Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4562-D Staff AnalysisDecember 2, 2004 ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: Z -4562-D NAME: Hickory Grove Revised Long -form PD -R LOCATION: On the West side of Hinson Road, just South of Pebble Beach Drive DEVELOPER: Markus—Evans Construction, LLC 1801 Champlin Drive Little Rock, AR 72223 ENGINEER: The Mehlburger Firm 201 South Izard Street P.O. Box 3837 Little Rock, AR 72203 AREA: 40 Acres CURRENT ZONING ALLOWED USES PROPOSED ZONING: PROPOSED USE: NUMBER OF LOTS: 85 Fa -911-1.9 Single-family Residential Revised PD -R Single-family Residential VARIANCESNVAIVERS REQUESTED: Plat Variances - FT. NEW STREET: 0 1. A variance to allow a reduced front building line along the interior streets. 2. A variance to allow a reduced side yard setback for all proposed lots. 3. A variance to allow a reduced rear yard setback for all proposed lots. 4. A variance to allow the development of the subdivision with private streets. BACKGROUND: The property is the remaining 40+ acres of a 120 -acre parcel or the eastern 1/3 of the property owned by the First Baptist Church. The site was originally proposed as a multipurpose facility with residential school and church facility. The western 80 acres have since developed as a single-family neighborhood. December 2, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: Z -4562-D This property was zoned MF -6, Multi -family District (six (6) units per gross acre allowed) in mid -1981. A "Declaration of Covenantg' was filed and recorded in 1981, which runs with the property. The private covenants regulate the property's use and portion of the property's development. The private covenants state that the property will be developed for condominium units developed pursuant to the Horizontal Property Act being Act 60 of 1961 (units for sale only, no rental units). The covenants designate certain areas of the property as OS (Open Space) and require a six (6) foot high privacy fence be constructed at one location prior to any construction. The covenants also state that structures built in one area of the property not exceed one and one-half stories in height; both located on the northern boundary of the site. A preliminary plat and a multiple building site plan review were filed on the site in May 1997, to allow the construction of 234 apartment units in 10 three-story buildings. Prior to the Public Hearing; the applicant requested the application be withdrawn from consideration. A proposal was filed in March 2000, to develop a portion of the site (18.47 acres) with 22 buildings of owner occupied condominium housing. The application was later withdrawn from consideration without prejudice prior to the Public Hearing. Ordinance No. 18,884 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on June 3, 2003, rezoned this 39 -acre site from MF -6 to a Planned Residential Development with 83 units. The Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed the request and provided a recommendation of approval at their March 20, 2003 Public Hearing. The applicant proposed to develop the site in three (3) phases with zero -lot line townhouses, each of which would have its own lot of record. A common wall would be shared by each structure, which would be dissected by the common property line. This would allow some measure of property on each end of the structure for maintenance of the building. The structures would have enclosed garages facing a private street with a private courtyard on the rear of each townhouse unit. The applicant proposed the construction of a bridge, across the creek that separates this property from Hinson Road. The bridge would be constructed in the first phase. The applicant proposed a public roadway to connect with Hinson Road and Dorado Beach Drive. The road would be constructed when one of the abutting lots was final platted. There were two other streets proposed as a part of the development, which the applicant intended to maintain as private streets. There were three areas designated by covenants in the deed that were not to be encroached upon by building construction. The applicant indicated the areas of non - encroachment on the proposed development plan and indicated the covenants to be in force. 2 December 2, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -4562-D At the May 6, 2003 Public Hearing of the Little Rock Board of Directors, Director Michael Keck requested the item be returned to the Planning Commission to reconsider the need for the connection of Dorado Beach Drive between Rahling Road and Hinson Road. There had been many conversations between the neighborhood, the developer and the Board concerning the connection of the street. In these conversations, the neighborhood did not want the street connection and the developer indicated he did not desire to build the street. Director Keck was not convinced the Commission considered all the issues related to the street and if the development should be developed without the through connection. Director Keck stated he was not stating the street should not be built, only that the Commission reconsider the need for the street connection when making their decision concerning the approval of the project. Mr. Jim Lawson, Director of Planning, gave a presentation to the Board of Directors concerning traffic in the area. The Commission was not given this presentation. The presentation contained background material concerning when the street was proposed as a collector street to the Citys Master Street Plan, the development pattern in the area and traffic counts on Pebble Beach Drive. Director Keck indicated he did not feel the Commission had all the relevant information and therefore did not consider the street connection issue or if the subdivision should be developed without the connection. On May 29, 2003 the Little Rock Planning Commission took a second look and the proposed street design and the need for the proposed Collector street extending from Dorado Beach Drive and ending at Hinson Road. The Commission first considered the connection in 1995 when Pebble Beach Estates was preliminary platted. At the time two (2) streets were proposed to extend eastward into undeveloped areas; one of which was Pebble Beach Woods, the other area is the site being considered by the requested application. At the time the applicant proposed to subdivide 39.87 acres into 116 single-family lots. There were two (2) connections proposed one (1) Beckenham Road and the other Dorado Beach Drive. Beckenham Road has been shown on the Master Street Plan as a collector street since 1988. Staff and the Commission at the time of the proposal for Pebble Beach Estates requested Dorado Beach Drive be constructed to Collector Standards. [Per the Master Street Plan the Commission has the authority to request additional streets at the time of subdivision. 'The exact location and additional need for Collectors will be determined by the Little Rock Planning Commission upon advise of Staff'] When the Commission reviewed the Woods at Hinson, now known as Pebble Beach Woods in June of 1997, the Commission once again requested Dorado Beach Drive be constructed to Collector Standards. This request extended the street to the west property line of the current proposed development. The Master Street Plan was never officially amended to include this connection but the minute record indicated the Commission's desire for Dorado Beach Drive to extend from Hinson Road to the west. 3 December 2, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -4562-D Staff informed the Commission there was one east/west connection in the area, Pebble Beach Drive. The traffic counts on Pebble Beach Drive indicate approximately 1,500 automobiles per day of through traffic. The Commission was informed the service volume of a collector street was 5,000 cars per day. Other average daily traffic counts in the area indicated Pebble Beach Drive carried approximately 550 automobiles northbound and 575 automobiles southbound on Montvale Drive. On Valley Park Drive the average daily traffic counts indicated 775 northbound automobiles and 1,080 southbound automobiles. The final area analyzed was Pebble Beach Drive just east of Valley Park Drive. Estimates indicated there were approximately 2,950 automobiles per day eastbound in this area and 2,790 automobiles per day westbound. In 2003 Pebble Beach Estates and Pebble Beach Woods were 85 percent`built-out'. Of the homes constructed there were a number of the homes vacant. In addition there were 50 plus lots, which had been approved with a preliminary plat but have not yet began construction in the Chenal Ridge Subdivision. The proposal involved the completion of the connection of Dorado Beach Drive to Hinson Road. The applicant stated he was willing to make the connection and move forward with the project. Staff felt the connection desirable and felt the connection should be completed. With construction of Dorado Beach Drive extending from Hinson Road to the west and connecting to the current terminus, the traffic pressure on Pebble Beach Drive would be relieved. Although Beckenham Road had been identified on the Master Street Plan as a collector street staff did not feel Beckenham Road would be constructed in the near future. Staff felt once the connection was made it would aid in relief of traffic pressure on Pebble Beach Drive and Dorado Beach Drive should traffic volume become an issue. The Planning Commission reaffirmed their recommendation for the proposed collector street to remain on the Master Street Plan by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. The item was then considered by the Board of Directors and approved with the proposed collector street as was reviewed and approved by the Commission at their March 20, 2003 Public Hearing. Ordinance No. 18,883, also adopted June 3, 2003, allowed the requested variances for lots without public street frontage, an increased lot depth to width ratio and a variance to allow double frontage lots. The lots were sized to accommodate the building plans as required in the Subdivision Ordinance for zero -lot line developments. On October 16, 2003 the applicant proposed to amend the PD -R to allow the creation of 65 detached single-family lots on this 38.62 acre site. The developer indicated the retention of the green spaces as was previously proposed in the areas to the north and south of the site. The applicant also indicated Dorado Beach Drive would be extended as was previously approved (as one of the lots abutting the roadway is final platted). 4 December 2, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont:) FILE NO.: Z -4562-D The applicant requested variances from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow an increased depth to width ratio, a reduced front lot width, a reduced platted building line and reduced side and rear yard setbacks for specific lots within the development. The developer indicated the internal streets would be maintained as private streets and be gated. The applicant also indicated the development would be constructed in three phases. A. PROPOSAUREQUEST: The applicant is now requesting a revision to a previously approved PD -R to remove the connection between Dorado Beach Drive and Hinson Road therefore, allowing for a more efficient subdivision layout. It is the position of the applicant that this connection is unnecessary and will not provide any traffic relief for Pebble Beach Drive. It is also the position of the applicant that the amount of traffic on Pebble Beach is such that the level of service is still well within acceptable limits. The revised plat allows for the extension of the cul-de-sacs to the north and a total lot count of 85 units. The applicant is willing to construct a cul-de-sac at the end of Dorado Beach and allow for emergency back entrance to the subdivision should the bridge on Hinson Road be impassable. A turnaround will be constructed on the west side of the bridge and a single gated access will be constructed. The streets will remain private but constructed to city standard. All deed -restricted areas will remain in tact. The applicant is requesting similar variances as were previously approved. The applicant is requesting variances to allow the development of the subdivision with private streets, a variance to allow an increased lot depth to width ratio, a variance to allow a reduced front building line and a variance to allow reduced side and rear yard setbacks. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is currently undeveloped and heavily wooded. Construction has begun on the bridge crossing extending from Hinson Road into the proposed subdivision. The Windsor Court Condominium development and single-family residences are located to the south, with single-family residences to the north. There is undeveloped R-2, Single-family property to the west, with single-family residences further west. Single-family residences and undeveloped R-2 property are also located across Hinson Road to the east. 61 December 2, 2004 SUBDIVISION C FBI E NO.: A (Cont. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: FILE NO.: Z -4562-D As of this writing, Staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents indicating both support and opposition to the proposed request. The Pleasant Valley Property Owners Association, the Hillsborough Property Owners Association, the Chenal Ridge Property Owners Association, all property owners within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, within 300 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1. This is the third revision to this plat. All previous comments apply, except as may be modified under this plat. 2. Dorado Beach is shown on the Master Street Plan as a collector and should be construct as planned. 3. The plat as submitted shows some fairly major drainage -way relocations. Additional hillside drainage easements should be provided. Relocation of existing drainage ways should be minimized. 4. In accordance with Section 31-207, private streets shall be constructed to the same standards as public streets. Loria and LaScalia do not meet the criteria for minor residential street and should be constructed to a 26 -foot width with sidewalks on one side. Remove the island from Bella View or demonstrate that a single unit truck can make the turn. TILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements if service is required for the project. No construction within Tract "A' without approval of the plans by Little Rock Wastewater Utility. An existing sewer main outfall is located within Tract "N. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center -Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. A water main extension will be required in order to provide C.1 December 2, 2004 SUBDIVISIO ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) — _ FILE NO.: Z -4562-D service to this property. Modification of the plans for water facilities now under contract will be required with this change. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional information. Fire Department: Maintain a 20 -foot gate opening. Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning -Division: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Low Density Residential for this property. The applicant has applied for a PRD for a single-family residential development The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: A Proposed Extension of a Collector street (Dorado Beach) is shown on this site that crosses the site in an east—west direction. A Master Street Plan Amendment for the removal of that Collector Street is a separate item on this agenda (Item No. 13—File No. MSP04-04). Hinson Road is shown as a Minor Arterial on the Master Street Plan Dorado Beach Road is shown as a Collector. These streets previously named may require dedication of right-of-way and improvements. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicanfs property lies in the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The Residential Development Goal listed an objective of "Develop Neo -traditional neighborhoods (pedestrian and bicycle friendly neighborhoods, which are less dependant on automobiles) in areas that have not yet developed. It also listed action statements of 1) "Enforce the construction of sidewalks with all types of development', 2) "Insure that physical continuity of sidewalks so that sidewalks built on the same side of the street connect without gaps and that sidewalks built on opposite sides of the street are connected with ADA accessible crosswalkd', 3) `Require developers to install underground utilities in all new subdivisions, and 4) `Require street lighting to be in place in new subdivisions at the time streets are opened. Landscape: No comment. 7 December 2, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A Cont. FILE NO.: Z -4562-D G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (June 24, 2004) Mr. Frank Riggins was present representing the request. Staff stated the request involved two issues, one to remove a proposed collector street from the Master Street Plan and two, if this issue were successful the revision of the previously approved preliminary plat. Commissioner Rector questioned if this issue was discussed as a part of the original planned development. Staff stated in their opinion the issue had been discussed. Mr. Riggins stated a traffic study was currently underway that would prove the street was not warranted in this location and the removal of the proposed collector street would not have a negative impact on the area. Staff requested the applicant provide additional information on the proposed preliminary plat. Staff requested the applicant provide the linear feet of internal street along with the source of water and the means of wastewater disposal in the general notes section of the proposed preliminary plat. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated there were concerns with the indicated drainage -way relocations. Staff stated relocation of existing drainage ways should be minimized and requested additional hillside drainage easements to be indicated on the proposed plat. Staff also stated streets, public or private, were to be constructed to Master Street Plan standard. Staff noted the comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies and suggested Mr. Riggins ' contact them individually for additional information. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the June 24, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the linear feet of internal street, the source of water and the means of wastewater disposal. The applicant has also indicated drainage easement and additional easement as requested by staff. The proposed request is to subdivide this 40 acre site into 85 single-family lots. The proposed subdivision will be developed in two phases. The average lot size for Phase I is 75 feet by 150 feet and the average lot size for Phase II is 70 feet by 135 feet. The applicant has indicated Lots 74-85 will be developed in Phase I and Lots 1-73 will be developed in Phase II. The proposed development will add 3,818 linear feet of new private street along with sidewalks where required per the Master Street Plan. December 2, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: Z -4562-D The proposed subdivision will require variances from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the development of lots with reduced front, side and rear yard setbacks. The applicant has indicated a fixtp fnnt g1wicligiQ and setbac . The applicant has indicated ail d etback and a five TooMM 3--jildlina Staff is not supportive of the proposed request due to staffs non-support of the applicants request to remove a proposed collector street from the Master Street Plan (Item #13 — File No. MSP 04-04). As indicated staff feels the proposed collector street indicated on the Master Street Plan is critical to future development of the area as did the Commission in 1995, 1997 and 2003. Without the removal of the proposed collector street from the Master Street Plan, the indicated design will not work. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 15, 2004) Mr. Randy Fraizer was present representing the applicant. There were registered objectors present. Mr. Fraizer stated his client had received a traffic study which was given to staff at the agenda meeting. He requested the item be deferred to the August 26, 2004 Public Hearing to allow staff time to review the provided information. A motion was made to waive the By -Laws with regard to the late deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. A motion was made to defer the item to the August 26, 2004 Public Hearing. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. The applicant requested the item be deferred to the December 2, 2004, Public Hearing to allow time for an appeal to the Little Rock Board of Directors of the denial vote received on the previous item (Item J—File No. MSP 04-04). There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to approve the deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. I7 December 2, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A Cont. _ FILE NO.: Z -4562-D STAFF UPDATE: This item was deferred for two cycles at the August 26, 2004 Public Hearing to allow the applicant time to determine if a related item, a Master Street Plan issue, would be appealed to the Board of Directors. The' applicant later determined an appeal would not be sought on the Commission recommendation of denial of the proposed removal of the proposed connection of Dorado Beach Drive. The applicant submitted a letter dated September 7, 2004 requesting this item be withdrawn from consideration without prejudice. Staff is supportive of this request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a letter dated September 7, 2004 requesting the item be withdrawn without prejudice. Staff stated they were supportive of the request. There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to place the item on the Consent Agenda for Withdrawal. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. 10 Clk_ t� ITEM NO.: 13.1 -k'�V'V_ ,_�� FILE NO.: Z-4562 D ' %A� (-th NAME: Hickory Grove Revised Long -form PD -R LOCATION: on the West side of Hinson Road, just South of Pebble Beach Road a -d 1 4a- R Planning tall Comments: 1. Provide notification of property owners located within 200 -feet of the site, complete with the certified abstract list, notice form with affidavit executed and proof of mailing. 2. Provide the linear feet of internal street on the proposed preliminary plat. 3. Provide the source of water supply and the means of wastewater disposal on the proposed preliminary plat. Variance/Waivers: Plat Variances: - A variance to allow a reduced front building line, a reduced side yard setback and a reduced rear yard setback. A variance to allow the development of the subdivision with private streets. Public Works: 1. This is the third revision to this plat. All previous comments apply, except as may be modified under this plat. 2. Dorado Beach is shown on the Master Street Plan as a collector and should be construct as planned. %t'b LLx qL'S_ 3. The plat as submitted shows some t6irly major drainage -way relocations. Additional hillside drainage easements should be provided. Relocation of existing drainage ways should be minimized. 4. In accordance with Section 31-207, private streets shall be constructed to the same standards as public streets. Loria and LaScalia do not meet the criteria for minor residential street and should be constructed to a 26 -foot width with sidewalks on one side. Remove the island from Bella View or demonstrate that a single unit truck can make the turn. Utilities and Fire Department/County Planning: _Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements if service is required for the project. No construction within Tract "A" without approval of the plans by Little Rock Wastewater Utility. An existing sewer main outfall is located within Tract "A". Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center -Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. A water main extension will be required in order to provide service to this property. Modification of the plans for water facilities now under contract will be required with this change. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2434 for additional information. Fire Department: Maintain a 20 -foot gate opening. Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: No comment received. Plannin_q Division: No comment received. Landscape: No comment. Revised platlplan: Submit four (4) copies of a revised preliminary plan (to include the additional information as noted above) to staff on Wednesday, June 30, 2004.