Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-02-25 - MinutesMINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE TECHNICAL PLAT REVIEW COMMITTEE A regular meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee was held on February 25, 2004 at 9:00 a.m. in room 111 in the City Administration Building, 113 W. Mountain, Fayetteville, Arkansas. LSD 04-10.00: Lindsey Office Building, pp 174 Page 2 STAFF PRESENT Matt Casey Jeremy Pate Renee Thomas Craig Camagey UTILITIES PRESENT Jim Sargent, AEP/ SWEPCO Mike Phipps, Ozark Electric Coop. Larry Gibson, Cox Communications ACTION TAKEN Forwarded STAFF ABSENT Perry Franklin Danny Farrar Travis Dotson UTILITIES ABSENT Johney Boles, Arkansas Western Gas Sue Clouser, Southwestern Bell Technical Plat Review February 25, 2004 Page 2 LSD 04-10.00: Large Scale Development (Lindsey Office Building, pp 174) was submitted by Crafton, Tull & Associates, Inc. on behalf of Lindsey Management Company for property located on the northeast corner of Joyce Blvd. and Stearns Street. The property is zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial, and contains approximately 5.86 acres. The request is to allow development of an 84,420 sq.ft. office building with 275 parking spaces proposed. Pate: Welcome to the Wednesday, February 25, 2004 meeting of the Technical Plat Review Committee. There are three items. Item number three, the Large Scale Development for Hanks Furniture has been tabled at this time. There is not an applicant present for the Large Scale Development for Allied Storage so we will move to item number two, LSD 04-10.00 for the Lindsey Office Building submitted by Jerry Kelso. This project has been before the Planning Commission previously but it does have to comply with all of our current ordinances and the recommendation from staff at this time, just to let you know. For Subdivision Committee review we will need a materials sample board showing the materials of the structure and then a board of the elevations. I believe we have one side elevation but it is just an architectural rendering, not the elevation. The maximum height is 75' or six stories. If you could just include as a note the height of the structure, I know that middle portion is pretty high. The street lights along Stearns Street and Joyce, I don't know if those are existing or not but if not, they will be required every 300', if you could show those. There are six bicycle racks required. I noticed on the plat it said spaces, I just want to ensure that those are racks that will accommodate two bikes. Staff has talked a little bit about the traffic created from 82,000 sq.ft. of office space. We haven't quite come up with a recommendation of what to do with that yet. Either a traffic study or maybe participation in a signal somewhere in this location. If you would contact staff this week and we will let you have a more formal recommendation of what we should go forward with. I have been talking with both Dawn and Tim about this specifically just because a site with this much office space intended for that many employees in one location. There are several avenues out. Obviously, we have two out onto Joyce Street and one out onto Stearns and a couple of cross connections here so we will have to look at it and see what we've recommended in the past. Kelso: You've got a lot of vacant land out there too and that is going to be developed either commercial or office. Pate: The magnitude of this structure, it's a pretty large structure in this location so that is one of the things that kind of brought it to our attention. If there is any signage to be located, show where that is. Kelso: I think we have got an actual sign plan and everything so I will get that to you. Technical Plat Review February 25, 2004 Page 3 Pate: Dumpsters, again screened on all sides. No permanent structure more than 30" in height is allowed within a building setback. I believe I saw a retaining wall within the building setback, as long as that is not over 30". This is the retaining wall to the north, I'm not sure of the height of that. Matt may have called it out to label that wall but if it is over 30" it can't be within the building setback. That is all of the Planning comments. Matt, do you have anything? Matt Casey — Staff Eneineer Casey: How tall is that wall? Kelso: I don't know Matt. These plans were actually done by someone earlier. We are at 15' and you are at 10' back there so it appears to be about 5' tall. Casey: I assume that utility representatives are going to ask for a utility easement along Stearns there so a retaining wall cannot be located within an easement either, regardless of the height. Jeremy already mentioned the building setback issue. If you could label that height at the highest point. Kelso: One thing that might help us, we took this thing to the City Council as far as the reduction of Stearns Street and that may give us enough room to put a 3 to 1 slope instead of a retaining wall. Pate: I had that same question because it looks like you're dedicating right of way. Kelso: That was done before we went to City Council to reduce the right of way width. Pate: That was only for that location as well. We have to go through the same process, I believe it would go back to the City Council. Kelso: This was part of the deal on the other one too. We were improving that with the other plan. Casey: This was shown on Stearns Street apartments. Pate: Maybe we can just go down to 50' right of way. Kelso: If we can do that I think we should be able to get a three to one slope in there to make it work. Technical Plat Review February 25, 2004 Page 4 Casey: Also, if you could address the height of the retaining wall and also the easement. On number three down here in the bottom left corner, it is also in an easement and the detention pond. If you could address that so it is not in the utility easement. Also, sidewalks along Joyce need to be 10' wide at the edge of the right of way consistent with what's been installed to the east and also need to go all the way to the property line, which will necessitate this culvert to be able to accommodate that. That is all I have. Craig Carnagey — Landscape Administrator Camagey: Jerry, this was approved a year ago? Kelso: It may have been a couple of years ago. Camagey: I assume Kim requested this wall in the northeast corner to save those trees back there. Is there any reason that you know that she didn't request that on this other grouping in the middle of the property? Kelso: I think because the grades were there, we are getting pretty close back to existing grades. I looked at that a little bit and I know what you are saying but I think we were within a couple feet or so of existing grade with the back of curb at that location. I may need to look at the grading just a little bit more. You know by the time you have a retaining wall in there and you've got two foot to make up you're better off to just three to one slope it up to 6'. Camagey: The only comment that I have, I can't determine on this northern side for street trees, if these are street trees or if these are shrubs. The plantings between the pin oak and the althea are pretty similar. I would like to make sure that those are street trees along Stearns. If you could eliminate the pin oaks from the selection and put something in there, anything on our list would work other than that pin oak. Kelso: Are you talking about the ones here along Stearns? Camagey: Actually, in general, if you could just eliminate the pin oaks all together for the whole project. In the last couple of years the pin oaks have really been hit by an outbreak of beetles. Before building permit we are just going to need a detailed landscape plan including the size of all these species installation and just standard planting details and things like that. Jim Sargent- AEP/SWEPCO Sargent: I see that you've got a utility easement along Stearns and Joyce Street. We will need an easement to get back to where our transformer pad is. I Technical Plat Review February 25, 2004 Page 5 don't know if you have those trees in there if we will have to angle around those but we will serve this from off of Stearns Road. Kelso: We may have to eliminate the retaining wall along Stearns, maybe we can go between where we've got the retaining wall and the back of curb. Sargent: We will just need a 20' easement down to that location. Kelso: I don't think Craig will let me put an easement down the back of those trees. Camagey: It would be a shame to put a retaining wall in there to save them and then a utility cuts them out. Sargent: I will need load information and we will need two 4" conduits from the transformer pad to the riser pole. Are you pretty sure that's the location where the transformer is going? Kelso: I think so. Most of the work was done on this thing a couple of years ago by somebody else and I think there was a lot of detail but that's probably where the transformer is going to be. Sargent: That's all I have. Larry Gibson — Cox Communications Gibson: Jerry, we can come in there the same way SWEPCO does. The only thing I'd ask for would be about 4' to 6' north of that transformer pad, place us a 4" from there over to the riser pole. Also, from that location to the tower is where they'd probably have the communications room, I'm guessing, I don't know. If they do that would be almost the center of the building somewhere or in one of these comers. Also, if they could get us a conduit from there over to these wings just under the pad a 2" would work fine. Of course we will need access from there, I'm sure Jim will have his office on top and if he doesn't have TV he is going to be mad. We'll just need access from these bottom floors, especially on this tower part and then from the communications room location, wherever it is going to be out to the wings and turn a 2" conduit with a 4" back. That will do it for me. Pate: A couple more comments in your packet here, in 1995 there was a right of way dedication that has not been less and accepted in this legal so I included that for you. Kelso: I seen some stuff like that in my folder and I didn't know what that was so I just left it off. Technical Plat Review February 25, 2004 Page 6 Pate: I included that for you. Also, the Fire Department has comments in here. One of theirs we talked about at In-house was the provision for a 26' wide entrance. They have a recommendation that that be a minimum of 26' wide. Kelso: For this one way coming in? Pate: Planning staff's recommendation is that there is adequate access to several places on this site. I don't know if potentially that is not marked as a fire lane or something of that nature. Again, that's a recommendation from them. Planning staff feels comfortable with what you have but I just wanted to make sure that that was brought up. Commercial design standards look fine, this is what was permitted. We just need to make sure that the other sides are the same or what all the sides look like. Revisions are due March 3`a at 10:00 a.m. With that, there is no one else here for the other items so we will have to continue those to the next meeting.