No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-08-27 - MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE TECHNICAL PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE A regular meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee was held on August 27, 2003 at 9:00 a.m. in room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ITEMS CONSIDERED ACTION TAKEN LSP 03-49.00 Lot Split (Green, pp 243) Forwarded Page 2 PPL 03-14.00: Preliminary Plat (Oakridge Estates, pp 180) Page 3 Forwarded PPL 03-15.00: Preliminary Plat (Copper Ridge, pp 435) Forwarded Page 9 LSD 03-32.00: Large Scale Development (The Crowne, pp 598) Page 12 Forwarded STAFF PRESENT STAFF ABSENT Matt Casey Jeremy Pate Renee Thomas Craig Carnagey Perry Franklin Travis Dotson Danny Farrar UTILITIES PRESENT UTILITIES ABSENT Mike Phipps, Ozark Electric Coop. Johny Boles, Arkansas Western Gas Larry Gibson, Cox Communications Jim Sargent, AEP/SWEPCO Sue Clouser, Southwestern Bell Technical Plat Review August 27, 2003 Page 2 LSP 03-49.00 Lot Split (Green, pp 243) was submitted by Sharon Green for property located at 4369 Weir Rd. The property is in the Planning Area, with a request to split the 5.63 acre lot into two tracts of 1.05 acres and 4.58 acres. Pate: We will go ahead and start the Plat Review meeting for August 27, 2003. We had six items on our agenda but the last one has been tabled. The first one is a Property Line Adjustment which will be in house only so the first item we will review today is a Lot Split for Ms. Sharon Green. Please come up. I talked about tract A and that the septic system requires a letter and I think we are going to be ok on that so no hurry. We do need to include the plat page, your engineer can just put that on there. We also need you to indicate from centerline 30' of right of way along the county there. Add the ownership and dedication block so you can dedicate that portion to the county as required. The Planning area setbacks typically are 10', it looks like you have them at 5'. That is basically all the Planning comments that we have. We will need 30 copies on September 3rd at 10:00 a.m. This is in the Planning area so Parks has no comments. Matt? Casey: No comment. Pate: Utilities? Mike Phipps- Ozark Electric Coop. Phipps: What are these 1, 2, 3, and 4? I'm just curious? Pate: Those are adjacent property owners down there. Phipps: My request for tract B is a 20' UE on the west property line. Any relocation of any existing OEC facilities will be at the developer's expense. That is all I have. Johny Boles — Arkansas Western Gas Boles: No comment. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: That easement that Mike asked for is fine. Technical Plat Review August 27, 2003 Page 3 PPL 03-14.00: Preliminary Plat (Oakridge Estates, pp 180) was submitted by Milholland Company Engineering and Surveying on behalf of BMP, Inc. for property located east of Crossover Rd. on Gulley Rd. The property is located in the City of Fayetteville's growth area containing approximately 13.23 acres with 10 lots proposed. Pate: The next item on our agenda is PPL 03-15.00 for Copper Ridge submitted by Milholland Company. This property is also in the Planning area. There are no parks comments. Basically, we are looking at again typical setbacks in the county are 10'. There is one that has a larger setback, I don't know if you did that intentionally or not but all the others are ten so I just wanted to call your attention to it. There are a couple of labeling things basically. This future proposed right of way, let's take the future and proposed right of way off and just label it right of way. When you are dedicating that it will read right of way once you dedicate it. Milholland: I was wondering if we dedicate it and you all reroute your Master Street Plan then you have got a dedication there that is no good and what I was hoping to do is we can restrict any building in this area but not call it a dedication at this point just because the Master Street Plan may change. That would keep from having to vacate it later but it will be on here, reserved for future right of way. Pate: Milholland: Pate: Milholland: Casey: Milholland: Casey: Milholland: For instance right now, say the Master Street Plan went right through here. You would still have to dedicate that. That is a natural dedication. You are requesting basically to move it over the same as you did with another project. That right of way is dedicated as well. I remember that. We need to do the same thing. Go ahead and dedicate the right of way along there. What is going to happen if they dedicate it and then 15 years down the road you all change your Master Street Plan to go out through here somewhere? Is there a promise that you are going to give him back his land? It would have to be a vacation of the right of way. Would it go back totally to this land owner or would it be half and half since this guy hasn't given any? That would be only one half, that would be 100%. Can I put you on the record saying that? Technical Plat Review August 27, 2003 Page 4 Casey: Milholland: Casey: Milholland: Pate: Milholland: Pate: Milholland: Casey: Milholland: There is only one property owner involved so it is all coming off one land. Can we call it a right of way easement right now to be safer? The right of way easement would be off this guy. You are talking about half of the total, not just what you are giving. Yes. I am just saying in the long term when we are retired and they put this Master Street Plan somewhere else and this is vacated, the policy is today if there is a street right of way, regardless of the width of it, half goes here and half goes there. If I call this a right of way easement this sticks with the land. Can I do that? The requirement is if there is a Master Street Plan street that goes through your property or is adjacent to your property that you dedicate a sufficient amount of right of way. If you cross both streets you are dedicating the entire amount. For instance, right now you are getting out of dedicating 90' because you are requesting to move the right of way over here to the side to dedicate only 45'. I understand what we're doing, I'm just thinking about long term. To be consistent with what we do now we request the dedication. That is what our desire is. I just made a note of what we just talked about. If you could Mel on the last property down here, you showed that Master Street Plan going there, show how this street is supposed to go through on the Master Street Plan. The vicinity map shows that the Master Street Plan streets should be shown even if they're just proposed so if you could include that that will give everybody a little bit of background on that. Ok. I will go ahead and show this down here just to make it clear what we did. If the Master Street Plan shows that is still going to be there so if they vacated a portion of it it will be the additional portion that you are dedicating so I would think that that portion, 100% of it would go back to the property owners. In legal terms through the years I know if this is called an easement for right of way off of this property and if it was ever vacated it would go to the property. City policy if it is ever annexed 20 years down the road and they run the street somewhere else the policy would come into conflict. Casey: I thought you were talking about along Gulley Road, the additional right of way. That is what we were talking about earlier. Technical Plat Review August 27, 2003 Page 5 Milholland: Pate: Milholland: Casey: Milholland: Pate: Milholland: Pate: Milholland: Pate: Milholland: Pate: Milholland: Pate: No, I'm talking about this over here. As soon as it comes down over here it goes into a canyon for a mile or two miles The perfect place for it is in line with Joyce Street right now. We are trying to be consistent. This right here I have no problem with but I think the best location would be right here because it comes across the top of the ridge and across. Over here you have got a quarter of a mile where you go into a canyon about a mile long. Did you attend our traffic study meeting last night? No, I should've been there. I didn't know they had one last night. The same thing here if you could on the right of way. Just 55' put a right of way label right there so that is clear what that is. We will need to provide a note also on the plat limiting access to lots one, nine, seven and six to the interior streets. Seven and six incase the minor arterial is ever built out. I think the northwest road is a bad move on the city's part. Street names need to be approved by the 9-1-1 Coordinator. That is a standard comment. We do need a letter from the Department of Health for the septic systems. You should have it, I submitted it with the original submittal. All utilities shall be placed underground. There are no other staff comments because it is in the Planning area. Revisions are due on September 3rd by 10:00 a.m. On your county approval you have got inadequate, does that mean that it is not done yet? Yes. That is the letter we are talking about. I don't know if it just hasn't made it to our files, hasn't been routed to us yet but I haven't seen that. I submitted it on Friday. Utility comments please? Technical Plat August 27, 20 Page 6 Mike Phipps Review 03 — Ozark Electric Coop. Phipps: Milholland: Phipps: Milholland: Phipps: Milholland: Phipps: Milholland: Gibson: Milholland: Phipps: Gibson: Phipps: Milholland: Phipps: Milholland: Phipps: Milholland: Are they going to want front or rear service on this? All the lots are rear service. We would like to put underground service along you overhead to those six lots on the west side from that easement line, is that ok? Yes, you have got plenty of easement. Then along the east side of 1, 2, 3 and 4. I am assuming you will probably have to loop that. Yeah. We have got a 50' transmission line easement that if you are wanting to go 8 and 9 we will need an easement outside of that. You can't go underground with that? Yes, I can go underground but they can't locate anything in that easement like gas pedestals. Can they go across it with their services though? You can cross it but you can't run parallel with it. Is that how to get along this side right here? It doesn't matter to me. It would probably be easier on the west side or on the east side of 8 and 7 all the way until you hit the cul-de-sac there for the existing easement. Are you talking about an easement just on the west side of your easement? Yeah. How much will that need to be, just 10'? I would go with a 15' for general utility easement. You can go around the cul-de-sac. All the way to the south end or just for the cul-de-sac? All the way to the south end for 6, 7, and 8. That cul-de-sac may change a little bit as far as the center of it. Right now we think we have the right location but once we get the cross sections it Technical Plat Review August 27, 2003 Page 7 Phipps: Milholland: Phipps: Milholland: Phipps: Milholland: Phipps: Johns Boles — Boles: Larry Gibson Gibson: Milholland: Phipps: Gibson: Boles: Milholland: might move a little bit up, down or over. There is a little drop-off right here and we want to keep it out of there if we can. We will go ahead and give you 15' around it when it is placed. Ok. You have got a street light in the island at the entrance. On the east side of that we are going to need a 2" conduit to that street light. Can we put another 2" conduit with it to put a water line to irrigate that in the same trench? That would be up to the city. I would get about a foot of earth separation. Any relocation of these existing facilities will be at the developer's expense. Those transmission line poles through there are roughly between $15,000 and $20,000 a piece to move one of them. I hope you don't have to relocate those. We are. If you do, I don't know what you're getting into. We don't intend to. These are the locations you see here. That is why we put the street ending in a cul-de-sac to keep it out of there. That is all I have. Arkansas Western Gas I don't think I have any comment Mel. — Cox Communications That easement that he has asked for on the west side of that electric easement will be fine. Do any of you all need that quad conduit there? Yes, leave that there. I like that. Yes, I like it too. I am just saying until it gets down to it we don't know exactly how we're going to come through. We may have to come back to this east side and back. It is going to be fairly expensive Mel to pipe this due to the lengths. We can give 100' free per lot and this one lot is 350' across the back. Do you have to loop it? Technical Plat Review August 27, 2003 Page 8 Boles: Milholland: Boles: Milholland: Boles: No, I don't have to and probably won't for this amount. Do you have a line up here? I have a line on the north side of Gulley. Will you run one down to here and then one down this way? No, probably, this is a high pressure line over here so every time I tap it I have to have an above ground station so I'm probably not going to tap it twice. I am probably going to have to come back down. Milholland: Could you just tap it there and go down that way and come back down to the end and then come down this way? That is shorter than down here. You might have to go across the front of those two lots rather than in the back of them. Tap it right here or down there either one, go like this down to here and down to here. Boles: Milholland: Boles: Milholland: Boles: I can do that but that forces these services out front. You couldn't service them over here? Yeah I could. We prefer to have them off the street or at least 30' off the right of way or something like that. The right of way will be in the trees. I was just saying that front service would be a lot cheaper. We will put it in there however you want it. Milholland: We'll pay. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: Those easements and crossings are ok. That is all I have. Technical Plat Review August 27, 2003 Page 9 PPL 03-15.00: Preliminary Plat (Copper Ridge, pp 435) was submitted by Jorgensen and Associates on behalf of Charles Sloan of Sloan Properties, Inc. for property located south of Wedington Drive on Double Springs Road, north of the Owl Creek Subdivision. The property is zoned R-0, Residential Office and contains approximately 4.32 acres. The request is for a proposed residential subdivision containing 13 lots with 12 two family dwelling units (24 units total) proposed. Pate: The next item is a Preliminary Plat for Copper Ridge off of Double Springs Road. Just a basic comment, the Copper Ridge, Copper Creek thing and the street name is Cooper also. Those will need to be approved by the 9-1-1 Coordinator. The adjacent zoning needs shown also. All of the setbacks need to be labeled. Indicate a No Parking sign to be posted at the turn around. Place a barricade at the entrance of the detention pond. That can be the curb. Whatever sign you go with let's try to make sure this doesn't become a parking lot. Brackett: With it being adjacent to the pond that doesn't really help. Will curb be fine? Pate: The curb will be fine. An assessment for the cost to build the remainder of Copper Ridge Lane and we will come up with that before Subdivision Committee. City Code requires that street lights are placed every 300'. I noticed that you have one here and one here. Brackett: I think that is pretty close to 300'. Pate: If we could put one here right around 300' and another one closer to the end for 300'. That will be good lighting. Also, put a note on the plat indicate limited access for lots one and eight to the interior street. Any signage for the subdivision will need to be indicated. All proposed utilities need to be underground and any existing utilities under 12KV shall be relocated underground. We will need a waiver request for the length of the dead end street. We need 30 copies by the 3rd at 10:00 a.m. Matt? Matt Casey — Staff Engineer Casey: Chris, the assessment is going to be about $220 a foot so it is about $5,500. Let me clarify that at Subdivision for the exact amount. You can scratch number one at the top. On the detention pond, you've got a small trickle channel shown but we are looking for one through the center of the pond all the way through and that will be on all detention ponds. Brackett: The low point of the pond? Technical Plat August 27, 20 Page 10 Casey: Brackett: Casey: Brackett: Casey: Brackett: Casey: Brackett: Casey: Pate: Brackett: Pate: Review 03 We would like to have the bottom of the pond slightly sloped to the trickle channel and have it run right through the middle. That is the way I have it shown. I was a little bit worried about this ditch over here where the pond is discharging to. It is hard to tell from the plans if that is a very significant ditch. If you could provide a little bit of information downstream here. I am just worried about dumping that off. That is going right at that house and if that ditch is not big enough I don't want to shoot your water out to that person's house. I can show cross sections there. This street here also dumps into that and gets into the drainage for this subdivision. Also, the drainage report, the comment was there can not be an increase in flow to discharge point B. In your drainage map you had the area that is bypassing the pond and it was just a whole area and it wasn't divided into what was going to point A and point B so we couldn't really compare the pre and post. I had a pre and post analysis that showed a decrease going to B. We've got pre and post analysis but it does not include the bypass flow. I will get with you on that. That is all I have. This will be going to the Parks Board September 8`", which is another thing, we're not doing anymore of that so don't expect it. Ok. In the future it will have to go to Parks before we review the Plats. Craig Carnagey — Landscape Administrator Carnagey: Brackett: I just need you to show the tree preservation on the plat. I know you have got it on the subdivision plan but I don't see it on the plat. I can talk to you about this later but on the construction drawing it does need to show protection measures for that elm during construction. Did you get a copy of the grading plan? Carnagey: Yes, and I don't show any protective fencing around that elm on this one. Technical Plat Review August 27, 2003 Page 11 Brackett: I thought I showed it but if I didn't I will. Carnagey: And then there is payment into the tree fund in the amount of $1,575. That is all I have. Pate: There are some fire Marshall's office comments. It looks like most of it is ok. Here is one with a hammer head turn around. Hydrants should be a maximum of 500' apart. Utilities? Mike Phipps — Ozark Electric Coop. Phipps: Chris, I would like a quad conduit crossing that comes out this little drainage on lot four, four 4" there. I need a 10' UE for those street lights wherever you decide to locate them. When this comes back is this going to be 1A, 1B, 2A and 2B? Brackett: Yes, these are all duplex. Every lot is going to have a duplex on it. Phipps: We'll probably do like we did at Legacy and put the meter for each of these duplexes at the center of each lot so they are not crossing the other to get to it. The transformers are probably located on the lot lines there. The service connections will be centered like we did in Legacy. That is all I have. Johns Boles — Arkansas Western Gas Boles: No comment. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: Your easements and crossings look good. Do notify Cox Communications when they break ground on this project. Not after they get the homes built but when they break ground. Pate: I just have one additional comment. Please add the rear setbacks to the plat. Brackett: Thank you. Technical Plat Review August 27, 2003 Page 12 LSD 03-32.00: Large Scale Development (The Crowne, pp 598) was submitted by Crafton, Tull and Associates on behalf of LEC Properties for property located on the southeast corner of 15th street and Beechwood Avenue. The property is zoned RMF -24, Residential Multi -family, 24 units per acre and contains approximately 32.3 acres. The request is to build an apartment complex with 444 dwelling units proposed. Pate: The next item is the Large Scale Development for the Crowne. I am not going to go over all of these. A couple of things that you could do, on these blow up sheets, if somewhere you have room to show a small site shaded so that the commissioners will have a better idea of which section it is. Add plat page 598. We will need to look at the proposed trail. I understand you are meeting with Parks after this meeting. A lot of comments that I have and that they have will be nailed down in that meeting. I would like to see some additional connections to that proposed trail. Right now you have a connection on this sidewalk coming through your development. Trash compactors, I just have a question. Travis Dotson has made a comment. The Solid Waste and Recycling Division requests specs on the trash compactors to make sure all equipment the complex will be purchasing and using will be compatible with our equipment for refuse removal. They also have a compactor lease/purchase program available. Kelso: They use these things on their sites all over the country so we will make sure he gets that information. Pate: They will need screening as well. A question on your vicinity map, it doesn't look like the site extends all the way to Razorback, does it? Kelso: It touches it right here which is not really a big deal on this but yes, it does touch Razorback. Pate: Parks is concerned because on this it shows that it is not. They thought that basically the last time they seen it at Parks it did. Kelso: It does. Here is the right of way right here. Pate: If you could label that right of way on the site plan. It is on the grading plan but on the site plan as well. I assume the right of way has already been dedicated. Kelso: I thought that was done with the Lot Split but if it wasn't we will dedicate it. Pate: I just wanted to make sure. You don't have a lot of room here to show Razorback. If there is any way we can get some more information shown Technical Plat Review August 27, 2003 Page 13 Kelso: on the plat with where centerline is it would be nice to see. That will be 55' from centerline. It is just that piece right there though. Actually, this is the piece right here that we dedicated and we don't own this property anymore. This is the property we own right here, this little chunk right here. I think there is sufficient right of way right there but I will get as much as I can shown on there. Pate: I know that you are working on a revised traffic study. Kelso: Yes, we will submit that with the revisions. Pate: We will need to see that. We are also reviewing the necessity to provide an assessment for the Razorback Road intersection signal. Whether at this time it is determined it is needed right now or in the future this development is for sure going to have an impact on that. Kelso: I agree. I think it will have an impact. I don't think it will be shown that it will be needed. In fact, that is what the other study showed that it was not needed at this time with this development. When the overall thing develops out but probably not now. Pate: Just so you know there may be an assessment for that. Kelso: Sure, I think they are expecting that. Pate: In several places the parking exceeds the number of 12 allowed by ordinance for interior islands. I marked them by counting them. There are several places that happened, just make sure you count them for an interior island every 12 spaces. I know we talked about backing up some traffic at preliminary review. Kelso: Right, which is what we did what we did. Pate: Kelso: Which, I think is a good solution to that. I kind of have the same question over here. Obviously this isn't developing yet but this will probably become a main access to your commercial here, which on your master plan shows what it is. There is an interior island here. We are just worried about people backing out onto that from the commercial. What we may need to do is just do a separate commercial drive when this is done and then have this just as a separate deal. Right now this is two way traffic and so we will just have this do the same thing here if that is what has to happen. Technical Plat Review August 27, 2003 Page 14 Pate: I was just curious about if there was some way we can work out. Obviously, this can't be one way here, this has to be two way. Kelso: Maybe in the future this could be one way but you would want it two way right now. Pate: Yeah, that would change the island if you made it one way again. Kelso: I think it is something that can be worked out when this commercial is done that there would be a through street right here with no parking on it. I think that may be what they will be looking for. At this time I think this is all we can do. Pate: Kelso: Pate: Kelso: I think the concern is when this develops more this is going to serve more traffic so this through street connection is more important. Once this commercial gets going that is going to be pretty heavily traveled. Just to let you know up front that we are looking at that. If you come up with anymore alternatives let us know. Any floodplain development will require a floodplain development permit in addition to grading and drainage. I know the Parks had concern and we have concern about this structure specifically. It is in the floodplain and I think they are requiring 30' north of the floodplain to be dedicated as the trail. They may be able to work around that. Yes, we talked about that one in depth because we knew that one was closer than we originally took the thing through. What we got is what we got. That was the one particular structure that they are concerned about. It was agreed that we will just have to work around that one. The number of bike racks at each symbol. You have the overall number but if you could just include the number that each symbol represents, right now it is just a square on a piece of paper, I'm not sure how many there are. Any lighting needs to be shielded and directed downward away from adjoining properties. An easement plat needs to be filed at the time of final approval and indicate and label all signs. Any proposed utilities need to be underground. The street you are proposing needs to be approved by the 9-1-1 Coordinator. I know the Fire Department, Captain Farrar came over and basically they have full coverage on all of these structures but they don't really here. That is what they are worried about. They can't require it but Captain Farrar has stated that it would be beneficial to them if they could get into this. I don't know if this is going to be sodded. It will all be sodded. I don't know if we could make this wider so they could get through there. There is that handicapped ramp but there may be something that they could go in between or something like that. We may be able to do something right there. Technical Plat Review August 27, 2003 Page 15 Pate: I think he is just worried about accessing through the middle here. That is not a requirement, just a comment that he made. Kelso: Ok. Pate: The Commissioners will probably have questions about you master plan. Those are all the comments that I have. Matt? Matt Casey — Staff Engineer Casey: I've got a few. Your water line here you've got stubbed out here. That would be on a dead end line. We need to have that looped for this size of a project. Kelso: I know we have talked about that a little bit. Casey: If you could extend that up a little bit and then cross under. That is a public line I think. You might come down here and then with a "T" stub out for your future development and then on the other side of your "T" come across the road. Kelso: Kind of like the fire hydrant right there and then connect however? Casey: Yes. Also, we would like to see a trickle channel through the entire length of the pond. Kelso: Yeah, I know you all have been requiring that now. We tried to put a 1% slope on it but if that is required that is required, that is fine. Casey: Also, the outfall pipes from the pond, if you could shorten them, first my comment was to take it out of the floodway all together but I didn't think that trail was actually going to be constructed with this project but if we could shorten it up that way it is just on the downstream side of that trail. I am worried about the waters getting up and that pipe being submerged, we have actually seen that happen in some recent developments and it has been discharging right into the floodway. Also, if you could extend the sidewalk at that radius at Beechwood and 18th for the length that you are improving. Also, to be consistent with other recent developments, the sidewalk you show across the existing box culvert we need to maintain the required greenspace through there so we will require that that box be extended to accommodate that. I didn't check with the Sidewalk Administrator before I made that comment but I know it has been a requirement in the past. On the east side, if you could stub the sewer line up for future connection for that commercial area. Right now three is no way to serve that with sewer right now. There is one out here in the street Technical Plat Review August 27, 2003 Page 16 but the way the land is falling it should be stubbed out. Have you already gone that far with your master plan as far as sewer layouts? Kelso: I really haven't. I have no idea. Casey: If you can extend the easement to where that will be added later. Kelso: I think it would be more beneficial to go ahead and stub it out. Casey: Any new manholes constructed in the floodplain need to be above the 100 - year water surface elevation. On the grading and drainage plan the floodplain that was shown, the elevation for the floodplain didn't match what we show on our website. Kelso: He may have just wrote it down wrong. Casey: You might verify that. Right here the floodplain stops for some reason. The floodway actually is shown all the way up here. That needs to extend. When this comes through we might have to complete this study all the way for the extent of the property. It will only be that much but that will have to be extended through your property and if you will show the base flood elevations on this portion as well. That is all I have. I will get you those as builts. Kelso: That will be good because right now it is showing them in no man's land. Is it about in that area though? Casey: Yes. Kelso: Ok. Pate: Craig? Craig Carnagey — Landscape Administrator Carnagey: Jerry, I am going to need you to submit the full size site analysis sheet with predominant tree species identified for the canopy, even if it is just one or two, whatever is predominant in that area so I can take a look at it. Kelso: I was trying to get away from all these sheets. Carnagey: I know, I think the Planning Commission is going to want to take a look at the full size sheet as well. Also, on your tree preservation plan in the legend you show fencing but I don't see that on the drawing so I need that shown on the drawing and the grading sheet as well. On the mitigation trees, I am going to require that you plant all 27 on site. I know you put Technical Plat Review August 27, 2003 Page 17 here for a 20% reduction but I think you have got plenty of room to plant all of your mitigation trees on site. Kelso: They will probably plant more than that. Carnagey: In addition, I need you to identify the species that you are going to use for mitigation. We are going to try to make it compatible with what is down there. That is another reason to get that site analysis sheet with the predominant species. Kelso: As you know, we're working with Melissa on that. I don't know if she has called you. Carnagey: I haven't talked with her about this project. Kelso: I didn't know if you knew. Carnagey: We will definitely get a species list from her then I think that is it as far as tree preservation and then just to reiterate what Jeremy said on the landscape plan with the banked parking. It looks like there are some areas that you need to add some trees within the parking as well. There are some islands that are missing trees and some edges that are missing trees. I have got them identified if you need to talk to me about it. Kelso: Let me take a look at it and see. Pate: Rebecca, do you want to go over your stuff? Ohman: We're going to meet after this meeting. Pate: The Fire Marshal's comments are in the back of the packet and you can call Captain Farrar if you have any questions. The fire hydrant shall be relocated within 100' of the fire department connection. Access is not shown for the club house side of the complex. There are two club houses, that is probably what he's talking about. The fire apparatus access road shall comply with the requirements of §5034.1 and shall extend to within 150' of all portions of the facility or any portion of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building. If you would, just coordinate those with Captain Farrar. Casey: Talking with Paul Libertini, who is working on our traffic study. Apparently when the new Master Street Plan and everything is adopted our cross section and our street sections are going to change. He asked if you all would consider widening these street improvements, I think it calls for 38' but if the answer is no it will need to be 36' but the new street is Technical Plat Review August 27, 2003 Page 18 going to call for a 42'. If you have got room to do it it might be something we can look at together. Kelso: What about widening that box culvert more? Casey: We can look at that. Kelso: We will just have to look at it and see. Casey: That is just a request, that is not a requirement. If the answer is no then that does need to be 36' instead of 38' to match our current standards. Kelso: Ok. Pate: Utilities? Jim Sargent — American Electric Power Sargent: I am not the engineer on this but he would like to meet with you all. Kelso: Typically with these big projects like this the best bet is for us just to meet individually with utilities or I will send you our plan via electronic format and then you all just put your layout on there and we will do the easements, just like we do these other apaitment projects even though this isn't a Lindsey one. Our best way to do it is just send you electronic drawings and then you do the layouts, we'll dedicate the easements on that. Gibson: That is what we were going to request is just to have a meeting with all of us and in the mean time, Jerry, could we get a print showing this whole thing, it doesn't have to be a big scale, just including the utility easements and streets built with parking lots without all the water lines. Kelso: Either that or I can just send you an electronic drawing. Gibson: If you want to just print something out when we have that meeting we can get them then. If you will just give me a couple days notice if I don't have another plat meeting I can meet with you. Kelso: I was planning on doing it last week but I was on vacation so I couldn't do it. Gibson: That is the best way, I agree with you. Kelso: We'll just do it that way. Technical Plat Review August 27, 2003 Page 19 Pate: September 3rd is your revision date, 30 copies. Kelso: It is going to be a different type of project in Fayetteville as far as different types of buildings and things like that. Pate: Is your client willing to supply elevations for this do you know? Kelso: If he has got them ready I think possibly. Pate: I know it is not a requirement for residential projects at this time but I know that with a project of this size Commissioners are going to be interested in what is going on out there. I know we have seen some photos of other projects by this same developer and they have looked decent so just to let you know that. Kelso: Ok.