Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-10-29 - MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE TECHNICAL PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE A regular meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee was held on Wednesday, October 29, 2003 at 9:00 a.m. in room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ACTION TAKEN LSD 03-40.00: Large Scale Development (Water & Sewer Operations, pp 321) Forwarded Page 2 LSD 03-41.00: Large Scale Development (Bank of Fayetteville West, pp 40 1) Forwarded Page 8 PPL 03-19.00: Preliminary Plat (Wildflower Meadows, pp 321) Forwarded Page 12 PPL 03-20.00: Preliminary Plat (Salem Heights, pp 284) Forwarded Page 18 FPL 03-12.00: Final Plat (Ash Acres, pp 367) Forwarded Page 24 Members Present Johney Boles, Arkansas Western Gas Mike Phipps, Ozark Electric Coop. Larry Gibson, Cox Communications Staff Present Jeremy Pate Suzanne Morgan Matt Casey Craig Camagey Rebecca Ohman Members Absent Sue Clouser, SBC Jim Sargent, AEP/SWEPCO Staff Absent Perry Franklin, Transportation Travis Dotson, Solid Waste Danny Farrar, Fire Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 2 LSD 03-40.00: Large Scale Development (Water & Sewer Operations, pp 321) was submitted by Mandy Bunch of EB Landworks on behalf of the City of Fayetteville for property located at the end of Industrial Drive in the Fayetteville Industrial Park. The property is zoned I-2, General Industrial, and contains approximately 45.74 acres. The proposal is to construct a new Operations Center for the City of Fayetteville Water & Sewer Division with a 22,500 sq.ft. office and warehouse, a 6,000 sq.ft. storage facility, an 1,800 sq.ft. vehicle storage area and parking areas. Pate: We are going to go ahead and start the meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee for Wednesday, October 29, 2003. The first two items are Property Line Adjustments that won't be discussed at this meeting. We will go ahead and move on to item number three, Large Scale Development for the Water and Sewer Operations Center submitted by Mandy Bunch on behalf of the City of Fayetteville. Bunch: I'm Mandy Bunch, the Project Engineer and this is Thad Kelly, the Architect. Morgan: The first comment is on some of the notations, some of the words are blotched and there is big and small font so if you could clear that up so it is easier to read. The same with easements. We are requesting that prior to Subdivision Committee that you submit building elevations on a mounted board along with a material sample board. Bunch: I have a question about that. It has been kind of a point of contention the whole time. This is Industrial and it is not generally required. Is there some reason that since it is the city's project the city is being mean to itself? Is there some precedent that they have to have that? Kelly: We did submit the material board, just a small little board and then the elevations are there, they're just not mounted. Is there a reason this is contrary to city requirements? Pate: Not that I'm aware of I think at our meeting early on we discussed whether elevations would need to be submitted. Bunch: I know Sharon had several conversations with you guys. Pate: We can talk about that and see if it falls into that. Obviously, we have the smaller ones. If it is determined to meet Commercial Design Standards we will need the board. If it is determined it doesn't need to meet Commercial Design Standards it won't. We are reviewing it right now like it does but if it is determined that it does not need to then you are right, you will not need to submit a board. We will let you know that just as soon as we find out ourselves. Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 3 Morgan: The adjacent zoning on the west is I-2 I believe. The vicinity map needs to include street names. The building setback for the east, you have it set along what is currently the existing property line. That needs to be moved. Bunch: That is coming up from the survey. The property line adjustment was done after the survey and I think the drawings got mixed up. Morgan: Also, the project information block shows that the proposed use is a warehouse with office space, I don't know if we need to add the water and sewer operations? Bunch: That's what that is. The majority of the space is warehouse so that's why I listed it that way. Morgan: Ok, if you could indicate right of way on Industrial. Dimension the cul- de-sac radius and I believe a street light is required on the cul-de-sac. Kelly: It's existing. Bunch: I don't think there is a light out there. Kelly: There's not a light but it is an existing cul-de-sac. Morgan: I'll check on that. Compliance with Commercial Design Standards, I included an excerpt for Commercial Design Standards. Please disregard the requirements for a waiver on page four because it isn't needed. If we could get an elevation of the proposed monument sign and finally, trash service needs to be an enclosed area. Bunch: We talked about that in our meeting we had before. Evergreens and hollies in those areas to kind of screen that barbed wire from the front view. Pate: Do you have that called out? Bunch: No, I can add it to the site plan. It is shown on the Planning plan right now. Pate: I think it would be good to at least call it out what type of screen and what type of fence is there. Bunch: Yes, because they do have barbed wire on top and I knew it wasn't meeting that. Morgan: Those are all of the Planning comments. Engineering? Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 4 Matt Casey — Staff Eneineer Casey: Mandy, I just had a few comments. First, the easements are going to be required 10' on each side of every water and sewer main, even if they are existing. There are not any shown for the proposed. On the Property Line Adjustment plans submitted there are some utilities shown south of this site. Bunch: Do you have a copy of that drawing that I can have? Pate: Here is one but it hasn't been revised. Bunch: We need to make sure all the easements are taken care of? Casey: Yes, they are city owned but still put an easement around them. The water line doesn't show up here on Industrial Drive. You are showing a valve and a hydrant. We need to show the lines. On our GIS site it shows what all is there. There is a cross, there is a valve and hydrant on one end, a valve and a plug on the other and then there is a stubout to the valve to the east crossing Industrial Drive. The sewer lines, the manholes that you are connecting to for service actually extends to the east. I was curious, the water meters show last service tap by the City of Fayetteville. Is that something that Iurgens wanted to do himself? Bunch: I don't think he said he wanted to do that. I think all of that is going to get pulled out of his actually doing anything. Casey: Take off by City of Fayetteville. The lines going to the rear of the building for the fire hydrant needs to be 8" unless you want to loop them and then they can be 6". Bunch: Ok. Casey: Concrete trickle channel through the pond. The bottom needs to be sloped to the channel. Ponds need to be sodded and need to include the 100 -year water surface elevation. Also, we need to include a floodplain reference on the grading plan. Carnagey: I just need a tree preservation system detail on the preservation plan. On the landscape plan south of the facility there is a lot of parking that exceeds 12 spaces so we need to correct that. It is that south corner, you've got 13. Bunch: Ok. Rebecca Ohman — Parks Planner Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 5 Ohman: Mandy, Steve Hatfield has been in contact regarding the Arkansas Missouri Railroad to the north of the property, that is on the Trails Master Plan. I know you've worked with staff regarding emergency exits to that side. I would just ask that you get into contact with Steve Hatfield about access to that future trail. He is out of the office until next Monday. Bunch: The last I remember I had sent him some drawings and I hadn't heard from him. Ohman: Ok. Bunch: That's where we are right now. Morgan: Utilities? Mike Phipps — Ozark Electric Coop. Phipps: I believe this is AEP service area. I will check on it today but if not, I'll give you a call. I think it is AEP. Gibson: I am almost positive that there is an AEP pole sitting right there on the corner that services this. Johney Boles — Arkansas Western Gas Boles: Mandy, I really need this 25' easement over here shifted outside that gas easement please. Bunch: 35' in Johney? Yes. Are you sure it's not 60'? I think that's your entire easement there. Boles: Yes, but you are showing a 25' utility easement and building setback within that easement are you not? Bunch: No Sir, I think he just labeled yours. That's your easement, I don't have another easement shown there. That's something that the surveyor has got labeled based on where the property line was. Boles: I just wanted to make sure that there are not any other utilities installed within that area. Bunch: What about up by the road? Do I need to move that water line to the other side of that driveway? Boles: That would be great. They are real particular with the transmission lines. Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 6 Bunch: Ok. Boles: That's all I have, thank you. Bunch: How about services coming off that line? Can service come off of that line? Boles: Sure. Bunch: Would there need to be a regulator or anything in there? Boles: It will just be a standard high pressure tap. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: Mandy, the property between this property and the Marshalltown Tool Company, right there in the corner, there are several trees right down through here and I know we can't come in here. I would like to ask for just south of that tree line if we could get a 20' general utility easement that runs east and west there is a trail going through there already and there are no trees in it. I'm right there, that's the closest thing I have. I think electric may have the same issue. I think they have a three phase right there that feeds that tool company. I will almost bet you that is where they are coming from too. Just kind of come from that pole and go south, south of those trees and then come down and meet this other one or something like that. Whatever works out best for you. Bunch: What about when we get past this point? Do you want me to trail Johney's gas easement? Gibson: Yes, we will need something to get to this point. We can cross it, they just don't want us running parallel in their easement. You may look at that. That's the reason I'm saying you may want to shift that out here to the east, they don't mind if people cross it. That's all I have. Morgan: Comments from fire are included in your packets. Bunch: It says the access road for fire hydrants should be 26' wide. Pate: That is the same comment coming forward. I have been told by the Fire Department that that is a recommendation. The 20' clear is a standard requirement though. Bunch: We've got 24'. Pate: On the other side as well? Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 7 Bunch: Yes. Morgan: Revisions are due November 5"' at 10:00 a.m. Bunch: Thank you. Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 8 LSD 03-41.00: Large Scale Development (Bank of Fayetteville West, pp 401) was submitted by Mandy Bunch of EB Landworks on behalf of the Bank of Fayetteville for property located between Steamboat Drive and Tahoe Place on Wedington Drive. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial and contains approximately 1.14 acres. The proposal is to construct a 3,740 sq. ft. branch bank. Pate: Item four is a Large Scale Development for the Bank of Fayetteville West. This is definitely a commercial structure so we will need building elevations mounted on a board, a 2406 maximum and a materials sample board as well. Any signage proposed needs to be reflected in the elevations and must meet all of our standards. I know we talked a little bit about this right of way and centerline constructed verses the other centerline. This Large Scale was approved back in 1999. They were indicating the correct rights of way. We will need to see the minimum 55' from centerline on Hwy. 16. I believe the other ones are fine. You have plenty because they only require 25'. Here it shows 47.5' and over here 46. Bunch: On the day we met about this we pulled out the maps and it said you've got 50 whatever. The previous dedication was actually 4.05' on one corner and 4. whatever on the other corner. Pate: Whatever it is to meet that 55'. I spoke with the land agents about this to see if it was maybe potentially already there, maybe the centerline wasn't constructed in the middle of the right of way but according to the records, we don't have that 55' so we will need 55' from centerline called out. Bunch: Even with the 5'? Pate: I'm assuming this 46' here and 47.5' here is the existing right of way. Bunch: I think I have got an issue with the survey. We need to take care of that this morning because the site is not possible with anymore right of way on it. It is tight. It has streets on three sides and in the Overlay District. Casey: Any lesser dedication of right of way will have to be approved by the City Council. Pate: Just to let you know that Matt is correct. Bunch: I know and that's why we talked about it before. I thought it was going to be easy and the survey kind of messed me up. We'll see. Pate: Indicate any easements that are required. The Design Overlay District, as you very well know, requires 250' from intersection to curb cut and this doesn't meet that. If you could provide a letter to me requesting a waiver Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 9 from that so we'll have that in the file. I believe there is one with the old submittal but we are just treating this as a new project. That will take into consideration also this northern property. There was a lot of discussion when the last one went through. There was a lot of discussion because there is a platted curb cut. I don't think it's there and that doesn't meet standards either but obviously, this has to have a curb cut here to have access because it is not allowed to have one on Hwy. 16. Just get me a letter. Although you don't meet the parking lot requirements to provide a bike rack, staff is going to recommend that you provide at least one. In the Design Overlay District multi -mobile transportation is a requirement so that will help with that. Parking lot lighting needs to comply with Overlay District requirements as well, 35' maximum height, sodium lighting pointed downward away from adjacent properties. Bunch: Did you see where they wanted to use metal halide and I had the waiver letter? Pate: Yes. Bunch: I think they are going to go with shorter poles, it is my understanding that they are going to be on 25' poles so they will be short poles. Pate: I think you have that in your letter as well, the 25'. That will just be another waiver. This will have to go to the full Planning Commission. Some other standard comments, trash service needs to be coordinated with the Solid Waste and Recycling Division. I do have a note that it is going to be pull out and push out carts, is that correct? Bunch: Yes, I talked with Travis yesterday. Pate: That's all from Planning. Matt? Matt Casey — Staff Engineer Casey: Mandy, I've got numerous comments as you can see. Show the 18" water main along Wedington and how it connects to the shown 8" water line. Also, the sidewalk that is out there doesn't meet our current standards so we'll need to place sidewalks at the back of the right of way. Bunch: You are kidding right? Casey: No. Bunch: It was just constructed four years ago as part of the Highway Department project. Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 10 Casey: I know but they did it wrong. That needs to be moved back. Bunch: That's a big deal. Casey: The drainage structure, you are going to have to do some sort of extended flume to the back for that to drain into. Why is the sidewalk a big deal? Bunch: At least there is some green separation. Is that your comment or Chucks? Casey: That is a consensus between all divisions. That's all I have. Craig Carnagey — Landscape Administrator Camagey: No comment. Bunch: I gave you the plan that the bank wanted and May Construction is thinking they might want to scale it back some to meet city requirements so when I resubmit I have been instructed to meet city requirements instead of some of the excess that is on there. I think it will still be this. Camagey: My comment would be then that a detailed landscape plan needs to be submitted before building permit. You guys are pretty much all there now. Bunch: We will get it updated, sorry about that. Rebecca Ohman — Parks Planner Ohman: Mandy, Parks is requesting that sidewalks be constructed at the back of the right-of-way. This is shown on the Trails Master Plan as an on street linkage. Thank you. Bunch: So we have to fill that ditch in and redo all that. Where does the Trails Master Plan cross the highway? Ohman: Across I-540? Bunch: On the bridge with the 2' sidewalk. Ohman: That's the next big leap. Pate: Fire comments are included but they are minimal. Again, the 26' access recommendation which you do actually show on this one. Utilities? Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 11 Johney Boles — Arkansas Western Gas Boles: We have a 4" high pressure line on the north side of Wedington and we also have a 3" plastic line on the north side of Wedington. When they decide where they are going to construct that sidewalk we are going to want someone there. I am not sure if that line was installed prior to additional right of way being dedicated previously. I am not sure where it is going to fall. I am hoping it is still inside the property. We will try to install that service far enough to the north where they won't have to cross that high pressure line when they run their private line. Bunch: Ok. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: This location you've got back here on the northeast corner for the electric, cable and phone is fine. This conduit that they are placing here, if they would put a 4" and sweep it above grade approximately 14" and about 4' or so away from the electric transformer. You may not be able to get 4' every time but we would like to have at least 3' or 4' away from there. That's all I have. Pate: Reading your notes here on right-of-way dedication, it was approved at 55' from centerline but it was never actually dedicated and that was my comment because it has to go through an easement plat process which never happened with the original Large Scale. Just so you know that it wasn't ever dedicated. Bunch: So we're good with easements for everybody right? Gibson: I don't think there's a problem. In the future we may ask for a little more up here. We are going to have to come underneath the street and come back from this overhead line to service this thing. Bunch: There won't be actually an easement plat required since it is a state highway, I will just do a right of way dedication by deed. Gibson: It's got that 30'along the front. Bunch: All of that is existing, it's already platted. Pate: Then you are fine with the deed. Thank you. Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 12 PPL 03-19.00: Preliminary Plat (Wildflower Meadows, pp 321) was submitted by Keystone Consultants on behalf of James Coger for property located west of Holt Middle School and North of Mount Comfort Road. The property is zoned RSF-4, Residential Single-family, 4 units per acre, and contains approximately 18.38 acres. The proposal is to develop 48 lots on the 18.38 acre tract. Pate: Item five is a Final Plat for Ash Acres submitted by WBR Engineer. Stanley: That's me and I apologize, my engineer is not here. Pate: We can skip over if you want. Stanley: That would be great, thanks. Pate: We will go onto item six, Wildflower Meadows submitted by Keystone. Morgan: My first question is just briefly, I was wondering about adjacent zoning. Bates: We did this in March and I guess we turned it in before it was annexed. That will change. Morgan: The site map needs to be shown on one sheet. Bates: It is going to be hard to read with such a small scale unless we turn it sideways. Pate: It may make it more confusing switching north around. We often see plats on separate sheets. Bates: It would be at 100 scale. It would be this size, it would be real hard to see the dimensions and I don't know how we are going to do that. Morgan: Ok, perhaps at Final Plat stage then. Label the lot widths at building setbacks along the cul-de-sac so we can verify lot widths. There are several things that need to be added to the plat. When I considered them all on one page, the vicinity map and those existing on the cover sheet are added to the site map. Bates: We put everything on the cover. Pate: At a Preliminary Plat stage as long as we have the information here I think it is sufficient. At Final Plat stage, the county only accepts one size of sheet, etc., etc. Bates: Right, we were just trying to make it easy to read for this meeting. Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 13 Morgan: If you could include a note on the plat limiting access to the interior streets only. Bates: These along Mt. Comfort? Morgan: Yes. Street names need to be approved by the 911 Coordinator. If you could locate any signs for the subdivision if there are any plans. Bates: I don't think there is going to be any. Morgan: Also, public utilities need to be located under ground. Street lights are required to be 300' apart. They're pretty close. All electric lines 12KV and below need to be relocated underground. Bates: We can't do these, obviously, they are major transmission lines. Pate: It is 12KV and under. Morgan: Those are all of Planning comments. Pate: I have one additional comment. Suzanne's comment on the access limitation, this is a collector street, so we need to limit those to the interior streets where possible. Obviously, you've got three lots here that have to access that collector. Bates: These 38 through 41 pretty much have to. All of these could access interior streets. Pate: 47 through 50, 42, 13 need to access the interior streets, 38 as well. Driveways accessing on collectors and arterials aren't the best thing. We try to recommend that that not happen. I don't know if there is a way in this particular instance that you could recommend a shared drive with those lots to minimize the curb cuts there. We are looking at curb cuts every 50' or so apart. On a collector, which potentially carries a higher load of traffic, that is going to be potentially dangerous. Bates: If you look at Clabber Creek Phase II they are all the way down through there. Morgan: Matt? Matt Casey — Staff Engineer Casey: Geoff, the sidewalk needs to be extended around the cul-de-sac and you and I talked yesterday, if the developer is willing I think it would be a good idea to go ahead and put the sidewalks along the other two lots to be Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 14 able to complete those loops. The access ramps for the cul-de-sacs need to match what you are showing at the intersection. Morning Mist, Meadow Glenn intersections are shown correctly, those others need to match. The ramps need to be pulled around to the radius. I will work with you on that. That's something more for the construction phase. Meadow Glenn Drive needs to be a 28' street rather than a 24' with sidewalks on both sides. It breaks out 300 vehicles per day estimated traffic volume, for 48 lots there will be 360 vehicles per day and the majority of them will go down to Mt. Comfort. Sidewalks are being required on both sides of Meadow Glenn. You need to extend the sewer to the west property line along Morning Mist. Each of the water line terminations, not where you end with a hydrant but there are some of them that you have stubbed out for future need to end with the gate valve pulled. That is right there and then down to the other property at the south and the east at the end of one of those cul-de-sacs maybe. Detention ponds need to be sodded and you need a concrete trickle channel through the entire length of the pond and the pond needs to be sloped to drain to the channel. You need to have the 100 -year water surface elevation shown on the pond. The cul-de-sacs, with the exception of one all drain towards the bulb of the cul-de-sac but there is no way shown for that water to get out. Add some piping to show how you are going to get that. Bates: We'll probably bring it all back to this street and into this ditch and then down to Clabber's detention pond. Casey: We will need to account for all of that. As you know, the sewer lift station Phase I will need to be upgraded for the construction approval. We also need to show a plan showing all the off site improvements that were required with the annexation and that can be at a smaller scale. Bates: I think I can do that. Casey: We'll want to see that and let the Commissioners know that that was required. Morgan: All of the conditions for the annexation were included in that. Casey: I didn't add it to the list but this is in our assessment area for the Rupple Road Bridge. Dealing with rough numbers here it came out to be about $5,400. I will have the exact number prior to the Subdivision Committee meeting but it will be pretty close. We are a long ways from constructing that bridge with that. Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 15 Craig Carna2ey — Landscape Administrator Camagey: Geoff, on your tree preservation plan I do need to have you go ahead and put a tree canopy table on here indicating how much square footage is existing and the fact that you are preserving it all. I am also going to need tree protection fencing, what you have here is fine. We may need to put a little bit of fencing back on lots 44 and 45. I haven't been back there to see what those conditions are. We also need a protection fencing detail placed on the subdivision plan. That's all I have. Morgan: Parks? Rebecca Ohman — Parks Planner Ohman: The applicant went to parks board and recommended accepting a combination of money and land on September 17, 2003. The applicant and Parks Staff, including Steve Hatfield must meet to delineate the trail corridor thus, establishing the parks fees remaining. This fee is based upon the present parks formula. The actual park land fee will be determined at the actual subdivision approval at the Planning Commission level. Because the land will not have frontage on any street of any subdivision we will have to figure out the best route to legally lot it. I have been working with Dawn to find the best route for that. Steve will have to be involved with that and the layout of the property. Bates: Do you want to call me and get together because I have no idea what you all want really. Ohman: A 5' trail corridor. Bates: I think it was in September and I remember going out there and that is about it. Ohman: I will call you. Morgan: The fire comments are in your packet. I also had a couple of additional comments that I just noticed. If you could include zoning for adjacent properties. Also, you are calling out zoning for this as R-1, if you could update that to RSF-4. We are going to need an amended annexation order for our files signed by Judge Hunton with correct acreage to make the annexation ordinance legal. Bates: We are still working on that one. Morgan: Utility comments? Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 16 Mike Phipps — Ozark Electric Coop, Phipps: We need an email AutoCAD 14 or Windows 2000 this plat with the crossings and utility easements that we are about to request on there. We won't design anything for this project until we receive this plat on disk. This transmission line has a 50 utility easement transmission line easement on the east side of the property joining Clabber Creek, 25' from each side of center. We can't have any utilities within that easement. They can cross it east and west but they can't run parallel with it inside that easement. Anyone that needs in there will have to have a utility easement outside that. I will let Johney and Larry take it now with the crossings and utility easements. Johnev Boles — Arkansas Western Gas Boles: Is lot 46 going to be a buildable lot? Bates: No, that's where the detention pond is. Boles: From the northeast corner of lot 47 we are going to want some conduit underneath this drainage here, six 4" conduits. All these conduits that we are going to request will be 4". We are going to need a 20' utility easement between lots 47 and 48. You are showing a 20' utility easement in front of lots 48 through 50, am I correct in assuming that it ends in the middle of lot 47? Bates: It looks like it. Boles: Ok, we need that extended over to tie into this. We are going to come off Phase 11 of Clabber Creek and come off the northwest corner of that lot in Phase II of Clabber Creek to access this. Also, we need crossings underneath this drainage between 49 and 48. Bates: Can I just take your plans and bring it back? That would be easier. Boles: That works for us. I don't know how Mike is going to want to get to all of these street lights to get to the cul-de-sacs when we are going to be behind. Phipps: I can dig in that easement I've got. Boles: Probably right here what we are going to opt to do, of course we are going to need a casing right here, but we are going to go to this area and request a 20' utility easement here, go down and then just come back to here. Gibson: That will also cover getting across there. The green is the crossings, the yellow is the routing. These right here are 10' UE's for the street lights Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 17 and a couple of 20' UE's right here that we asked for. You can take that with you. Boles: We also need that emailed. Gibson: I would request when they break ground that they will notify us. Everybody is getting far behind now. Bates: I think that the same contractor for Clabber II is just going to come straight ahead. Morgan: Revisions are due November 5`h at 10:00 a.m. Thank you. Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 18 PPL 03-20.00: Preliminary Plat (Salem Heights, pp 284) was submitted by Landtech Engineering on behalf of John Alford for property located on Salem Road, south of Salem Village. The property is zoned RSF-4, Residential Single-family, 4 units per acre, with 89 residential lots proposed. Pate: Item seven on our agenda is a Preliminary Plat for Salem Heights submitted by Landtech Engineering. Just for you utility guys, this came through Preliminary Plat last year and the applicant, developer has decided to add some lots so we are going back through the Preliminary Plat process. Leonard, the comments are all listed here for you so I won't go over all of them. There are a couple of discrepancies on the plat and I know you submitted the wetland delineation report. Some of the hatching shows delineated wetlands but then it's got a lot of grading through it. That is something Matt and Craig may want to discuss with you. Gabbard: There was a problem with some of the drafting on it that I was unaware of. I'm sorry about that. Pate: Proposed street C, this one here, the right of way needs to be dimensioned on that as well. The detention pond, wetland areas and open space need to be labeled as lots in the subdivision and maintenance must be provided for and include a note to the affect about who is going to maintain those areas on the plat. All lots have to have 6,000 sq.ft. outside of the floodplain and include a note with the comment there on the plat. Rupple Road is a minor arterial to the west that requires 45' from centerline to be dedicated. If you could dimension that along the entire property boundary and show the right of way along the entire property boundary. There are several fees that are associated with this and it went through the same process in the last Preliminary Plat. Those fees have been updated and Matt can get those to you. I will let him go over that. Casey: I don't have much to add. I know you submitted construction plans already for this. Here is an updated list, I don't remember the previous number, it may have gone up. That's all I have. Craig Carnagey — Landscape Administrator Carnagey: All of the previous comments still apply. My only comment now is to clean up the language on the tree canopy table and then add your mitigation numbers and the proposal for tree preservation so it is there for the Planning Commission if they have any questions. That's all of my comments. Pate: Parks? Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 19 Rebecca Ohman — Parks Planner Ohman: The Parks Board recommended to accept money in lieu of land in the amount of $49,395 for 89 single family lots. Leonard, have you looked at off street access to that park to the north of the property? Gabbard: No I have not. Ohman: We would like to look at potential access. Some options may arise to access that property, it is 8 acres. Gabbard: I'd be glad to do that. Just tell me what you want to see and I will put it on there. Ohman: Ok, thank you. I will get with you and Steve Hatfield can work with you on that. Pate: Utility comments? Johnev Boles — Arkansas Western Gas Boles: Leonard, what we would like to do is what we did with the previous project, just give you this colored layout and let you do that. Gibson: If there is a problem with issues as far as trees we will have to deal with that. The yellow is the routing and the green is the crossings. This is what Mike needs for his street lights. There are a few easements and Johney wrote some notes over here. On these crossings we would like to see those on the west side of that drainage. Gabbard: I understand. I told them about changing those on the previous one so we will get that fixed. Gibson: If there are some issues with trees, I know there are some trees in here and a couple of other places. We may have to think about maybe going in front on some of them for a little square or something to the back. Boles: We get into issues with these cul-de-sac lots if services do get placed in the front. Gabbard: The only thing that really sticks out anymore as far as issues, the biggest thing that we have problems with the electrical service. Those things tend to be bulky. Everything else you can pretty much live with. Sometimes you just do what you have to do. Boles: We are going to need these crossings right here. Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 20 Gibson: That's very important right there, that's the only way we can service this. It is not in the wetlands though. It is crossing the drainage but it is not necessarily in the wetlands where they've got it marked. Gabbard: Right, they did have some wetlands that was marked in funny locations down there but we can do that I think. Boles: Leonard, do you have any idea from Rupple Road where the southeast corner of Clabber Creek is in relation to this development? Gabbard: The southeast corner of Clabber Creek is way over here. Casey: Clabber Creek Subdivision, not the creek. Gabbard: No I don't. Casey: This road lines up. Gibson: I knew it was going to be pretty close. Clabber Creek Phase I is to the west and this street lines up. Gabbard: I didn't have any idea where that entrance would be. It does match up with the curb and gutter that was built. When we surveyed this there were inlets that were built out there that was in place and we shot all that. As far as this subdivision entrance I don't know. If it did line up it would be like a blind hog finding an acre. Gibson: I'd take credit for it if I was you that did it. Pate: Leonard, I just want to reiterate that any lots that have frontage to interior streets a note on the plat needs to restrict that access to those interior streets to that they are not accessing onto the larger streets. If there is any way to show a provision for a shared drive, if that is a possibility for any of these lots that would be something that we would like to see. The ones that have direct access onto collector streets. Gabbard: That, that and that. We can pretty much do it all except for those right there. Pate: That's what I was referring to. If there is any way we can utilize shared access within those lots as opposed to a curb cut for each lot. I don't know if that is something that you can do but that is something that we would like to see if possible. I know a lot of other subdivisions use that option. Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 21 Gabbard: Lots 25 through 31? Pate: Yes. Gabbard: Restrict access to all other lots to Road A. Ohman: Leonard, I was looking at it, if we could pull a pedestrian access through this area, not taking away from the tree mitigation, the trees that you are keeping for the ordinance but pull it through here, that would connect eventually with this park land. It would be just like a natural path, gravel or crushed stone or something like that so it doesn't increase the impervious surface for the neighborhood. Gabbard: I think that what I would like to do is when we pin this thing toward Final Plat stage I would like to have you and Greg and I go down there and look at what would be the best path layout to cause the least amount of impact. Would that work? Pate: The thing is, it is important that the comment comes up now because pedestrian access, there is a detention pond here from property line to property line and to get a path through there that is going to be real important where that ends up, coordinating that right now. Ohman: Maybe then, this is implicated that it probably will be the detention pond, however we can get the pedestrian access through there. Pate: How it will go through I don't know. Ohman: Since it is not park property we wouldn't have any problems going through it. Pate: Matt, do you have a problem with pedestrian access going through the detention pond? Casey: I wouldn't encourage that. What is to keep kids from going into it when it is full with water? Ohman: Can we go across the bank? Casey: Yes. At that time we looked at it before, this area that we are discussing today was a part of the floodway and it has been removed. Gabbard: What happened was we thought the floodway was up in there and we found out that it wasn't. Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 22 Casey: It is in the floodplain though. Pardon me, my role as floodplain administrator is fairly recent, these lots that are within the 100 -year floodplain, you can go ahead and show them as you have. Pate: Prior to building permit it has to go to the Corp. and get the LOMR-F approved. Casey: Let me just read Sara Edwards' comments. "What we have to do in the mean time is that all lots have to be one acre in size. At such time as you go ahead and get that filed you submit your Letter of Map Amendment to FEMA and that is approved then you submit the Final Plat. It can't be submitted until that is done and at that time we have to add those lines back in." Right now you have to show the big lots. Gabbard: Because it was in the floodway. Pate: On Cornerstone that Jorgensen submitted they had lots in the floodplain and they went ahead and platted them with the Final Plat but no building permits were issued. Gabbard: She thought at the time that was being reviewed the last time that we were showing that in floodway. Casey: We are going to have to work through this. I need to find out what the FEMA requirements are and then let you know whether the lots can be shown for now or take out some of those lot lines and then add them back in at Final Plat. Gabbard: Initially that would put me back to the very first submittal. What I did, I talked with Jim Beavers when he was in there for a little while and I also talked with Steve and with Tom Hecox. What we need to do is just do our grading. We don't have to go through a real involved process because we are not dealing with the floodway, we are dealing with the floodplain. It is really about a 30 day process or maybe a 45 day process to get that LOMR. Casey: Are you going to get a LOMR-F for each individual lot or a complete LOMR? Gabbard: I am going to do a complete LOMR for all those lots affected by the floodplain and what I intended to do was have that submitted with the Final Plat. Just go ahead and accept this Preliminary Plat or else I'm right back to where I was. According to all of the guidance I've been given to this point I was hoping to get this Preliminary Plat accepted with the lots as I've shown them and then before the Final Plat is approved, as part of Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 23 the submittal that goes with the Final Plat to have the LOMR as part of that submittal. Casey: That makes more sense than what is said here in these minutes. The Planning Commission will be approving a subdivision with less number of lots than what they are going to see on the Final Plat. Gabbard: It also affects her with her parks fees and you with your revised fees. Let's say this is our target, we are going to hit it by the time it is dedicated at the Final Plat all of this other stuff will have to be part of that submittal. Casey: It makes more sense doing it that way. I don't know why it was done differently. Gabbard: I don't know either. Casey: I will get some more information. Gabbard: Thank you, I appreciate that. Pate: That's everything, revisions are due the 5`h at 10:00 a.m. Gabbard: Because if I did go with less lots and then got it approved you'd be making me come back here because it wasn't the same damn Preliminary Plat that you saw the first time. You have a good day. Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 24 FPL 03-12.00: Final Plat (Ash Acres, pp 367) was submitted by WBR Engineering on behalf of Rob Stanley for property located at 109 W. Ash. The property is zoned RSF-4, Residential Single-family, 4 units per acre, and contains approximately 1.33 acres. The request is to create six lots on the 1.33 acre tract. Pate: Let's go back to item five, the Final Plat for Ash Acres submitted by WBR Engineering. Planning comments, I just referenced the Preliminary Plat and P.U.D. that came through this for density requirements that all meets our regulations based on the Planning Commission approval. Ash Street does need to show the 25' from centerline dedication along all the property frontage including this area right over here. You have 25' right of way shown here, we just need to dimension over here as well. Rudasill: Ok. Pate: The Final Plat needs to show the surveyor's seal, signature and date. Rudasill: I didn't have a current copy of your signature list so I will get that on there. Pate: I included that in your packet, the correct signature blocks. The common space, open space and tree preservation area. Rudasill: They will be shown. The tree preservation got turned off on that print. Pate: This will all need to be in a protective easement. Rudasill: Ok, you'll need a specific description for that? Carnagey: Right. Rudasill: For the common space will you need a legal description for that also? Pate: I believe the entire area will be in this protective easement, this entire piece here and then this over here as well. Rudasill: The variation is that this encompasses tree preservation, this portion of this is part of the open space but it doesn't encompass part of the tree preservation. The tree preservation continues up around this corner. Camagey: We should probably indicate the boundaries of the tree preservation area. Rudasill: I've got all that, it just got turned off. I will do a separate description for both of them and that way it will be clearer. Technical Plat Review October 29, 2003 Page 25 Pate: The other option is I think it would be better to just be an easement, the other option is just to include that entire area as a lot in the subdivision. When you start breaking these things up it starts getting confusing. Rudasill: I will do one as common property, which is owned by all of the owners. Pate: On the plat also if you could turn on a layer showing the detention basin. All we have is the outflow. Any new street names need to be approved by the 911 Coordinator. Since it is a private drive you will have to coordinate the signage with our Transportation Division saying private drive. Any guarantees for incomplete improvements must be received prior to signing the Final Plat and that includes street lights and sidewalks and everything else. In the back of your packet is the dedication blocks that needs to be shown. Rudasill: Everything has been done so we are in good shape there. Casey: Bill, the only thing additional I need to add is remove the construction notes. One more thing, we will need to have a construction bond before we sign. Rudasill: Ok, can do. Rebecca Ohman — Parks Planner Ohman: Parks fees will need to be paid prior to signing the Final Plat. Stanley: Where do I reference that when I go to pay that? Ohman: You should be receiving an invoice, if not, just reference the number, FPL 03-12.00. Stanley: Ok. Ohman: Thanks. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: We've already got everything in there. No comment. Pate: Revisions are due in November 5`h at 10:00 a.m. Thank you.