Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-06-12 - MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE A regular meeting of the City of Fayetteville Subdivision Committee was held on Thursday, June 12, 2003 at 8:30 a.m. in Room 219 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS CONSIDERED ACTION TAKEN LSP 03-40.00: Lot Split (Parker, pp 564) Approved Page 2 LSP 03-41.00: Lot Split (Hampton, pp 526) Approved Page 5 LSP 03-42.00: Lot Split (Sweetser-Stafford, pp 293) Approved Page 7 FPL 03-05.00: Final Plat (Legacy Point Phase I, pp 435/474) Page 9 Forwarded to Planning Commission MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Don Bunch Alice Church Alan Ostner STAFF PRESENT STAFF ABSENT Dawn Warrick Matt Casey Renee Thomas Craig Carnagey Jeremy Pate Rebecca Turner Subdivision Committee June 12, 2003 Page 2 LSP 03-40.00: Lot Split (Parker, pp 564) was submitted by Alan Reid of Alan Reid & Associates on behalf of Kathy Parker Mastalerz for property located at 701 Huntsville Road. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 1.93 acres. The request is to split the property into two tracts of 0.31 acres and 1.34 acres with 0.28 acres dedicated as right-of-way. Bunch: Good morning. Welcome to the Subdivision Committee meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission for Thursday, June 12, 2003. Today we have four items on the agenda. I guess we will start with the first item LSP 03-40.00 for Parker submitted by Alan Reid and Associates on behalf of Kathy Parker Mastalerz for property located at 701 Huntsville Road. Staff, would you give us the report on this please? Pate: Yes Sir. The proposal is to split the 1.93 acres existing into two parcels, one is 0.31 acres and one is 1.34 acres. It includes a 0.28 acre dedication of right of way along Huntsville Road. The 1.3 acre parcel will retain the existing structures and drives, the 0.31 acre parcel does not contain any existing structures. Surrounding land use is single-family residential. A water line does exist along Huntsville. A 6" sanitary sewer line also exists along Huntsville but it will need to be extended to the property line of the proposed lot split. Right of way being dedicated, Huntsville Road is a minor arterial requiring a minimum of 90' right of way dedication. The applicant is proposing to dedicate .28 acres for the right of way. That does include the required 45' from centerline. Staff is recommending approval at the Subdivision Committee level. There are five conditions of approval and I will read those for you. 1) A 20' utility easement shall be designated along the northern boundary of the subject property. 2) A sewer main shall be extended to the property line of the proposed 0.31 acre lot at the expense of the developer. Connection to the sewer line shall be made prior to filing of the lot split. Service lines may not cross property lines. 3) Right-of-way for Huntsville Road shall be dedicated in the amount of 0.28 acres as indicated on the plat. 4) Payment of Parks fees for one new single family residential lot in the amount of $555 shall be made prior to issuance of a building permit. Number five is a standard condition of approval. Bunch: Thank you. Tree and Landscape? Carnagey: Nothing additional. Bunch: Does the applicant have any sort of presentation? Reid: My name is Alan Reid, I am representing Kathy Parker. I think Mrs. Parker would be more than willing to meet all the staff recommendations. I don't see any problems there. We really don't have anything else to say. I think he covered it very well. Bunch: At this time we will take public comment. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to give us the benefit of their comments on this issue? Seeing none, I will bring it back to the committee. I will start off with a question concerning the sewer. The existing structure appears to be on septic. The conditions of approval needs to reflect that the existing structure needs to be connected and also that any additional structure on the split lot would have to be connected also? Subdivision Committee June 12, 2003 Page 3 Casey: I think the split lot will have to be connected. The existing structure I'm not sure it could be done without installing a pump and redoing the plumbing to pump it up to the manhole with the elevation. Bunch: What are the city requirements on that? Casey: It is 300' to accessible sewer. The accessibility issue also takes into account elevations. Bunch: Would that same condition apply to the split lot or is the elevation different there? Casey: The split lot is .31 acres so it is under the one acre limit for septic so they will have to go with the public sewer. Reid: I believe that lot is easier to access into that manhole When I was out there it seemed to me that the lot that is being splitting off has a more suitable elevation for having fall into the manhole. Whereas, the house existing, the 1.34 sits quite a bit lower than the road. Bunch: Are there anymore comments or questions? Ostner: I have a question for staff I suppose or engineering. This electrical line that is crossing the new lot is that in the air or is it buried? Reid: That is an overhead line. I think at Plat Review SWEPCO or somebody asked that they relocate that along the property line. I thought I saw that on a Plat Review note. Bunch: The only note that was made was relocation will be at the owner's expense. It didn't specifically address the easement. Reid: I think there is some kind of ordinance that the line can't be over houses so if it interferes with the house I'm sure it will have to be removed. Bunch: Otherwise it will need an easement. Warrick: The utility company at Plat Review did not request an easement over this line. Coordination of a development on the lot would certainly involve the utility company, which is Ozark Electric. The line was shown on the plat and they reviewed it at the Plat Review level but did not require an easement to be in that area. There is an overhead line, you can see that the pole is south of the new lot and extends over to the other side of Huntsville. Casey: l don't think they typically ask for easements for private service to service one house. Bunch: Do we need to reflect that as one of our conditions? Warrick: It has not been a requirement. Subdivision Committee June 12, 2003 Page 4 Bunch: Ok. Is there anything else? MOTION: Ostner: I will make a motion to approve LSP 03-40.00. Church: I will second it. Bunch: I will concur. Reid: Thank you. Subdivision Committee June 12, 2003 Page 5 LSP 03-41.00: Lot Split (Hampton, pp 526) was submitted by Ron Hampton on behalf of Carey J. Hampton for property located at 650 S. Ray Avenue. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 0.61 acres. The request is to split the property into two equal tracts of 0.305 acres. Bunch: The next item on the agenda is a lot split submitted by Ron Hampton submitted on behalf of Carey J. Hampton for property located at 650 S. Ray Avenue. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential, and contains approximately .61 acres. The request is to split the property into two equal tracts of .305 acres. Staff reports? Pate: Yes Sir. This is a lot split to split the existing lot into two tracts of 0.305 acres. The proposed lot one currently has a single-family residence and lot two is currently vacant. They both do have adequate frontage. Water exists along Ray Avenue to the west and Dockery Lane to the east. Sanitary sewer also exists in those locations. Right of way being dedicated, Ray Avenue and Dockery Lane are both local streets on the Master Street Plan requiring 25' from centerline right of way dedication, those have been indicated. Staff is recommending approval at this time with three conditions of approval. 1) A minimum of 25' from centerline shall be dedicated pursuant to local street requirements on the Master Street Plan along both Ray Avenue and Dockery Lane. 2) Payment of Parks fees for one single-family residential lot in the amount of $555 shall be made prior to the issuance of a building permit. Condition number three is a standard condition of approval. Bunch: Are there any additional staff comments? Parks? Hesse: No. Bunch: Thank you. At this time we will go to the applicant. If you would, please introduce yourself and tell us about your project. Hampton: My name is Ron Hampton. We are building a 1,400 sq.ft. house on that lot. As far as I know I've done everything for that. Bunch: At this time we will take public comment. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to address us on this issue? Seeing none, I will bring it back to the Committee. Are you going to be able to save some of those pretty trees? Hampton: Most of them. I had to take some of them out because they were going to be in the way. Bunch: It is a pretty lot. Hampton: What is going to be done is done now on the trees. Osmer: Is Dockery Lane built? Hampton: Yes. Subdivision Committee June 12, 2003 Page 6 Bunch: Are there any motions? MOTION: Church: I will make a motion that we approve LSP 03-41.00. Ostner: I will second. Bunch: I will concur. Hampton: There was one thing I was going to ask since I don't know totally. Where it says Plat Review I have met all of those conditions that they required. Warrick: That is a standard condition that we place to put you on notice that all the conditions and discussions that we had at that Plat Review level carry forward to this level also. Hampton: Ok, I don't have to go around and get any signatures or anything, that is what I wanted to make sure of. Subdivision Committee June 12, 2003 Page 7 LSP 03-42.00: Lot Split (Sweetser-Stafford, pp 293) was submitted by Jo Hannah Sweetser-Stafford for property located at 2622 Azalea Terrace. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 2.72 acres. The request is to split the subject property into two tracts of 1.32 and 1.40 acres proposed. Bunch: The next item on the agenda is LSP 03-42.00 submitted by Jo Hannah Sweetser for property located at 2622 Azalea Terrace. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential, and contains approximately 2.72 acres. The request is to split the subject property into two tracts of 1.32 and 1.40 acres. Staff reports? Pate: Yes Sir. This request is to split the property into two tracts of 1.32 and 1.40 acres. Tract two will remain a residential lot at this time. The applicant has indicated a desire to dedicate the split tract to Parks at a future time. At this time staff is recommending a parks fee for a single-family dwelling in the amount of $555 to be paid prior to building permit on the split lot and a reassessment from Parks will occur if the land is dedicated as indicated. Parks can address that. Existing development, the current tract contains a single-family dwelling with access to Azalea Terrace. Mud Creek tributary bisects the site and is the approximately location of the tract split line. A 6" water line does exist along Azalea Terrace and numerous sanitary lines exist as you can see on your site plan. Right of way being dedicated along Azalea Terrace, a local street, requires a 25' from centerline dedication. Staff is recommending approval at this level subject to the following conditions. 1) A minimum of 25' from centerline shall be dedicated along Azalea Terrace. Said dedication does need to be indicated on the site plan. 2) Payment of Parks fees for one new single-family lot in the amount of $555 shall be made prior to issuance of a building permit. Condition number three is a standard condition of approval. Bunch: Anything additional from staff, tree and landscaping? Turner: The Parks dedication is simply we are just going to leave it as a single-family lot split so it will be one additional lot, $555. We did speak with the applicant about in the future making the connection for the Gulley Park trail, continuing that. That would be in the applicant's best interest to wait until she is ready to bring that forward possibly as a donation in the future. We are going to leave it at that right now. Bunch: At this time we will take a presentation from the applicant. Could you introduce yourself? Stafford: My name is Jo Hannah Sweetser Stafford. I'm selling the house and I would like to split the lot off. The other side doesn't benefit the people who are buying the house. It really doesn't benefit anybody except at a future date for me to donate it back to the city so you can basically have your sewer lines and your water lines back. Right now it is for my family's personal use. Bunch: You are ok with the conditions of approval? Subdivision Committee June 12, 2003 Page 8 Stafford: Tell me how, when I close the house tomorrow, I am going to need to explain to the people that are buying the house. Tell me about the right of way. What do I have now? Warrick: I think it is just a notation that needs to be added to the plat before it is filed. We are going to verify that. It looks like there is existing 25' of right of way from centerline to the front property line already. We are just basically trying to make sure that it is noted on there as right of way existing. Stafford: So it basically doesn't take away from the people that are buying the house. Warrick: That is correct. It would not reduce the lot size or change the property lines. The $555 would only be applicable if a building permit were applied for for tract 1. Stafford: That wouldn't happen anyway. Bunch: At this time we will take public comment. Is there anyone who would like to address us on this issue? Seeing none, I will bring it back to the committee for questions, comments and motions. MOTION: Ostner: I will make a motion that we approve LSP 03-42.00. Church: I will second it. Bunch: I will concur. Stafford: Thank you, I appreciate it. Subdivision Committee June 12, 2003 Page 9 FPL 03-05.00: Final Plat (Legacy Point Phase I, pp 435/474) was submitted by Jorgensen and Associates on behalf of Charles Sloan Properties, Inc. for property located east of Double Springs Road and south of Owl Creek. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and RMF -6, Low Density Multi -family Residential and contains approximately 36.53 acres with 66 single family and 24 duplex lots proposed. Bunch: The next item on the agenda is the Final Plat for Legacy Point submitted by Jorgensen & Associates on behalf of Charles Sloan properties for property located east of Double Springs Road and south of Owl Creek. Jeremy, is this yours? Pate: Yes Sir. This is a Final Plat application. The subject property is 36.53 acres with 66 proposed single-family lots and 24 proposed duplex lots. The request is to approval the Final Plat of Phase I for Legacy Point. Phase I Preliminary Plat was approved March 25th and a revision to that was approved May 21s` just dividing it into three phases. Surrounding land use is single-family residential and zoned A-1 and R-1. The proposed property, the property has extended water and sewer lines. Double Springs Road right of way varies from 45', which is required from centerline, to 60' and greater at some points. Persimmon Street also requires a full 70' right of way dedication. The street improvements proposed are Double Springs a minimum of 14' from centerline and Persimmon Street a minimum of 28' pursuant to city standards. At this time staff is recommending to forward this to the full Planning Commission. That is basically due to the first condition. I will read over the conditions of approval. There are 15 of those. 1) Final inspection shall be performed prior to final plat approval. 2) A temporary cul-de-sac shall be constructed at the end of Milliken Bend prior to final plat approval of Phase I. This is needed to accommodate emergency and service vehicles. 3) The right-of-way for Double Springs Road (varies) and Persimmon Street (70') for all phases shall be dedicated with Phase I by warranty deed prior to filing of the final plat. 4) The required street and drainage improvements for Double Springs Road shall be constructed with Phase I. Persimmon Street shall be constructed as a 28' residential street according to current City standards. 5) An initial layer of pavement shall be required on all interior roads prior to signing of final plat. The final layer of pavement on all streets may be guaranteed. 6) The detention pond shall be constructed with Phase I. The detention basin shall be sodded prior to signing of final plat. 7) A variance for the rear setback for the existing house on lot 76 is required to be approved by the Board of Adjustment prior to acceptance of the final plat. 8) Deed for park land dedication in the amount of 3.42 acres must be received before the signing of the final plat. 9) Outflow structure for park land is to be constructed and approved by the Parks Department prior to signatures being applied to final plat. 10) Payment of fees in the amount of $41,650 into the tree fund escrow account must be received prior to acceptance of the final plat. 11) Sidewalk construction shall be in accordance with the Master Street Plan and Chapter 171 of the Unified Development Code to include a minimum six foot sidewalk with a minimum ten foot greenspace along Double Springs Road and Persimmon Street and a minimum four foot sidewalk along all interior streets. 12) Proof of payment for street lights must be received prior to signing of final plat. Conditions 13 through 15 are standard conditions of approval. Bunch: Are there any additional staff comments? Tree preservation? Carnagey: I met with Chris yesterday about a tree off of Greens Chapel Road that need some drainage Subdivision Committee June 12, 2003 Page 10 accommodations due to the grading and the construction of that road and we agreed that he would put in a swale for that tree to allow it to drain better. Bunch: Do we need to add that as a condition? Warrick: It would be appropriate for that to be an added condition. Bunch: Since this recommendation is to forward to the Planning Commission then we can insert that. Is there anything else from Tree and Landscape? Carnagey: No Sir. Bunch: Engineering? Casey: As we discussed before the meeting, some of the roads are still gravel because they can bond out the final layer of asphalt. The final layer is also the initial layer on those. We have added that the pavement be placed on those roads and I have spoke with the developer and he says his intent is to have them all paved prior to Planning Commission meeting. We will make sure that that is complete. Bunch: Final inspection will be prior to the Planning Commission meeting? Casey: The final inspection was scheduled for yesterday and then was postponed and then scheduled for today and I haven't heard if they are going through it or not. Have you heard Chris? Brackett: Currently right now they are paving on Double Springs Road. I haven't heard about a final but I doubt it because of the rain. I doubt that we are going to have it today. They are paving today and that is the one thing that should've been done yesterday morning but because of the rain didn't get done. It will be weather permitting within four to five days at the latest. We need to let it dry out so you can walk around in it. Bunch: So there is sufficient time between now and Planning Commission to get the work completed and inspected? Brackett: The work will be done today. Bunch: Is there anything else from Engineering? Casey: No Sir. Bunch: Parks and Recreation? Turner: Yes Sir. We spoke with Charlie Sloan, the developer, yesterday and had at the Preliminary Plat looked at a condition that the parking lot must also be completed and reviewed. We have decided to waive that until Phase II. The parking lot for the park will be completed during Phase II of the project. We also would like to go ahead and schedule a meeting to go Subdivision Committee June 12, 2003 Page 11 out and view the head wall so that we can double check that's being installed correctly. If you could also label the park as lot 133 before Final Plat that would be great. Thank you. Bunch: At this time we will go to the applicant. Brackett: The park will be 134, the detention pond is 133. Bunch: At this time if you would introduce yourself and give your presentation. Brackett: My name is Chris Brackett with Jorgensen & Associates, I am here representing Charlie Sloan today. In essence we are just finishing up this first Phase and would like to get it approved so he can finish the second phase. Bunch: At this time we will take public comment. Seeing none, I will bring it back to the Committee. Are there any comments or questions? Ostner: Where is the parking lot for the park? Brackett: It is right there. It is part of the park property that would be dedicated. Ostner: Is the detention pond going to be fenced off? Brackett: We don't have any plans to fence it off. It really from someone standing in the street, it is going to look like part of the park but it just won't be. The developer is maintaining the park for two years. There will be signs for the park property that Parks is going to be providing to us and we will be installing but other than that you won't hardly be able to tell the difference. It will just be a big green area with a big box right there. Ostner: I have always been curious since they are empty and dry 360 days a year whether it was safe for a kid to get in there with a soccer ball. It doesn't seem to be dangerous to me. Brackett: No, it does have the slope on it so it will drain. There won't be danger when it is dry, just when it is raining heavily, really heavily for it to be seeping up to be a problem. Ostner: At that point it will be obvious that it's not. I have no other comments. Bunch: Commission Church, do you have any comments? Church: I don't have anything. Bunch: Do we have any motions? MOTION: Church: I will make a motion that we forward FPL 03-5.00 to the full Planning Commission with the change in number five from payment to pavement and then the addition of number 16 that we Subdivision Committee June 12, 2003 Page 12 build up the swale around the tree that was previously mentioned. Ostner: I will second. Bunch: Do we need an additional condition to reflect Engineering's comments or is that pretty well covered? Casey: I think those were covered. Bunch: And also for Parks? Turner: I think that is fine. Bunch: You seconded and I concur. Good luck Chris. Are there any other announcements or administrative items? Warrick: I have nothing further. Bunch: In that case we are adjourned. Meeting adjourned: 9:00