you Danny. I didn't see you there and wasn't sure whether you said ok or not ok. Any additional buildings will require additional fire hydrants to be installed on the property. From our Sidewalk Administrator, Chuck Rutherford, sidewalks will have to be extended north where the existing sidewalk ends up to a point where you can feasibly build it up to the creek. Keith is here. Shreve: That will be approximately 125' additional. Hagen: That is what I thought and when we talked with the applicant he had indicated that it was built within 10' of it. Conklin: That is what Mr. Nelms indicated to us. Did you go out there and look at it? Shreve: I went out and looked at it yesterday afternoon and it is approximately 150' short of the channel at this point. Hagen: Ok. Shreve: It will just have to be closer to the channel, probably 125'. Hagen: We can set it back 20' or 30' to allow for improvements? Shreve: Right. Conklin- Ok. Great. On the tree preservation you are showing that you will be preserving 15.2% of the site based on a total site area of 41.51 acres, which I am assuming is the existing Landers out lot and this area up here that you are showing. Kim still needs a site analysis drawing. Hesse: Phil, if you just want to meet with me with what I need on that drawing. Conklin: That is all that I have. Matt Casey with our Engineering Division will go over Engineering's comments. Matt Casey — Staff Engineer Casey: I am just curious where the wetlands are located. Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 7 Hagen: They have been identified around this pond up into here and a little bit in this channel. Casey: You are aware from your conversation with Mr. Beavers that we are going to allow this to move onto the Subdivision Committee level with the revisions that you spoke about yesterday. We will need to get those submitted and those changes made in order to proceed. Hagen: If we go underground with that is there any need to discuss it or just submit it? Casey: Just submit it and then we will discuss it after we look at it. The changes that were requested was right now the drainage is discharging to the north and we are going to require that it comes down and follows the flow type that it is taking now based on the existing ditch that they dug years ago across there. Hagen: We are proposing a box structure that would discharge at the same point but going around this future area. I need to talk to you a little more about that. Conklin: Do you have anything else Matt? Casey: No, that's all. Conklin: Are there any additional staff comments? Ok, utilities? Mike Phipps — Ozark Electric Coop. Phipps: Along that south property line I need that 25' easement extended all the way along that south line past the used cars. Hagen: The 25' easement on the south? Phipps: Yes. Conklin: On the existing Landers site, is that what you are talking about? Phipps: Yes, it just stops. Conklin: There may be one there already. Phipps: If there is I want it shown and if there is not then I want one. That is all I have. Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 8 Jim Sargent — AEP/SWEPCO Sargent: This part of the display area is in SWEPCO's territory. If there is only lights we will give that to Ozark if there is any additional we may want to get over there. That is all I have. Johnny Boles — Arkansas Western Gas Boles: No comment. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: No comment. Sue Clouser — Southwestern Bell Clouser: This 25' UE that is on the north on there, it just seems to stop. Was that a utility easement all across there do you know? Hagen: I am going to have to double check that and make sure that they are all showing. Clouser: That is my only comment. Phipps: We vacated that north of the Chevy building. Nobody was in there, I know I vacated it. It is going to be the Hummer display area. Clouser: I can see where that stops over by Chevy but then going west it just kind of sort of comes to an end. Was that whole thing vacated? Phipps: No, just that little piece, I'm not sure how long it was. Probably that 160' deep right through there. Conklin: When did you sign off on that? Was that a private easement with Ozark? Phipps: No. Conklin: I don't remember it going to the City Council. Boles: I haven't signed off on an easement, I am still in there. Phipps: Did you see it Johnny? Boles: No, I have a line in there. Phipps: Ok. Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 9 Conklin: Ok, maybe it just died once they found out he had a line in there. Hagen: That vacation that was up there the other night, we are not going to need that. They are going to go to the end of the building. Conklin: They have got a lot of room out there. Does anybody else have anything on Nelms? Phil, I would like for you to show the wetlands on the plans and put a note that no wetlands are going to be disturbed in the areas proposed to be developed and put some type of note regarding the LOMR "F" with FEMA about what you are agreeing to do. September 4th at 10:00 a.m. we will need revisions due in the Planning Division Thank you. Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 10 LSD 02-23.00: Large Scale Development (Hampton Inn, pp 558) was submitted by Erin Rushing on behalf of Nary Krushiker for property located at 2614 W. 6`h Street. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 3.54 acres with a 4 story, 94 room hotel proposed. Conklin: The next item on the agenda is a Large Scale Development for Hampton Inn submitted by Erin Rushing. It is located at 2614 W. 6th Street. It is zoned C-2 and contains 3.54 acres with a four story 94 room hotel proposed. Good morning Erin. I will go over the Planning Division's requirements. Submittal requirements are adequate. Zoning is adequate. Plat requirements were adequate. The legal description we did check, I think the city has been in contact with regard to what needs to happen to that. Street is adequate. Under parking, driveway, we just need to know what type of height and lighting will be used in the parking lot. Why is the aisle width over 24' in the south lot, and just how many employees are there? What I am looking at is you have a 39' aisle width at this location. Typically, the Planning Commission and staff try to reduce the amount of pavement and if it is not needed you could actually pull those parking spaces up against the building and provide some more green space. Rushing: Tim what that is, is a delivery area. You can see the stripe, it is a delivery turn around area for food service. Conklin- Just put in a letter that you are requesting that and justification for that. Then just on your parking calculations, I am sure you are ok but just one space per bedroom and one space per employee so you need to list the number of employees at maximum shift so we can just verify that. Everything else looked ok. I actually didn't really have a chance to review the Commercial Design Standards in great detail. Is there a sign proposed? Rushing: Actually, there are two signs proposed. I apologize for not having them on the plans but there is a sign located, I actually have it drawn in on Shiloh down there by the sewer, that is the reason for the bump out in that drive. Conklin: Ok, so this is all one parcel all the way up that street? Rushing: Right. Conklin: And there is a sign somewhere right here? Rushing: And a screen here, right there. Conklin- Is it a monument sign? Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 11 Rushing: It is a monument sign. Conklin: It needs to meet our Design Overlay District requirements. Rushing: It will. We have already met with Sara about it and she is aware. There is another sign proposed down here on Sixth Street. Conklin: That could be a problem since it is not on the same lot. Rushing: We worked with Sara on this a couple of months ago, we were told that this would be considered as one subdivision, it would be part of University Square. Conklin: Joint tenant? Rushing: That's right, joint tenant signage and it will be in that general location, we haven't really worked out the details. Conklin: Do we have elevations submitted? Rushing: No. Conklin: We will need elevations of that submitted for both signs if they are not in there. Can you describe the building materials? Rushing: Based on what I can tell by the architect, it is going to be a stucco type finish, your typical hotel type exterior. There is a foundation wall around the bottom, a wayans coat around the bottom. I hope to have elevations of all the sides before the next meeting. Conklin: That would be great. With regard to this structure right here that goes back to the east, that is not shown on this, is that a single -story? Rushing: Yes it is. It is a pool area. Conklin. Indoor? Rushing: Yes. Conklin: Yes. I would assume all four sides are going to be similar to this? Rushing: That is right. Boles: That northeast corner is the pool area? Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 12 Conklin: That little area right there is going to be an indoor pool, single story structure. If there are signs on the building they need to be incorporated on the elevations also. That is it for Planning. With regard to our Fire Department, I have a proposed fire hydrant dedicated, Danny, can you go over that comment Danny Farrar — Fire Department Farrar: Conklin: Farrar: Conklin: Rushing: Conklin: Casey: Conklin: Casey Conklin: Farrar: That fire hydrant that is proposed I assume will be dedicated to the Fire Department connection. The hydrants in the area, which you need a hydrant every 600'. The Fire Department connection, we recommend, recommendation only, a free standing FDC away from the building. All surfaces, the minimum width should be 20' unobstructed width. Is the building required to be sprinkled? Yes. Ok. Does that fire line extension need to be in an easement? This is just a public line, the 6" coming off the 8" will be public with the utility easement over the top of that? We are going to want 10' each side of the waterline and the hydrant. Then you are going to have from that fire hydrant another line for the Fire Department connection, is that correct? You have the fire hydrant and then you have a line that comes off that fire hydrant? That is a private line. The 6" that goes from the public 8", ok. You asked for a free standing... Fire Department Connection away from the collapse zone of the building. Again, that is a recommendation. Conklin- Ok, thank you Danny 9-1-1, we will need a street name for the private drive. I put two of those in there for you. Parks, no comment. Perry Franklin, the drop-off canopy will need to be ADA accessible. Talking with Perry and the way he is reading your plan, it looks like you may not have a ramp that goes from the front door down to that drop-off area. Rushing: It is actually just one big flat surface. It is not really, the slope is already a ramp. Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 13 Conklin: Does it meet ADA basically? Rushing: Oh yes. Conklin: Ok, so when they pull up, get out of their car, it is all flat all the way into the building? Rushing: That is right. Conklin: That should work. From our Sidewalk Administrator, you are showing bicycle racks. Four racks need to be shown, you need to add the sidewalk symbol to the legend. I am not sure, is that what you are showing on the bicycle racks, four on the plans? Rushing: Actually, we only have two on the plans. Conklin: When you say two is that one bike on each side of the rack? Rushing: Oh, I see. Conklin: Is that what you are saying? Shreve: We are talking four racks, four "U"s. Rushing: Ok. Shreve: Which would actually park eight bicycles. Rushing: Ok. I have them in two different locations but they are multiple loops. Conklin: Ok. We do have a city standard that you have to comply with in regard to the type. Just with regard to sidewalks, are they going to plan any type of pedestrian access throughout this development to get over to the shopping center and out to the street? The Design Overlay District encourages that you have access from the street to the building. I think there is an opportunity here, especially for a motel that if you have Razorback Pizza and other type of restaurants, I think it would be nice and desirable to incorporate a pedestrian sidewalk or pathway through the project. Also, in the Overlay District it says you should try to accommodate that. It doesn't say shall. I could see people walking through here. I don't know if they are ever going to get across Sixth Street, but you have Denny's across the street that they possibly could be walking down there and there is a restaurant proposed for lot one. That is something to talk to your client about. Rushing: Ok, I totally agree. Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 14 Conklin: Solid Waste, you will need to provide a dumpster site no less than 12'x18' deep constructed of not less than 8" of concrete. That is all I have. I will let Matt Casey go over the Engineering comments. Matt Casey — Staff Engineer Casey: I just wanted to point out a few comments I had. The proposed private street through here will have to meet the minimum street standards for the City of Fayetteville. Rushing: As far as width or the pavement? Casey: The pavement and the grade and the subgrade. Conklin: Does that include just the new portion, not including this parking lot up here? Has this been built and designed yet? Rushing: It hasn't been built. Casey: If that is going to be considered part of the private street then that will need to be as well. Rushing: Do you know what those standards are? Casey: We have got minimum street standards established and it will vary depending on what is proposed. Conklin: When will that street be built? Is it going to be built at the same time the Hampton Inn and Suites will be built? Rushing: The parking lot will be built within the next thirty days. Conklin: Ok. And the street will be built at the same time as the hotel? Rushing: It will be built at the same time as the hotel. It could be another six months. Conklin- The hotel will not open up until the street is there. I am making statements now to clarify for the record, the street will be finished prior to the hotel opening up, is that correct? Rushing: That is right. Conklin- I just wanted to clarify that. That would be in the best interest if that is a one way street for people trying to get to it. Go ahead Matt, sorry. Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 15 Casey: Also, the water lines proposed have landscaping in the easement. We need to have that moved. Rushing: Alright. Casey: On the grading plan, it shows the southern portion of the parking lot all draining out and going to the south toward Sixth Street. We would like to see all of that come back to the detention area. Rushing: We have looked at that. One of the options we have looked at is over detaining in that region of the detention pond to compensate for what is going this way due to the grades and the high point being a little bit further towards the center of that lot, it is harder to get all of that water on the property line, all of it going that way. Casey: The reason we were requesting that is because you all are requesting that detention not be required for this portion that is going to the south for now. We will accommodate you on that and require detention at the time of development of lot one if this water can be detained over here. We won't make you detain what is running off of the street. I was not provided with any calculations showing what was pre -development going to the south or post -development, if you can show me that there is no increase due to this additional pavement for the private drive and this area of the parking lot, then that is fine. Rushing: Ok, that is our goal to do it that way. Conklin: They are going to be able to count the existing houses and the impervious surface for the houses on the site in that calculation also. I don't know if that makes any difference or not. Rushing: Probably not. Conklin: It does give you some additional runoff existing with the existing development on there. On the back of your building here, the existing one, are they planning on doing anything since now this private drive is right behind it to make it look nice? Rushing: I hope so. Conklin- Ok, offer that to them. Tell them I would really like to see something done. I think there is that overhead electric line. Clouser: There is phone on there, there is a lot going on back there. Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 16 Conklin: Clouser: Conklin: Newman: Conklin: Newman: Conklin: Newman: Conklin: Newman: Conklin: Rushing: Conklin: Kim Hesse Hesse: Rushing: Hesse: Rushing: Conklin: If we put some trees in. I think they may be asking us to relocate that is what I heard. Is that Ozark or SWEPCO? What size line is that Glenn? That is 12,000. Ok, so it is over. It is three phase all along the back of that existing building to University Square, it runs north the entire length of Hwy. 62, it actually goes up here and serves this motel. How much would it cost to put a 12 KV line under ground? It depends, just the line without facilities, of course this will have pad mount transformers, but we figure somewhere around $20,000 a mile. Ok. That changes depending on the equipment that you have to install. It can get expensive. Ok, I was just curious. Tim, is it possible if we move that landscape buffer there on the south side of the property line, is it possible to relocate that off site along the back of that building? If we move this landscape strip over to here somewhere, utilize that plant material, of course it is off of our property line, so would we still be able to count it toward our landscaping requirement? Technically it is the same owner. That is more of a Kim Hesse question, what do you think about that? — Landscape Administrator The sign is going to be in there? Move that to where this pizza place is, existing retail here. This isn't there for required landscaping. Ok. That is really extra. Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 17 Rushing: You are right, I didn't think about that. Conklin: That is why I was asking about the type of trees and overhead lines. Rushing: I guess that is what I was looking at, those are all small crepe myrtles and small evergreen trees. Conklin: Utilities would be ok with that? No comment, they are in agreement. Casey: I have several minor comments if you all have any questions just get with me about those. Conklin: Are there any other staff comments before we go to utilities? Kim? Hesse: Erin, why don't you just meet with me. I need some additional information. I think for the Overlay District, they need to know how much green space and how much open space after you develop. 25% has to be open, whether it is green or just landscaping. Rushing: I have got site coverage on here. Conklin: I saw that on here. I guess my question is you talk about total impervious surface, 56.3%, does that include this out lot? Rushing: No, that includes just this 3.54 acres. Conklin: Ok. Hesse: That will do it. Conklin: Utilities? Glenn Newman — AEP/ SWEPCO Newman. I have an overhead line that runs north and south there between University Square and this development, any relocation of facilities will be at the developer's expense. I would like to have if I could get it, load calculations so that I can reserve a transformer if we don't have any, it is a 12 week delivery. You are showing an easement all along the perimeter except along the south where that overhead line is there. I see an arrow and a dimension. Rushing: Actually Glenn, what the easement does, it follows that private drive. The property owner is talking about developing this lot where the hair studio is so that potentially would be relocated if they are going to develop that lot. Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 18 That is the reason why there is not an existing easement going through there. Newman: Ok. I guess we will address that at that time again. Conklin: You will see that again, it is in the Overlay District. Newman: That will be fine. As soon as we get an idea, I can't find a location for the transformer or any electric facilities, so as soon as we get that worked out. Rushing: They haven't been determined yet. Newman: We will work out the easement requirements if, in fact, we need any. That is all I have. Johnny Boles — Arkansas Western Gas Boles: Our line runs north and south as shown on your print. Any relocation of that line will be at the owner's expense. It looks like it might be impacted by the construction of this private drive here. Rushing: That is right. Boles: I would like to serve this property from the northeast corner of lot 2, down in that island. I would provide five pounds of pressure and then you would have to run your pipe line from that point to the building. Rushing: Ok. Boles: That is all I have. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: We are also joint usage on that overhead power line going north and south there and phone is on there too. If they want to relocate this overhead power line over here on this south side, we are also on that. I want to make sure we can serve lot one. At that time I would like to ask you to make sure we get some sleeves underneath this driveway for the back easement here behind the existing building going west. Conklin: Does everybody need a line there? Gibson: Make it a 4" quad. Rushing: Right there at the property line? Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 19 Newman: Yes. Gibson: Rushing: Gibson: Sue Clouser It may be where you decide to serve the Hampton Inn from also so it might be a good idea. I would also like to add wherever you decide to put the electric transformer, approximately 6' from it, take a 4" from there into the equipment room of the Hampton Inn. You can place it about 6' or so away from the electric transformer and we will need to have 36" radius sweeps on those too and a 3x3 plywood above it with a #6 copper ground. Let me just fax you a letter, I will just fax you one, there is some more detail about the wiring on the interior and everything. I will just fax you a letter and you can pass it on to the contractor, that would be quicker. Ok. If we have to relocate or if anything is damaged on this overhead line it will be at the owner's expense and that is all I have. — Southwestern Bell Clouser: Rushing: Clouser: Rushing: Clouser: Relocation will be at the owner's expense. I was looking at this with my planner and we are probably going to end up feeding off of the highway. I will need two 4" conduits will pull strings. We will probably have to talk about where we are going to go with them and to decide if this is going to go underground, I am guessing that it is probably going to come off this easement here so it would probably have to be built out to this easement under the pavement. I will also need a #6, do you know where you are going to put the equipment area? More than likely it is going to be at this south end of the building. It hasn't been all worked out yet. That will work. We will need a bare #6 ground back to power and the conduit will have to have pull string and we will also need that plywood backboard. I just wanted to let you know that we do have fiber cable running along here and coming down this 15' utility easement, there are two existing fiber cables. Along this north line? Yes. Just be real careful of that. Crossland had me come out and cut dead the service to this building because of what was going on back here. I didn't realize that they were going to be putting in a parking lot though. I am going to need somebody to get me conduit whether it is temporary or whatever. I do need a conduit built from approximately this location or wherever they are putting the facilities in here out to where I can get to this pole because I don't want to be cutting up your new parking lot. Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 20 Rushing: Is that something that you can coordinate? Clouser: I will call them if you want me to call Crossland, I will call them. Rushing: I really don't know anything about what is going on in the interior of the building. Clouser: It is not really in the interior. This was an existing telephone pad out here and it was an underground cable coming back to the pole and I just cut that dead and they said they would worry about it when they want new service but we need to get a conduit in there. I will call Crossland. This is all one owner? Rushing: Yes. Clouser: I believe that is all I had. Conklin: Do you know if they are going to keep the existing Hampton Inn as a Hampton Inn? Rushing: I really don't know. Conklin- People keep on asking me that question. Rushing: I would think that is a little bit odd having two adjacent to each other. Conklin: Kind of. I went up to Eureka, the Best Western, and went to the wrong one. There is one right down the street so there are two up there. Clouser: They could at least be different names. Conklin- Thank you Erin. September 4, 2002 at 10:00 revisions are due in the Planning Division. Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 21 LSP 02-40.00 & 41.00: Lot Split (Cowan, pp 455) was submitted by Dave Jorgensen on behalf of Coleen Cowan for property located at 16401 Summerrain Road. The property is in the Growth Area and contains approximately 7.63 acres. The request is to split into three tracts of 2.32 acres, 3.00 acres and 2.31 acres. Conklin: The next item is a lot split submitted by Dave Jorgensen on behalf of Coleen Cowan for property located at 16401 Summerrain Road. The property is in the Growth Area and contains approximately 7.63 acres. The request is to split into three tracts of 2.32 acres, 3.00 acres, and 2.31 acres. Good morning Dave. Jorgensen: Greetings. Conklin: I will go through the Planning Division's comments. Everything is adequate on submittal, everything is adequate on suburban plat requirements. Just on the right-of-way, does 90' of right-of-way really exist on Wyman Road right there or are you dedicating additional right-of- way? Jorgensen: As per prior lot split requirements. I wish I would've brought, there was a previous lot split that was brought through earlier in the year to the east of this property and that was the request, 90'. Conklin- Over here? Jorgensen: West. Conklin: I looked at our Master Street Plan. The Master Street Plan heads back north of this so I don't think that is on our Master Street Plan there. I share that with you, it doesn't look good if we made a mistake earlier this year. Jorgensen: I will fax you that and we can see if we can straighten that problem out. Conklin: Ok. Wyman Road jogs up on the future plan if you look at your vicinity map. Jorgensen: Yeah, it goes up, it doesn't adjoin that. Conklin: I'm not sure why we had that, I thought that was kind of odd. Washington County approval will be required. I am assuming that they are aware of the septic, State Health Department requirements and that they are fairly confident that the land is going to perk with this lot size. Is that correct? Jorgensen: Yes. Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 22 Conklin: Parks and Recreation had no comments. Engineering, I will have them go over theirs. Sidewalks, no comments. Perry Franklin, Traffic Superintendent, no comment. No Solid Waste comments. Matt? Matt Casey — Staff Engineer Casey: The only comment is water and sewer is not available in the area. Conklin: They are showing an existing water line right here. Casey: I didn't show that on our records. Conklin: That is why I crossed that out on your comments. Casey: Ok, well I know sewer is not available and water may or may not be. Conklin: Did you survey that in, is that where you got that from? Jorgensen: I will check on that. I am pretty sure it is there but let me put a big question mark and check on that and that 90' deal that you're asking me about because that is strange. Conklin: That is kind of strange. Jorgensen: I think what happened is that the owner on the previous lot split attended the meeting and we weren't here. I think we got this information through them and maybe there was a lack of communication going on or something. Conklin- I am not sure. I will look at it again because I looked at it pretty quick here. I am almost 100% sure that Master Street Plan heads up to the north. Jorgensen: That doesn't look quite right. Conklin: If it already has been dedicated to the city it is done, or whoever it has been dedicated to, we can't just give it back. If they don't care we will just go on. Jorgensen: I will find out about that. Conklin: Ok. Utilities? Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 23 Mike Phipps — Ozark Electric Coop. Phipps: I was going to ask for a 20' on Wyman and Summerrain but it looks like that barn and that house is right against the property line now out in the right-of-way. Jorgensen: That could be a squeeze. Conklin: Do you have a franchise agreement with the county to go in their rights- of-way? Phipps: No. Conklin: No? Because if you got that 90' on that other? Phipps: I know we are existing on Wyman. I don't know whether I am on the north or south but if we could get a 20' UE, 10' on each side of the line from A and B down to C I could access everything there. Jorgensen: That would be good. Phipps: Does that work Johnny? Boles: It works for me, I don't have anything out there. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: We don't have anything out there right now so there is no comment. Conklin- Sue, do you have anything out there? Sue Clouser — Southwestern Bell Clouser: Yes, I am sure we do. Conklin- Ok. Clouser: I agree with Mike on that 10' on either side of the property line there. Is there any chance that we could just go ahead and extend that and then we could come along with a 20' on tract C. That will get us around there if we ever have to get through we can just come around like that. Conklin: A "L" shaped easement like that? Clouser: Yes, an "L" and then just continue it right here with 20'. Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 24 Phipps: That will get us around that house and barn. Conklin: Ok. Jorgensen: Ok. Clouser: That is all, thank you. Conklin: Does anybody else have anything? No, thank you Dave. Revisions are due September 4, 2002 at 10:00 in the Planning Division. Jorgensen: Ok, I appreciate it. Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 25 LSP 02-42.00: Lot Split (Harkins, pp 298) was submitted by Alan Reid on behalf of Peter Harkins for property located at 5345 E. Mission Blvd. The property is in the Growth Area and contains approximately 6.76 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 1.56 acres and 5.20 acres. Conklin: The last item on our agenda is a lot split for Harkins submitted by Alan Reid on behalf of Peter Harkins for property located at 5345 E. Mission Blvd. The property is in the Growth Area and contains approximately 6.76 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 1.56 acres and 5.20 acres. From the Planning Division, everything is adequate on your submittal. It is a little confusing on the existing septic field that is shown in that easement and I just want clarification on what is that for. Is there a house on that property that is being split off? Reid: There is a house on the remainder, the 5.2 acres. It is up on the side. This proposed split area is mainly a meadow and the Harkins want to reserve because they have got some of their septic lateral lines in there. They wanted to reserve that area where their lateral lines were existing. The people that are buying the split area, the Brattons, they wanted this particular piece of property, the Harkins had promised years ago to sell it to them now they are going to try to finish the transaction but they don't want to have to cut down any trees and move their septic system. Conklin- Ok, and the Arkansas Department of Health has no problem with having septic systems on other private property with an easement? Reid: I know we have done it with the county before. Conklin: Ok. Whatever the Department of Health says is fine. It seems like it would be better to keep it on your own property, septic systems, and I'm not sure why you just wouldn't just go ahead and draw a property line there. Reid: I think that if it ever failed or they needed to replace it they would probably go ahead and do that but at this point they would rather just keep it operational and right there. The new owners have no problem with that, they went right along with it. Conklin- There is an existing 60' right-of-way for Timberland Lane. It kind of dead ends into this 50'. Celia, isn't the county right-of-way standards 60'? Silkwood: Normally, but a private road development lets you have a 50'. Reid: Actually, down here where we hit Steve Landers and John Morgan's, that is 60' down there. I think Neil Schmitt dedicated this extra 10' down there. Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 26 Conklin: That is what I was kind of looking at here. I would like to get it all 60'. Reid: This up here, I think it belongs to this Nicholas Giles, I think he owns that. Conklin: I am saying on their property, they could dedicate additional. See the right-of-way, it looks like an additional 5' or 10' or something. Reid: I see what you are saying. Conklin: On the side that they own to get it 60' and that way in the future when we all fight over how many houses can be built off this private drive, it could possibly be a public county street. Reid: I know down here where we did the Schmitt, of course we got the 10' off the other side so can I have a squirley alignment? We can do that. Conklin: It would make me feel better. Does it make you feel better Celia? Silkwood: That would make me feel better, we are all about feeling good. Conklin: I was just thinking of in the future to get in there to improve the street with shoulders and drainage. Reid: You just want me to take 10' off the east side of this property? Conklin- Down to where you can just show that 60' where Schmitt dedicated. Silkwood: We did this initially as lot splits right? This was never a platted subdivision? Conklin: The one to the north? Silkwood: It must not have been because they still all have county numbers, they don't have subdivision parcel numbers. Conklin: You are right but this isn't part of that right? Reid: No. Conklin: This is separate. Silkwood: Ok. Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 27 Conklin: Silkwood: Phipps: Reid: Conklin: Reid: Phipps: Conklin: Silkwood: Phipps: Silkwood: Conklin: Silkwood: Reid: Silkwood: Reid: This is just my soap box speech about what we end up with twenty years from now with 300 houses off a private drive and who is going to maintain it. It's a mess is what it is. It is Robinwood Phase I. It is called that but it was never filed as a subdivision. I think Schmitt just tagged that on to the end. He usually has a/k/a, tract one, Robinwood I but those were just splits. I don't know, I will have to look into it. He might have had more than one parcel and then he split it. Originally he came through for a subdivision. I thought this front part was Robinwood Phase I and then we did Robinwood Phase II. We built that subdivision. Your only question is Celia, that they are showing parcel numbers like they are splitting out individual parcel numbers. Yeah, if it was a platted subdivision to begin with then it should go through a replat and not a lot split but if this isn't even part of that. No, this wasn't part of it. My question is this west side 12' access easement, what the heck is that about? Where is it going? 1 see what you're talking about. Does it just stop? That is actually the Harkin's driveway, the 12'. Oh. That is how they get out to Hwy. 45. They own that property, they own that strip out there. It is 12' at one point and then it widens out where it borders on those tracts you were talking about. The Harkins never owned where those tract splits are. Their deed is Tess and except the five acres up in the corner and that is where Schmitt had developed into Robinwood. The Harkins always had a 12' entrance, plus they own both sides of that Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 28 Silkwood: Conklin: 12' road really. They are just granting these people the use of that 12' driveway or they can use Timberland Lane, either way. Ok. Ok. Perry Franklin didn't have any comments. Parks, nothing. Nothing from Sidewalks and nothing from Solid Waste. Matt? Matt Casey — Staff Engineer Casey: Reid: Casey: Conklin: Silkwood: Conklin- Silkwood: The access was one of my questions, but I think you just answered that. They are going to be able to access it from either side. Right. Go ahead and show the existing water meter and the service line, approximate locations so we can see that it is not going to be crossing the proposed split. I would also like to see the house location. Approval from the Health Department is going to be required for those septic lines being across the property line, which you have said that you have not had any problems with that in the past. Celia, have you been down there and looked at this? Not recently. They have that 12' private drive that goes through there. Pretty much we will leave that up to county standards with regard to road improvements when it is not adjoining the City of Fayetteville. If it is gravel it is typically left gravel. He has chose to put a 12' concrete road in there so I am not going to require anything beyond that. It makes it difficult to pass cars because they wound it through the trees. They did, I remember that. I thought it was asphalt. Conklin- Asphalt all the way back, yeah. It says 12' concrete on the plat. I went out there and it is difficult to get a car turned around. It would almost be better sometimes I think if we just left it gravel and had it wider, 20' out where you could turn a car in. I don't know. Utilities? Mike Phipps — Ozark Electric Coop. Phipps: Talking with Johnny, we would like that easement extended, a 50' UE. If we want to make that a 60' access and utility easement like it is now and extend it all down. If not, we will need a 20' easement. Right now we have 60' road and access plus a 15' utility. I think one reason we got it up Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 29 here was for the trees. The existing overhead there has a 30' utility easement, 15' each side of that line. You won't find it recorded, I'm not sure who owned the land when it was put in but it could have been a hand shake or somebody signing the back of the work order that it was built on. Any relocation of that line will be at the owner's expense. I would have to look to see if I could even take it out and get it out completely. We might be able to do it, I don't know if it goes over to the Leonard's place and ties in or how that works. I think the power for Leonard comes west of that property and up his drive, doesn't it Larry? Gibson: I think it cuts across the driveway right here on the east and then I think it goes to the north. I don't know what it serves from there. Phipps: It used to come from the west but now we have got that new underground to it so we might be able to take that out. Gibson: That is true. We have new underground street side. Phipps: That is all I have. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: We have got existing on the street side on the west side of this driveway in that 15' UE. We are not extended down to these two areas. I also agree with that 15' UE. Reid: Just extend that utility easement down across this property and just follow it? Gibson: To the second 5.20 acres. Like Mike said, if they use the 60' right-of-way the 15' is fine, if not, we will probably need a 20'. Reid: We are going to probably end up like he was saying, extending that over to make it 60' and then we will put a 15' adjacent to it like we did across there to keep it uniform all the way through there. Gibson: I think we are crossing on the northeast corner of 1717 Timberland Lane but if you would before you go down there, call for some locations. If we have to move anything it will be at the owner's expense. That is all I have. Sue Clouser — Southwestern Bell Clouser: I agree with Mike and Larry about the utility easements. Reid: Ok. Technical Plat Review August 28, 2002 Page 30 Conklin: Ok, September 4th revisions are due at 10:00 a m Thank you Alan. Meeting adjourned.