Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-10-16 - MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE TECHNICAL PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE A regular meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee was held on Wednesday, October 16, 2002 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS CONSIDERED ACTION TAKEN LSP 02-53.00 (1026 & 1027): Lot Split (Archer, pp 520) Forwarded Page 2 LSD 02-27.00 (1006): Large Scale Development (PJT Development, pp 435) Page 3 PPL 02-17.00 (1028): Preliminary Plat (Skyler Subdivision, pp 403) Page 11 FPL 02-7.00 (1029): Final Plat (Brookstone Subdivision, pp 212) Page 9 Tabled Tabled Forwarded STAFF PRESENT STAFF ABSENT Matt Casey Sara Edwards Kim Hesse Renee Thomas Keith Shreve Perry Franklin Danny Farrar Travis Dotson UTILITIES PRESENT UTILITIES ABSENT Larry Gibson, Cox Communications Sue Clouser, Southwestern Bell Glenn Newman, AEP/ SWEPCO Mike Phipps, Ozark Electric Coop. Jim Sargent, AEP/ SWEPCO Johny Boles — Arkansas Western Gas Technical Plat Review October 16, 2002 Page 2 LSP 02-53.00 (1026 & 1027): Lot Split (Archer, pp 520) was submitted by Julian Archer for property located at 2115 Markham Road. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 38 acres. The request is to split into two tracts of 35.5 acres and 2.5 acres, also, to split a tract containing approximately 2.5 acres into two tracts of 1.27 and 1.28 acres. Edwards: Welcome to the Wednesday, October 16, 2002 meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee. The first item on the agenda is LSP 02-53.00 and 54.00. Mr. Archer, please come up to the table. We will start with the Parks Division, there will be parks fees assessed in the amount of $940 and that is for two additional lots. In an R-1 district there is a $470 fee for each lot. There were no comments from Solid Waste. There were no comments from Traffic. There are no sidewalks required for lot splits. From Planning, we do not have a survey of the original 38 acres. The reason we need that when this goes through construction we need to verify the required right-of-way, verify access, water, etc. Then on the split for the 2.5 acre piece I am looking for a site map with a plat page number to be added on there, a floodplain reference, a legend on there. Also, any easements and right of way dedication will need to be shown and labeled. That is all that I have. Matt? Matt Casey — Staff Engineer Casey: My only comment was that sewer is not available to this property at this time. They have got a 24" water line but no sewer. Edwards: It will need to have a perk test. Archer: We have submitted for a perk test. Glenn Newman — SWEPCO Newman. No comment. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: No comments. Sue Clouser — Southwestern Bell Clouser: No comment. Edwards: Your revisions and your survey are due back October 23, 2002 by 10:00 a.m. That is what we will need and then you can go to the Subdivision Committee the 31st. Thank you. Not in Verbatim Technical Plat Review October 16, 2002 Page 3 LSD 02-27.00 (1006): Large Scale Development (PJT Development, pp 435) was submitted by Glenn Carter of Carter Consulting on behalf of Bobby Hatfield of PJT Development for property located at the southeast corner of Wedington Drive and Double Springs Road. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 5.51 acres with 6 retail buildings proposed. Edwards: The next item is LSD 02-27.00, PJT Development submitted by Glenn Carter of Carter Consulting on behalf of Bobby Hatfield of PJT Development for property located at the southeast comer of Wedington Drive and Double Springs Road. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 5.51 acres with 6 retail buildings proposed. Good morning Glenn. Carter: This is a nice plan. For those of you who saw the first one, I hope you threw those away. That was a good exercise for somebody who needed exercise but this is what we really want to do. Edwards: I will start with Parks, there is no comment. The Solid Waste and Recycling Division supports this request with no recommended changes. From Sidewalks, Wedington Drive is a principal arterial which requires a 6' sidewalk and a minimum of ten feet of green space. Please construct the sidewalk at the new right of way line, as shown. Carter: Shreve: Carter: Shreve: Edwards: Carter: Shreve: Edwards: Not in Verbatim At the right of way? Does that mean within the right of way? At the right of way line. We prefer to have it in the right of way. Ok, so the way I have it is good? Yes. Double Springs Road is a minor arterial which requires a six foot sidewalk and a minimum of ten feet of green space. Two access ramps will be required on the southeast corner of Wedington Drive and Double Springs Road. A single ramp on the radius should not be used. 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. What is that truncated domes? It is a requirement by the ADA at the bottom or entrance to an ramp. access New driveway approaches, access ramps or sidewalks constructed in the right of way shall be designed to meet Unified Development Ordinance. Technical Plat Review October 16, 2002 Page 4 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. Five bicycle parking racks are required, three for Phase I. From the Fire Marshall's office, all lanes and drives shall have 20' of unobstructed width. Building four, he says you should extend drive to the south for access. Building one you need to extend the drive to the south for access. He said not all the way around, he is just looking for at least 20' of unobstructed width. From the Traffic Superintendent, he is requesting that you show the existing street lights. Street lights are required every 300', at intersections, and at the end of the streets. ADA spaces should be located at the nearest access to the building entrances. Building #3 needs at least one van accessible space at the nearest entrance to the building. From Tree and Landscape, A Preliminary Landscape Plan is required for Planning Commission review and the Final Landscape Plan is required prior to issuance of the building permit. Per the interior landscape requirements for off street parking areas, a tree is required within a tree island at a minimum distance of twelve parking spaces. Trees within the parking area are to be spaced evenly among the spaces to achieve 50% canopy coverage over the paved areas and therefore proposing trees along the perimeter of the parking lot is not acceptable. As mentioned in the previous review, all items not checked under the preliminary requirements, are to be indicated on the plan for the Subdivision review. From Planning, I am asking that you add the plat page number on the site plan. Site coverage note, what I am looking for is the percentage of green space used for buildings and impervious surface. With a total of 123 off-street parking spaces, Code requires five bicycle racks for this amount of parking spaces. Parking lot lighting plan needs to be indicated on Site plan. Add square footage to each building in order to verify parking ratios. Our commercial design standards require access so we need these parking lots to be connected in order to provide cross access. Carter: You need all four of them connected with a 24' wide drive? Edwards: Yes. Just a note, you don't have to show this but a continuous planting of shrubs is required along Wedington and Double Springs Road. Carter: That is a tree every 30' and shrubs in between? Edwards: Yes. One landscape island is required for every twelve spaces, I think we talked about that with Kim's comments. I did not see any monument signs on these plans, are there any monument signs proposed? Carter: I don't know about the signs yet. Not in Verbatim Technical Plat Review October 16, 2002 Page 5 Edwards: If there is a sign proposed we will need elevations added to the site plan. Elevations of signage are required as a part of Commercial Design Standards. All utilities are required to be placed underground. You got me the elevations this morning, are both of the buildings going to be the same? Carter: Yes, all of the buildings will be the same. Edwards: I do have some concerns, and I think the Planning Commission will as well, about the visibility of this building from Wedington with the metal. When people are driving down I think it is going to be pretty visible, at least all the way back to building three. Carter: Ok. Edwards: Other than that, it looks good. Is he planning on building out Phase II within one year of approval as well? Carter: Right now, no. Edwards: I am going to state that it has to be built within one year from approval. We do have a process to request an extension. The reason for that is that in the event the ordinances change this will not be a blanket approval for Phase II. Carter: So right now he is required to do it all within one year? Edwards: Yes, with this approval. If he is not going to be able to do that he can request an extension in writing to our office and approval will be based upon current ordianances. Dumpsters will have to be screened and shall be relocated to the rear of the property. All utility equipment shall be screened. Are there any rooftop utilities planned? If so, parapet shall be extended up to screen those. If they are on the ground you can screen them with shrubs or some sort of decorative fencing. That is all I have. Matt? Matt Casey — Staff Engineer Casey: We are recommending that Double Springs be improved 14' from centerline with curb and gutter. Storm sewer is questionable. Carter: We are showing the pipe and we are showing the street. Casey: Not in Verbatim There should be no ditch between the sidewalk and curb. All public improvements will need to be installed with the first phase. For the Grading Plan I would like you to show the location of the proposed silt Technical Plat Review October 16, 2002 Page 6 fence; include the soil type on the plan; include the soil type on the plan; show the location of the existing 8" waterline that is being connected to for the fire line; it appears that water will pond in the parking areas at the northeast corner of buildings 2, 3, and 4. Is a swale proposed from the parking area on the east side of building #4? Under water and Sewer, an access easement is needed to service the proposed manholes. Will water services be run from the existing main at the road? Carter: We intended to serve it from Double Springs Road. Casey: Ok. We are going to recommend that this be tabled. I still need information for the drainage report. The pre- and post -development drainage areas are shown to be the same. Pre -development should show the flow to the east in the ditch along Wedington, ditch flow to the south along Double Springs Rd., and site flow to the south. Post -development should have the flow to the east in the ditch along Wedington, ditch flow to the south along Double Springs Rd., each separate area that flows into the detention basin, and site flow to the south. The proposed detention basin must be constructed during the first phase of this development. The outlet structure must be designed to properly discharge the detained storm water at each phase of the development. Provide drainage areas, flow calculations and detention pond calculations for each phase. Provide revised calculations for each of the revised drainage areas. Provide revised detention pond design based on the revised drainage areas. Carter: So we are going to be tabled for that? Casey: Yes. Carter: That isn't something that we can get to you as a revision? Casey: No, I think it just needs to come back to Plat Review so I can go over it. That is all that I have. Carter: Is there any waiver we can get on the sidewalk elevation being 2% over the top of the curb? Shreve: We really prefer to have it 2% above that. Carter: What about along the Highway? Shreve: 2% is desirable, we could probably work with you and the Highway Department on that. Not in Verbatim Technical Plat Review October 16, 2002 Page 7 Mike Phipps — Ozark Electric Coop. Phipps: Carter: Phipps: There is a 14.4 with 25KV potential and we will potentially need a 20' easement along Hwy. 16 and a 20' along Double Springs, and a 20' along that south property line. We will probably serve this line from the overhead along there. Any relocation of that line will be at the owner's or developer's expense. Along the south there, is there enough room for a 20' utility easement? If you don't mind going down the pond bank. We will need a 15' easement to transformer locations and 20' along the east property line. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: Carter: Gibson: Carter: Gibson: Sue Clouser Clouser: Carter: Gibson: Edwards: I would like to see 20' easement around the perimeter of the property. I will need a 4" conduit across this driveway on Double Springs Road. We are joint usage on those Ozark Electric poles running east and west down Wedington. That is a high count fiber optic so if that has to be moved it will be at the developer's expense. On the pole? Yes. It will probably have to go underground. That is all I have. — Southwestern Bell Not in Verbatim I agree with that 20' UE and I will want a 4" conduit under the two drives along Wedington. We do have facilities on Wedington that we could serve this from. Any relocation of Southwestern Bell facilities will be at the developer's expense. We will have to look at where you want to feed these buildings from. We will probably need a 2" conduit with a #6 bare ground wire and I need pull strings in all the conduits and cap them off if they aren't going to be used right away. Ok. Will these all have to go through separate Large Scales? No, just one Large Scale. Technical Plat Review October 16, 2002 Page 8 Casey: Something that I just caught, Glenn, around that fire hydrant we need a 10' easement on each side on that northeast corner where you are showing that water line cutting across there. Carter: Not in the right of way right? Casey: Right, just where it is out of the right of way. Carter: That might go back down to the right of way line. I put it close to the parking lot but I really didn't know. Is there a time that t can meet with you Matt? Casey: Just give me a call. Carter: So we have to come back to Plat Review right? Edwards: Yes, since this is coming back to Plat Review revisions are due October 21, 2002 at 10:00 a.m. Thanks. Not in Verbatim Technical Plat Review October 16, 2002 Page 9 FPL 02-7.00 (1029): Final Plat (Brookstone Subdivision, pp 212) was submitted by Peter Nierengarten of US Infrastructure, Inc. on behalf of Jack Morris of Washington Regional Medical Services for property located east of Wimberly and north & south of Longview. The property is zoned R -O, Residential Office and contains approximately 38.62 acres with 8 lots proposed. Edwards: The final item is FPL 02-7.00, Brookstone. It was submitted by Peter Nierengarten of US Infrastructure, Inc. on behalf of Jack Morris of Washington Regional Medical Services for property located east of Wimberly and north & south of Longview. The property is zoned R -O, Residential Office and contains approximately 38.62 acres with 8 lots proposed. Starting with our Landscape Administrator, are you saying it looks good? Kim Hesse — Landscape Administrator Hesse: I will meet with ESI to determine the exact language that needs to be on the Final Plat document. Edwards: There are no comments from Parks, no comments from Traffic or Solid Waste. Sidewalks are requesting that you add a note to the final plat that all retaining walls shall be set back a minimum of 2' from the right of way and all retaining wall construction shall be on the building permit and have the approval of the city engineer. You can disregard the comment about the adjoining property owner labels, we don't need that. Nierengarten: Edwards: Nierengarten: Edwards: Nierengarten: Edwards: Pull all of these off? No, you just don't need the labels. Storm water detention will be required for each tract upon development. It is on there, does it need to be in a certain spot? No, that is fine. Have streetlights been put in yet? They are not but when I turned everything in I gave a copy of the check and I have been talking with Jim with SWEPCO and so what we are waiting on is the transformer, when they get that in we are going to power the lights off of that. Addresses are required on final plats. You can just contact our GIS Department, Jim Johnson We are just looking for a box with the numbers. Nierengarten: Ok. Not in Verbatim Technical Plat Review October 16, 2002 Page 10 Edwards: That is it, revisions are due October 23Ta Matt Casey — Staff Engineer Casey: I would just like for you to add the 100 -year water surface elevation to each of the lots that the channel crosses. A final inspection of the water and sewer installation is required before Subdivision Committee. Edwards: Ok, utilities? Utilities Audio inaudible Not in Verbatim Technical Plat Review October 16, 2002 Page 11 PPL 02-17.00 (1028): Preliminary Plat (Skyler Subdivision, pp 403) was submitted by Dave Jorgensen of Jorgensen & Associates on behalf of Sam Mathias for property located south of Deane and between Sang & Porter. The property is zoned RMF -6, Low Density Multi -Family Residential and contains approximately 21.03 acres with 61 lots proposed. Edwards: We have talked about that we are going to go ahead and table this for inadequate drainage, however, we will be happy to go over these comments with you. We will go back to PPL 02-17.00, Skyler Subdivision, submitted by David Gilbert of Jorgensen & Associates on behalf of Sam Mathias for property located south of Deane and between Sang & Porter. The property is zoned RMF -6, Low Density Multi -Family Residential and contains approximately 21.03 acres with 61 lots proposed. From the Landscape Administrator, additional tree canopy can be preserved through design changes that will not affect the number of lots proposed or linear footage of streets. Through changes to the horizontal alignment of sewer and water lines and changes to the utility easement location, additional canopy preservation is recommended prior to approval through this department. We request to work with the engineer to achieve these changes within the time frame of this review process. Please note that all mitigation proposed within residential subdivisions must be in the form of the tree fund as defined in Chapter 167 of the UDO. Kim Hesse Hesse: Edwards: — Landscape Administrator Not in Verbatim Please just get with me on that. From Parks, On September 9, 2002 the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board recommended parks fees assessed in the amount of $47,915. That is seven single-family lots at $470 each and 119 multi -family units at $375 per unit. Our Traffic Superintendent did have some concerns about the parking. One thing it depends on if these are rentals and wants detail on how the parking is being provided. He has looked at the concept plan submitted and just wanted to verify that those are still the plans. From Sidewalks, Porter Road is a collector which requires a 6' sidewalk and a minimum of 10' green space. Deane Street is a minor arterial which requires a 6' sidewalk and a minimum of 10' green space. Sang Avenue is a local street which requires a 6' sidewalk and a minimum of 6' green space. Skyler Drive, Evening Shade Drive, and Willow Brook Drive are local streets which require a 6' sidewalk and a minimum 6' green space on both sides of the street. The necessary grading from right of way line to right of way line for sidewalks shall be done as part of the street construction. Two access ramps will be required at each street corner. Detectable warnings are now required when constructing or altering curb ramps. A 24" wide strip of detectable warning (truncated domes) should be installed at the bottom of a curb ramp to indicate the transition from the Technical Plat Review October 16, 2002 Page 12 sidewalk to the street. New driveway approaches, access ramps or sidewalks constructed in the right of way shall be designed to meet U.D.O. §171.13. The sidewalks shall be continuous through driveways with a maximum of 2% cross slope and elevated 2% above top of curb. 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. Gilbert: Do we need to do 6' sidewalks everywhere Keith? Is the city going to issue something that will explain that to our clients? How do we do that? We are playing guessing games right now and I am really uncomfortable with guessing games. Shreve: The ordinance says it is an interpretation of the Sidewalk Coordinator and he has interpreted that this area needs to have a 6' sidewalk. Gilbert: I understand that but we don't have any way of knowing. If I tell my client a 6' sidewalk he is going to point to the ordinance and say "No, we can do 4'." This is two projects in a row that we have had to redesign because of this issue. I would really like to see this issue resolved. Do you have any suggestions on how we can do that? Shreve: We are going to be working on revising the sidewalk ordinance in the next year or so. You can get with Chuck on his decision, it was his call and he has determined that higher density areas need a 6' sidewalk. Gilbert: Ok. Edwards: There are no comments from Solid Waste. From Planning, it looks like I had the same comments that Kim had about tree preservation and mitigation so we can get that worked out. I would like the Plat Page number added to the plan, which is 403. Gilbert: I have that right down here. Edwards: Ok, thank you. There is a requirement that a detailed study is required for the zone A floodplain, whenever a lot is being developed under five acres it has to meet those requirements, prior to the Final Plat submittal. I warn you about that because it is a lengthy process. Lot 44 is required to have 6,000 sq.ft. of buildable area outside of the 100 year floodplain. Gilbert: I understand. That is a very expensive process. Edwards: That is straight out of the FEMA requirements. Gilbert: Ok, is that the drainage issue? Not in Verbatim Technical Plat Review October 16, 2002 Page 13 Gilbert: Keith, can I get with you after this meeting? It seems that the Sidewalk Department wants all the sidewalks, the back of the curb at the right of way line and my concern is that we are going to lose some trees that way and that isn't good for anyone. Can I call you or Chuck? I need to do some more research. Shreve: We will work with you on that. Gilbert: Great, I think we are pretty close. Edwards: Staff is aware of a Bill of Assurance so these next couple of comments kind of go with that. We are requesting that Dean Street improvements be shown on the plan. A fence shall be added to south property line prior to final plat approval. All required trees and shrubs along south and east property line shall be installed prior to final plat approval. Label all common areas on the plan. Also, this is not in the written comments but we have a new policy and it is backed by ordinance. This ordinance states that all sidewalks will be allowed to be guaranteed by money in a city escrow account only and with a contract that will require total installation by the time that one half of the lots have received permits. Upon completion of half of the lots the rest of the sidewalks have to go in. I will get that in the Subdivision report. Matt Casey — Staff Engineer Casey: Not in Verbatim Provide a concrete trickle channel through the detention pond to the outlet structure. We are tabling this item at this time. All grading shall be set back a minimum of 5' from the property lines unless written permission is submitted from the adjacent property owner. The waterline connection at Porter will need to be made to the existing 6" line, not the existing 4" line. The waterline will need to connect to the existing 12" line along Deane. It does not appear to connect on the plan. There is a gap in the waterline along Sang Avenue. The closest waterline will need to be extended to connect to the proposed main in the subdivision. The City may be interested in cost sharing for further extension to close the gap on Sang. Show the proposed storm sewer along Porter and Sang. Staff will recommend that street improvements be made to Deane Street. The street will need to be widened to 14' from centerline with curb and gutter and storm sewer. The detention pond analysis should be site specific. The offsite areas that contribute flow to the channel should be used to determine the box culvert and channel size only. These areas need to be removed from the pre- and post -development flows table. The flow table should include pre -development flows, post -development flows and post - development with detention flows. The storm sewer discharge from the Technical Plat Review October 16, 2002 Page 14 south portion of the subdivision will not be allowed to point discharge as shown. If a channel or swale exists there now, then provide this information on the grading plan. If not, the storm water will need to be channelized to the existing ditch to the north. According to the City of Fayetteville Drainage Criteria Manual, a final detention pond design is required at the time of the preliminary submittal. Please provide runoff coefficient/ RCN computations, complete runoff computations for the 2-, 10-, 25-, and 100 -year storms, detention basin size requirement computations, release structure design computations, stage -storage and stage -discharge curves, and a summary hydrograph of the effect of the detention facility. When this information is submitted, please label it in a way that is easy to distinguish which drainage area and storm event the data pertains to. Edwards: Utilities? This portion of this meeting is inaudible. However, this will be coming before the Technical Plat Review Committee meeting October 30, 2002. Not in Verbatim