Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-02-11 - MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE TECHNICAL PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE A regular meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee was held on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 at 9:00 a.m. in room 111 in the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. ACTION TAKEN PPL 04-05.00 (Deerpath Estates Ph. 2, pp 488) Tabled Page 2 I-PZD 04-05.00: (Wal-Mart Optical Lab/Hwy 62W, pp 559)Forwarded Page 6 STAFF PRESENT Matt Casey Jeremy Pate Suzanne Morgan Renee Thomas Alison Brady Craig Camagey UTILITIES PRESENT Jim Sargent, AEP/ SWEPCO Mike Phipps, Ozark Electric Coop. Larry Gibson, Cox Communications Johney Boles, Arkansas Western Gas Sue Clouser, Southwestern Bell STAFF ABSENT Perry Franklin Danny Farrar Travis Dotson UTILITIES ABSENT Technical Plat Review February Il, 2004 Page 2 PPL 04-05.00: Preliminary Plat (Deerpath Estates Ph. 2, pp 488) was submitted by Project Design Consultants, Inc. on behalf of SCB, LLC for property located east of Crossover Road and north of Deerpath Drive. The property is zoned RSF-4, Residential Single-family, 4 units per acre, and contains approximately 9.13 acres. The request is to allow the development of 16 lots with 16 single-family dwellings proposed. Pate: Welcome to the Wednesday, February I I1h. There are three items listed on our agenda today. The first of which is a Lot Split or Travis Wood. That actually has been taken off and will be processed as a Property Line Adjustment so we won't discuss that one. Moving onto item number two, PPL 04-05.00 for Deerpath Estates submitted by Project Design Consultants. This is located east of Crossover and north of Deerpath Drive. The proposal is for 16 single family lots. Morgan: Planning comments, if you could review this description for accuracy. Also, the letter that was submitted regarding Phase II of Deerpath mentioned Final Plat approval. I never found anything to suggest that there was a Preliminary Plat submitted so I don't know if this is a miscommunication or what that is. Scott: We received a copy of something from the client that was a layout that was thought to be a Preliminary Plat. Pate: If it wasn't processed and approved though technically it wouldn't be considered as that. Morgan: Also, I just have some questions about ownership. If on your next submittal you could combine a couple of these pages, we don't need all of these pages. If you could show the dimensions of the lots and the lot widths at the building setbacks on cul-de-sacs. I think that will be fine but it should be included on here. Indicate zoning on adjoining properties as well as the plat page. The vicinity map, this project is dew south for the Preliminary Plat that was approved for the Stone Mountain subdivision. If it is possible if you could contact Jorgensen & Associates to get that. I don't know if you would be able to lay this onto here to see how those streets will line up. Also, we can talk about this further, there was an item that went before the City Council requiring a Master Street Plan street, this extension of Cliffs Blvd., and it was probably this street. If you could show that Master Street Plan street, it comes up here. If you could also increase the layout to the property to the north with the adjacent property. I know that there are a couple of lots and I guess I just have concerns about the connectivity. Scott: The home on that site is way over here. Technical Plat Review February Il, 2004 Page 3 Morgan: Ok. We were looking at some aerials and it seemed like there was a structure in that direction, dew north. Streetlights are required every 300'. Some of Planning's concerns are connectivity as well as the right of way width from 31' in Phase I to a smaller street. Scott: It's done because we want to minimize the disturbance of the trees there. Pate: The primary concern is Planning staff is recommending that there be connectivity to the north to eventually connect to Cliffs Blvd. and because it is no longer residential only, which was before the 24' width street, it will now be a thru street which would carry higher levels of traffic and would more likely qualify for the 50' right of way. As far as recommendations go we can look at that so that they don't contradict each other. I believe that recommendation was made with keeping in mind that it was a cul-de-sac and this is much too long for a cul-de-sac. Staff has a feeling that the Planning Commission would have a real problem approving a 1,500' long dead end street. Carnagey: If this is going to be tied in we will need to look at that. When I made this recommendation it was based on that was going to be a cul-de-sac. We might want to look at that a little bit more. Morgan: That's all I have. Matt, do you have anything? Matt Casey — Staff EnEineeC Casey: Some of the data shown doesn't match our minimum street standard requirements. We have a 150' minimum radius and so you will need to change that or request a waiver from the Planning Commission for the curbs. The requirement for the connectivity means the layout may change and that may not be an issue after the connectivity. I didn't bring a grading checklist with me but all of the items that are on our checklist are required in the Physical Alteration of Land ordinance need to be shown on that grading plan. The street sections, I believe they are shown at 30' in the detail, it will depend on the connectivity requirement, they need to be 24' back to back minimum. If a connection is provided with a stub out it needs to be 28'. Sidewalks need to be located at the right of way. Provide an easement a minimum of 10' on each side of the water and sewer lines. That's all I have. Morgan: Craig? Crai$ Carnagey — Landscape Administrator Camagey: On your site plan can you go ahead and put that on the tree preservation plan as well? Technical Plat Review February 11, 2004 Page 4 Scott: Sure. Carnagey: Also, I would think it would be a good idea to put the utilities in the front rather than in the back to eliminate removal of the trees in the back of these lots. These on the south side I would recommend be on the front along with this row. The rest of mine are pretty much checklist items except for number eight down here on the preservation plan you have this deed restriction description and I don't believe that you want to include that. Basically, this preservation area that is here, referring to they are all single family residential lots and I don't think you want to put a deed restriction on this lot so you may want to look into that and remove that description. Morgan: Parks? Alison Brady — Parks Planner Brady: This project needs to be reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and I believe that Rebecca contacted you on that. Mike Phipps — Ozark Electric Coop, Phipps: I like your utility easement in the front on this one because it works out a lot better. What I would also need is a 20' easement on lots 21, 22 to get back me back to existing power we have on the rear side of that lot. I have an existing transformer on the lots 10 and 9 at Phase I. I need a crossing there, a 4" crossing from lot 10 over to lot 25. For the streetlights if you will show them on this plat, I know we have one on lot 8 and 9 now so just every 300' throughout and one at the cul-de-sac. That's all I have. Scott: An easement between 21 and 22? Phipps: Yes. Johnev Boles — Arkansas Western Gas Boles: I would also be looking at front lot service on this project. I would request a 2" crossing from Lot 10 to the property line between 24 and 25. A 2" crossing from lot 12 to the property line between 22 and 23. A 2" crossing from lot 13 to the property line between 20 and 21. I would also request a 20' utility easement between lots 16 and 17 connecting those front and rear easements there. Scott: We may end up with a street there. Technical Plat Review February Il, 2004 Page 5 Boles: Right. I would also request that no grading be done within that 55' utility easement without an Arkansas Western Gas representative being contacted where the three transmission lines are shown here. That's all I have. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: Those UE's that Mike and Johney asked for are fine. They will work for me also. This one crossing that Johney asked for between 22 and 23 over to 12, if you would put me a 4" sleeve in right there and also back here where Mike requested one between 22 and 25. Clouser: Put one for me in both of those places too while you're at it. Gibson: That's all I have. Clouser: I agree with the utility easement requests and then the two conduits crossing and if there is any relocation it will be at the owner/developer's expense. Boles: If it would simplify things just make those crossings quads. Clouser: We would like to request pull strings in there as well. Are we having sidewalks in here? Casey: That's an additional comment that I had. They are shown on one side of the road, if a connection is provided and a 28' street then they need to be on both sides. Clouser: If there are sidewalks if you could bring the conduits out beyond the sidewalks. That's all I have. Morgan: This item will be tabled until it is heard by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. I'm not sure when the next deadline is to get on the next agenda but we can let you know. Technical Plat Review February Il, 2004 Page 6 I-PZD 04-05.00: Industrial Planned Zoning District (Wal-Mart Optical Lab/Hwy 62W, pp 559) was submitted by CEI Engineering Associates, Inc. on behalf of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. for property located at 2314 W 6`h Street. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial, and is in the Design Overlay District. The request is to rezone the subject property to an I-PZD, Industrial Planned Zoning District, to allow a 979 sq.ft. addition to the Optical Lab building and revise the on-site parking. Pate: The last item on the agenda today is I-PZD 04-05.00, Industrial Plannin District for Wal-Mart Optical Lab. This is the old Wal-Mart store on 6` Street. Planning comments, for a PZD there are some specific notification requirements. As opposed to notifying just adjoiners you have to notify every property owner within 100' of your property line. That needs to be by certified mail and when you submit revisions for Subdivision Committee you need to include the certified mail tabs. If you could on your site plan include the permitted uses or excluded uses. The list appears in the back, permitted uses in an I-PZD, if you could spell them out on the plat. A minimum of 51% of this proposed floor area of the whole site is required to remain in an industrial use for the I-PZD. Anything less than that in the future would constitute a rezoning request. Of course this is a rezoning and development request so it has to go through the full Planning Commission and City Council. Just a couple of quick plat comments, if you could on the site plan here on page two, if you could include the adjacent zoning and adjacent property owners on the site plan. I know it is on your page three, which is your Property Line Adjustment plan, but if you could show it on the site plan as well. Any easements that utility representatives request today need to be shown also. Also, label the right of way from centerline of Old Farmington Road to ensure that we have adequate right of way there, label and dimension that. I believe Futrall Drive is ok, it meets those requirements. Sixth Street dedication will have to be by Warranty Deed. I can get you a form for that. This proposal is subject to the Design Overlay District requirements. The greenspace here, if you could just provide on your site coverage chart the percentages. I know you have a total of 25%, if you could just provide the existing percentage of what you have and what you are adding needs to be in a percentage and then your total, of course, would be 25%. Also, on the plat include the number of employees for each of the uses that you have. For the Optical Center, Tractor Supply and the Employment office over here. Also, with the revisions if you could submit a letter justifying the numbers for parking assuming what's based on the employee numbers so that that is pretty clear to us. There are six bicycle racks required to be installed, if you could indicate those on the site plan. The existing poles, are they going to be retrofitted? Jacobs: Yes. Pate: So the poles will remain? Technical Plat Review February Il, 2004 Page 7 Jacobs: Yes, we are not going to touch the poles, just the fixtures. Pate: Those need to be full cutoff fixtures and I've included those comments here for you on page four. The outdoor storage, I have a question about that as well. Is the plan for Tractor Supply to relocate all of their supplies that are there right now into this fenced in area or will they be utilized kind of like they have? Jacobs: That is something that I will have to check on. From what I understood, Tractor Supply was permitted through it's own use with the City. Pate: It is an allowed use. If they are for sale items it is allowed to be displayed, we just need to understand. Right now they are right up against the right of way and pretty close to the street. Obviously, with the greenspace it will have to be removed. It is important for us to understand where that is going to happen. I don't know if it is to be hatched or if it is something on the plan showing where that's going to be located. Anything that is not for sale that is just outdoor storage has specific screening requirements and I've listed that for you in here as well, as far as fencing or screening for vegetation. Jacobs: Anything not for sale? Pate: That's correct. Jacobs: That shouldn't be a problem, everything is for sale. Pate: At this time, if there are any alterations to the building fagade, staff is not recommending that any be made, with the exception that if the use ever changes in the future, any permits issued for this will have to comply with Commercial Design Standards. Anytime development for these lots are reviewed they will be reviewed for Commercial Design Standards. Jacobs: How would that include Tractor Supply? Pate: Any commercial use will have to meet Commercial Design Standards. However, if it is Industrial what we would be looking for is compatibility. The Tractor Supply part of the structure is white right now and this is gray so we would need to ensure that that is compatible with the other structure. There are a couple more forms in here, I've included the ordinance requirements for the Overlay District as well as the I-PZD information, specifically, permitted uses. The Fire Department had a couple of comments, a sprinkler system, alarm system shall be required to be extended into this area, a fire alarm system. Also, they need access into the rear of the property. Is there access currently along this backside? Technical Plat Review February Il, 2004 Page 8 Jacobs: No, the only access is existing right in here. Pate: Is there a drive behind that building right now? Jacobs: No. Pate: As long as the curb cut remains open I think is what that comment is. That's the bulk of Planning comments. Matt? Matt Casey — Staff Engineer Casey: The only comment we have is about the sidewalk and it looks like there is a 6' sidewalk shown along the right of way for 6`h Street. We are also going to make a recommendation for a 6' sidewalk be extended to connect to the existing sidewalk on Blockbuster. Jacobs: Are you going to require a sidewalk along Old Farmington Road? Casey: We are not going to be requiring one at this time. Craig Carnagey — Landscape Administrator Camagey: I just need you to show existing and proposed on the landscape plan as well as parking spaces. As Jeremy said, on the landscape plan I need you to identify all the proposed display spaces as well. I have a couple of questions about the greenspace up front. This curb, where does it tie in on the adjoining property or how does it end? Jacobs: That curb will taper down. The next piece of property doesn't belong to Wal-Mart, it belongs to Blockbuster. We either have to work with them and try to extend it down to connect to where that existing curb is, we can probably do that because we are going to have to extend that sidewalk through that piece. Carnagey: We need to show that. Also, in the back, the trees that are in the back, are they in any kind of bed at all? Jacobs: No, as of now they aren't. Carnagey: Can you show some kind of bed there? I don't know if it is a curb or what that is. I think we talked about the need for another tree island in the very front of the building and we need an island every 12 spaces. Down here in the southwest corner off of Futrall I would like to see the planting of street trees every 30 linear feet along the front. All trees need to be a 2" caliper Technical Plat Review February Il, 2004 Page 9 at the time of planting. Go ahead and put the percent of greenspace cover on the landscape plan as well. I have no further comments. Pate: Utilities? Jim Sargent — AEP Sargent: Back on the northwest corner of the building where the power comes in I would like for you to show an easement 20' on either side of the power line. Jacobs: That overhead coming into the transformer? Sargent: Right. Also, down along 6"' Street there I don't know if there is a utility easement along there or not, I didn't see one labeled, if not, I would like to see one there. Any relocation of existing facilities will be at the owner's expense. Johney Boles — Arkansas Western Gas Boles: This 20' utility easement that you are showing here at the northwest corner of the building off of Old Farmington Road, where does that end to the east? Does it run the full width of that property? Jacobs: I don't know. I'll have to look. Boles: It's important that is recorded, I've got a line all the way down through there. Jacobs: We didn't do a full survey on this, we were kind of working off of old drawings. It would appear that it does, I don't know, I'll have to check. Boles: We need that on there. That's all I have. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: Are there not going to be any additional exits or entrances of this property added? Jacobs: No, there will be no additional curb cuts. Gibson: That's all I have. Sue Clouser — SBC Technical Plat Review February 11, 2004 Page 10 Clouser: We just built a new D mark in there and we come in somewhere off here on Old Farmington and come in right next to the loading dock. They are talking about expanding their capacity so as long as you're doing this work provide two 4" conduits up to the right of way, or at least to the utility easements beyond any pavement would be wonderful. If we have to do any relocating out there it will be at the owner/developer's expense and there are a bunch of special lines in there so we need probably a minimum of 60 days notice to get that work done because we will have to get downtime from Wal-Mart and that's not easy to do. It will be costly because of all the special things in there. I agree with the easements they requested. Pate: Revisions are due on the 18`h at 10:00 a.m.