HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-10-15 - MinutesTech Plat Review Notes October 15, 2003
PLEASE NOTE, THE AUDIO TAPE OF THIS MEETING IS INAUDIBLE AND
THESE NOTES TAKEN DURING THE MEETING WILL SUBSTITUTE FOR
FORMAL MINUTES OF THE TECHNICAL PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE
FOR OCTOBER 15, 2003.
Renee Thomas, Senior Secretary
Provide documentation that Mr. Rownak can sign for Bridgewater, LLC. Also, the parcel
numbers.
Jorgensen: You mean the parcel numbers that make up this project.
Pate: Those comments come also from the Preliminary Plat.
Pate: You need to show all right of way dedication fro streets.
Again, on lot 13 if that abuts Bridgewater Estates. Of course the Final Plat needs to show
the surveyor's seal and signature. Page 2 states You are showing a50' setback. Do you
have any knowledge of why that was not changed to 35'? I am just curious, it was a
condition of approval.
Jorgensen: We can make it 35' but we thought it would be better to make it more.
Pate: 35' is fine. Signature blocks need to be corrected. I have attached the specific
wording for that. Final inspection does need to occur prior to the revision deadline.
Casey: As Jeremy said, we need the final inspection before the deadline.
Clouser: Are we going on the rear easements here Dave or the front or a
combination?
Phipps: What I talked to Mr. Rownak about was a 20' easement on the lot line of
12 and 14 to get us back to lot 13
At the entrance off of Bridgewater, I know I talked to Chris, we have an existing power
pole just to the south of Bridgewater there is a private drive going to the south we have
got a power pole there that we need to access. Cable TV and phone. We need three
conduits over to that pole.
Jorgensen: Is this guy on the west side of the street coming in?
Phipps: Johney has got a meter on the east side of that new street going south.
Boles: I believe my existing line is on the north side of Bridgewater and to the south side
and then continues to the east.
Phipps: You've got a meter right here.
Boles: It is on the south side, my line ends right down here somewhere. It ends at that
last meter and I've got to tie on there crossing east to get a service for the existing house.
Frank Kelly's old house.
Phipps: We need another crossing at the entrance but it is up here on the southeast
corner of lot 12 over to lot 11 straight across there. We are going to go back service on
lots 1 through 11. We will stay in the rear through there. Of course you have got a quad
shown at the entrance off of Gulley Road. Is this pond going to stay up here off 28 and
29?
Jorgensen: Yes.
Phipps: What is that between 23 and 24?
Jorgensen: That common area is just kind of a place to get together and ride your
horses or something.
Gibson: That comes down between the two lots there in the front, is that going to
be a street?
Jorgensen: It is going to be a riding trail, you can put your utilities in there if you
want.
Clouser: I would like to add that any relocation will be at the owner/developer's
expense and to let us know when you start braking ground.
Jorgensen: It is broken.
Clouser: Make sure the conduits extend beyond the sidewalks if there are
sidewalks.
Gibson: I agree with Mike's comments.
Boles: Dave, I met with Mr. Rownak. I am on the south side of the road and crossing to
the property lines on the north. All of those crossings will need to be 2" for my service
crossings.
Jorgensen: Just to cover ourselves we went ahead and had the contractor put quads in.
Boles: My service is down here at the entrance of Maywood and Gulley Road. My
intentions were to use that for service but they poured concrete all around my pipe so I
am going to have to do something different. I may be able to go back to the west edge of
Gulley Road. That's all I have.
Pate: Just a couple of comments, those common spaces that you have noted, if you
could number each one of those as a lot within the subdivision and also include a note on
the plat kind of describing that and restricting development from those lots.
Jorgensen: Ok.
Pate: Include a note limiting access from lot 1, 26 and 29 from Maywood Road.
Revisions are due October 22at 10:00 a.m. Thank you Sir.
Jorgensen: Thank you.
Pate: Preliminary Plat for Salem Meadows submitted by Leonard Gabbard of Landtech
Engineering. Suzanne will go over this one.
You have reviewed this previously as a Preliminary Plat. There have been several
changes that have caused this to come back as a Preliminary Plat again. I am sorry it
happened, I want to make it right with the city here. We have a detention pond moved
into a wetland area and did get permits from the Corp. for that. W also lengthened the
cul-de-sac to more than 500' minimum. The developer has bought acres to the north tat
he will be bringing in to be annexed and brought in as a subdivision. That would line up
real well to help them go further to that north property and we would like to respectfully
request that you accept that as a revision on this plat. We also went through Rebecca
with the parks and Recreation and they voted to accept this with a combination of money
and land I would also like to ask that we continue that we would have the Preliminary
Plat heard at the Planning Commission on November 10`h. What I would like to do is try
to submit the Final Plat next Monday to continue in that cycle to be heard on November
10`h and then follow it with the Final Plat on November 24th
Morgan:
Casey:
Ohman:
Carnagey:
Boles:
Gabbard: We put the crossings in that were previously requested. I hope that is ok.
Gibson: The only thing I can see different is when you were here two or three
weeks ago they tabled it and said there were going to be changes. I asked them to put the
crossings for the main entrance on the west side so we can work with that. Just the two
there on the entrance coming off of Salem.
They are shown east of that drainage, I don't know if in fact they are installed.
Gabbard: If they are east of it they on the west side.
Gibson: We need six 4" on 55 and 56 crossing that stub out going to the north.
Gabbard: Ok.
Gibson: That's all I have.
Phipps: On these street lights, we will need a 10' easement on lots 41 and 42 to
access that light, 17 and 18, 35 and 36 I want to move that light over to the other side of
the cul-de-sac to be a little easier to get to it from 35 and 36 with a 10' UE there. You
may need one between the light on 41 and 42 and the end of that cul-de-sac, looking at
that it would look better on the street if it was between the 29 and 30 with a 10'UE. 82
and 81 and where we have this drainage along Salem we have a min overhead three phase
power line that the drainage is just right against that. How much room do we have? We
have a 25' setback and UE. I don't think there is enough room to get our utilities in that.
I am thinking of serving lots 81 to 86 from the front on Haywood Drive. You want a 20'
UE between 81 and 82
Boles: If we did that then 83 through 86 would be in the front is that correct?
Phipps: I'm just trying to get back to the pole, I've got to loop it back through .
Gabbard; What you are saying is you would prefer to have your meters for that
particular lot in the front fro that transformer.
Phipps: We will use our pedestals in the rear throughout the subdivision. Anytime
we have to go in front we don't use those pedestals. Lots 81 through 86 will be a meter
on the house.
Gabbard: For service poles to do construction they would have to actually set a
service or and do it the old way?
Phipps: Yes. Everything else should be at the rear of the lots. I guess that's all the
street lights I had. I will need a disk of this too. I can work with this too because I know
where I requested the easements and the crossings. It looks like what you already
emailed hasn't changed from this. They haven't cut this street in from the north yet have
they?
Gabbard: No, I have a question for Matt Casey on that.
Boles: Leonard, if we take that route between 81 and 82 I will request rear services for
81 and 82 and then 83 and 86 will be in the front.
Phipps: there may be enough room for you to go rear all the way through there.
Clouser: Did anyone request moving that quad on Grouch Road down in the left
hand corner, probably move that up in the utility easement. It is down at the northwest
end there.
Phipps: that is fine with me
Clouser: Wee need that moved up into the utility easement and are you all going to
ask for a crossing up here where they haven't built that street yet?
Gibson; yes.
Clouser: Any relocation will be at the owner/developer's expense.
Morgan: There are also fire comments. Revisions are due on October 22nd at 10:00
a.m.
Gabbard: On the revision to the street location there on the north side do you want
me to just submit a proposal for that for you to review?
Casey: Revise the profile as well as the plan sheet on that.
Morgan: Thank you.
Pate: Item five on the agenda is a Large Sale Development for Smokey bones
Restaurant submitted by CEI Engineering for property located at lot 17 of Steele
Crossing.
Clouser: Is the utility easement along the front of the property indicated on the
drawing?
Koch: It should be.
Clouser: Is that the dark black line?
Koch: It should extend down the entire length of Van Asche Drive.
Clouser: You do have the conduit for the telephone indicated and that needs to be
extended into the easement from the building Do you know if they are going to want it
on the inside or the outside of the building? If there is any relocation of existing facilities
it will be at the owner/developer's expense.
Koch: I gave you a check the other day.
Sargent: I haven't seen it yet. I understand it is there. We will need to get some
conduits from that pad to the transformer location. I guess you will be coordinating the
conduit down from this to the Red Robin property.
Koch: Anything that is going to take place on the Red Robin lot or between us since they
are ahead of us, I think they are going to be taking care of that storm pipe so maybe they
can provide the conduits.
Sargent: Ok, that's all I have got.
Gibson: Jim, is your transformer going to be on the northeastern property line?
These conduits are fine, just extend them out. That's all I have.
Boles: James, you are showing a gas line and a gas meter on the Olive Garden property
when in fact it does not it goes right next to the transformer that someone has contacted
Jim to move. You are going to have a conflict with that when the street is constructed
and I still have not seen any notification from anyone as of yet. I met with Sweetser tow
or three times.
Koch: They may be waiting for that cabinet to be moved.
Boles: My fear is when that cabinet is moved then we are going to have construction on
that street and then I am going to have to ask you to wait several weeks.
Koch; What we are trying to do is just tie into the existing parking lot of the Olive
Garden an. We had to shut down their one entrance there and we are just going to put it
back to the eastern lot line. Previously I think the access for the Olive Garden was
misrepresented in some drawings done by others. The shared access drive was
improperly displayed and planned for at some point in time in the past. There's not other
conflict with that boundary other than gas or electric?
Gibson: That's where we service the Olive Garden from.
Koch: Ok, so all utilities are in conflict. All relocation and expense is from the
developer?
Boles: Yes. That is correct. That's all I have.
Morgan: There are also comments from Fire in your packet. Revisions are due
October 22nd at 10:00 a.m. and I would just like to remind you again about the Property
Line Adjustment.
Koch: That is kind of a long shot for me to pursue. The reason I'm having to pursue that
is because this lot has had 3 lot splits filed. This is kind of the last thing I could come up
with to expose. Is there some variance or other mechanism that you are aware of at the
present time that might allow to continue?
Morgan: Without the property line adjustment I don't see any way.
Koch: It just seems redundant when there is Preliminary Plat already approved at the
Planning Commission when we are fixing to be starting construction on the road. I am
asking for any insight that you have got on that. Please feel free to call me after the
meeting with that.
Morgan: Ok.
Pate: Item number six on the agenda is a Residential Planned Zoning District.
Clouser: Who is going to own the property surrounding the buildings?
Rudasill: It will be the P.O.A.
Clouser: So if we were going to run our lines to the buildings then we are not really
crossing private property/
Rudasill: You are crossing common property. There is an existing easement along
the rear of these lots. That can be served along the rear of those. 21 through 27 and 19
and 20 to the west of the cul-de-sac, currently there is an easement to the front of the.
Preferably the front I would say, 19 and 20 can be served in the front.
Clouser: That 25' setback and UE, you have it labeled down below but between 19
and 20 should be an easement. I am going to need a crossing to get to those.
Boles: Everybody is probably gong to want to go on the front to be put underground. I
was planning on serving the front lot going off that corner pole and going front lots
around and making a loop out of that, we have an existing pole on the south side. I was
going to stay front lot and stay in the utility easement to get down the sides, it would be
better for us to stay front lot.
Gibson: All of that overhead that crosses this property is going to be required to be
underground?
Berstrom: By the ordinance it has to be. We have an overhead line here and here. It is a
single phase line.
Berstrom: We'll have to clear some room to dig. We have an existing overhead line
that runs along here. We'll have to bury this overhead line here, here, here and here.
Gibson: It is going to damage the trees.
Carnagey: This is existing utility easement, we don't have anything to stop that.
Rudasill: It is basically in an area that is going to be preserved Primarily what I'm
talking about is between 43 and 44 and 43 and 42.
Carnagey: I don't know how the ordinance addresses that.
Berstrom: We can serve a lot of this with overhead distribution over there. That is all
going to have to be put underground. It feeds all of these houses up the hillside.
Gibson: We can go rear or front either one but I'd rather go front. If that overhead
has to be relocated we will have to make arrangements. Anything that we have to
relocate we will have to charge for.
Clouser: Any existing southwestern bell facilities being relocated will be at the
owner's expense. We will provide units 5 and 6 in that area with that.
Rudasill: it should be ok.
Berstrom: Setbacks along 7, 8, 9, 13 and 14 I would like to see as utility easement.
WE can probably reduce that easement in the back to accommodate the front. I would
like to see a 10'UE between 17 and 18 so I can serve building 19 and 20 from the rear. I
also need a 4" conduit between 23 and 24 and 25 and 26 crossing the road, make them
quads. Another one between units 9 and 10 to 17 and 18. If I can get one just across
there that would be great. Any relocation will be at the owner's expense. The
overhead/underground conversion is at the cost of the developer for the existing overhead
line to be dug across. We have to feed that upper hillside.
Pate: I was looking at our ordinance
LSP -20' UE on the east property line on the west side of the right of way
Phipps: any relocation will be at the owner's expense. That's all I have.
Morgan: There is just a comment from the Fire Marshall that access and water are
unknown. Revisions are due on October 22'd at 10:00 a.m.
Meeting adjourned 11:03 a.m.
