Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5097 Staff AnalysisNovember 1, 1988 Item No. C - A.pp I . 11c : Name: Location: STAFF REPORT: Amendment to the Master Street Plan - West L i t t l e R o c k __.... ._._... Deltic Farm and Timber by Manes, Castin, Massie & McGetrick (MCMM) Modification of Alignments and Functional Classifications for West Little Rock North of Kanis Road, south of Cantrell, and west of the current City limits The MCMM request is to eliminate an arterial and alter the collector pattern in the area north of the Parkway, south of Cantrell and west of the proposed "West Loop." Concerns about the slopes (grades) and need for an arterial have been discussed. In preliminary discussions with Staff, an alternative alignment was also discussed. There is a large area of steep slopes in Area #1 (see map) which should reduce the amount of development and also prevent connections between the Cantrell area and the Chenal development. Due to the limited number of connections, each will act like a funnel (more traffic than would normally be expected). This concern, together with an attempt to space arterials at about one'mile intervals, the Staff feels requires an arterial to be built between the "West Loop" and the arterial to Johnson Ranch PCD. In addition, the 2010 estimate (assuming approximately 30% development) indicates an ADT of about 4000 for the said road. After review of the grades for the Taylor Loop connection, the Staff finds them to be within acceptable range and would be willing to discuss reduced standards because of the topography. Though the alignment shown on the Master Street Plan would provide a better flow, Staff is willing to discuss alternative alignments. In the past, Little Rock has reduced the number of arterials and located them so that traffic flows would be discontinuous (1-430, West Loop, Cantrell/Markham area). The result has been that collectors have carried high traffic volumes and have operated in a dual collector/arterial function. An example of this dual function is Shackleford Road. By the year 2010, most of the November 1, 1988 Item No.._C jcont �nu,pd)__ - collectors in this area are projected to have 7000 to 11,000 vehicle trips per day (ADT) -- design volume is 5000 ADT for collectors. The Staff has requested that a traffic impact analysis be done by Deltic on their North Slope rezoning request which covers this Master Street Plan area. We anticipate that the preliminary by this meeting for review. These determining whether the Taylor Loop arterial or a collector. (There is a reduced arterial standard for the topography and limited access.) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: numbers will be available numbers will assist in connection should be an also the possibility for alignment due to Deferral for two weeks to review traffic study information. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (October 18, 1988) Jim Lawson of the Planning Staff informed the Commission that Staff has asked for a two-week deferral in order to get the results of a traffic study. Mr. Lawson said Staff and a Deltic representative would like to present information to the Commission today. Mr. Castin, representing Deltic Timber, reviewed the Deltic holdings. He continued the presentation showing the proposed open space and public use areas within the Deltic holdings. He proceeded to discuss the arterial system for the area. Mr. Castin presented both the Deltic proposal and the current Master Street Plan alignment. Due to concern about how the arterial alignment off of the west leg of Taylor Loop occurred, Mr. Malone of the Planning Commission went over what was shown on the pre -1988 Master Street Plan and ET Study. On both of these plans, three breaks in the ridge were shown; two were arterial and one a collector. Staff felt that all three should be arterial due to the spacing of one and one-half to two miles and -only three possible connections through the ridge. Mr. Shultz, representing Johnson Ranch, expressed concern about the notice on Master Street Plan changes. Mr. Shultz also expressed some confusion about the status of Taylor Loop and when, or if, Taylor Loop was proposed to be downgraded from arterial status. He also said that the Taylor Loop/Hinson Road (east/west) connection was logical and should be made more direct. Mr. Jones expressed some concern about adequate notice being given to property November 1, 1988 tem No;C (Cont..inued) owners, particularly large ones, for both Master Street Plan or Master Parks Plans changes. Mr. Greeson stated that notice had been given to both Deltic Timber and Glenn Johnson Ranch developers prior to the current Master Street Plan being adopted. A motion was made to defer the issue to the November 1, 1988 Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed by unanimous voice vote (10 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent). PLANNING COMMISSION (November 1, 1988) Gary Greeson, Planning Director, informed the Planning Commission that City staff and Deltic Timber representatives met several times to review the traffic study data. Based on the results of the traffic study (conducted for Deltic Timber by Peters & Associates), all parties have come to general agreement on an amended street pattern for the area. The collector pattern requested by Deltic Farm and Timber, with an arterial from Taylor Loop West to intersect the Parkway north of the golf course as the Street Plan indicates, is the recommendation of Staff. This amendment includes: 1. A modified standard for the arterial consisting of 70 feet of right-of-way, 45 feet of paving from back of curb to back of curb and 12 percent grade (collector standard), due to topography and the land use pattern proposed_ In addition, two 12 foot traveling lanes (with 8 foot shoulders) are to be provided in OS areas, with a 70 foot right- of-way. Construction staging requires widening of the 45 foot section to full width when the traffic volume reaches 12,000 vehicles per day. Further, no parking or direct access by single family residential is to be allowed; nonresidential and multifamily areas have curb cuts spaced at 300 foot intervals; and intersections must be flared with additional right-of-way provided. 2. Downgrade of Master Street Plan proposed arterial to a collector from the Parkway to Denny Road. However, no parking shall be allowed, driveways are to be spaced at 200 foot intervals; and the developer is to work to minimize driveways. The intersection with Chenal Parkway must be flared in the same manner as the east side of the Parkway where the arterial intersects. November 1, 1988 tem No_Cm �.Cona inued.) 3. In the southern part of the Deltic property, all collectors that will have over 5,000 ADT shall have 200 foot spacing of driveways (except in hardship cases and unique situations), no parking, flared intersections. Curb cuts for driveways are to be minimized. Driveway requirements will be subject to review during the platting stage of development. (See attached letter from Charles Nickerson to Mr. Monzingo dated October 31.) Some clarification was requested concerning a short collector which goes off the north -south arterial south of Glenn Johnson Ranch. Mr. Jack Castin of MCMM, representing Deltic Farm and Timber, agreed to remove the collector in question. Mr. Castin quickly reviewed the traffic study numbers and standards for some of the roads. Mr. Ed Willis, representing Johnson Ranch Development, expressed some concern about the exact location of the north -south arterial to the Johnson Ranch Development at Highway 10. He also wanted to know if the east -west portion.of Taylor Loop would be downgraded to a collector. Staff said that based on the Deltic Timber traffic study, the classification would not be changed. Mr. Bill Meeks, representing Mrs. Johnson (a landowner on the east side of the Deltic property at Highway 10 where the north -south arterial at Johnson Ranch is proposed to go) stated that Mrs. Johnson wanted the road on her west property line as shown on an earlier plan (Highway 10 Plan). A letter from Mr. Karam expressing his desire that the road be on his east line and that he have access to it was read into the record. (His property is on the west boundary of Deltic property where the north -south arterial going to Johnson Ranch is proposed to be located.) Jerry Gardner of the Engineering Staff stated that the Master Street Plan was not intended to be site specific and that at this time the Engineering Department did not have an opinion as to where the exact location should be (whether on the east or west property line of Deltic, a difference of some 300 feet). Mr. Ed Willis, developer of the Glenn Johnson Ranch property, stated that the road was always to have been on Deltic land (the east side) and was to be built by November 1, 1988 Item NoC (Continued Deltic. The road (on the east) lines up with a major entrance to the Glenn Johnson Hanch development. Staff stated that the Glenn Johnson Ranch development had not been platted, and the City does not know where specific entrances will be. Mr. Monzingo of Deltic Farm and Timber stated that Deltic was not requesting a change in the Master Street Plan for this arterial and they wanted the road on their west property line. Staff agreed that the north - south arterial to the Johnson Ranch development was not a change since the Master Street Plan shows an arterial along this general alignment, and the specific location would be determined when zoning along the road took place. Mr. Gary Greeson again stated that the Master Street Plan is not site specific. Chairman Jones and the Commission asked that all parties get together and in thirty days come forward with a specific alignment for the north -south arterial at the Glenn Johnson Ranch development. A motion was then made by Stephen Leek to approve the amendment to the Master Street Plan as agreed upon by the City and Deltic Farm and Timber. It was noted that this action did not affect the arterial extending north to Glenn Johnson Ranch.. The motion passed by a voice vote (10 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent). 1. 2. 3. 4. 5_ 6. 7. 8. Meeting Date: December 20, 1988 Case No.: Z-5097 Request: Rezone from unclassified to "MF -6," "MF -12." "MF -18," "O-2," "C-2" and "C-3" Location: South side of Highway 10 east of Highway 300 (Deltic's north slope area). Owner/Applicant: Deltic Farm and Timber, Inc./John A. Castin Existin.g_Status: Vacant Propos_ed___ pe: Mixed development Staff Recommendat._i_o.n: Approval of the requested rezonings for nine sites. Following is the recommendation for the remainder of the sites: Site No. 119A, approval of "MF -6" as requested. Sites No. 121, 122 and 123, approval of request for withdrawal and substitution of Site No. 119A. Sites No. 132 and 133, approval of deferral to April 4, 1989 as requested, in order to work with other property owners in the immediate area. Site No. 134, approval of deferral to April 4, 1989 as requested, in order to work with other property owners in the immediate area. Site No. 135, approval of deferral to April 4, 1989 as requested, in order to work with other property owners in the immediate area. Site No. 140, approval of "C-2" as requested. Since the commercial land and 'he neighboring residential land have the same owner, the transition and buffering can be adequately handled. In addition, a proposed church site on Chenal Parkway will aid in the transition from commercial to residential uses. Site No. 142, approval of "C-3" conditioned upon requirement of site plan review by the Planning Commission and provision of a 40 foot landscaped setback adjacent to Highway 10 and the Chenal Parkway. Site No. 144, approval of 11C-3" conditioned upon requirement of site plan review by the Planning Commission and provision of a 40 foot landscaped setback adjacent to Highway 10 and the Chenal Parkway. 9. Planning_... q9mm.ission Recommendat.io.n: Approval of the ............... requested rezonings for Sites No. 102, 103, 105, 116, 117, 119, 120, 141 and 143 at the November 1, 1988 public hearing. Action on the remaining sites was deferred to the December 13, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting. 10. Recommendation Forwarded With: 10 ayes, 0 noes and ............ .... ............ ..... .. .. ..... ..... ............ ............ .... .. ...... .... . ............... ... I . Forwarded .... ... ... . .... ..... 1 absent. 11. Objectors: There were several interested individuals in attendance, including some objectors. Z-5097 Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: Deltic Farm and Timber, Inc. John A. Castin Deltic's north slope area Rezone from unclassified to "MF -6," "MF -12," "MF -18." 110-2," "C-2" and "C-3." Mixed development 204.12 acres Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE . AND _._ZON.I NG : North - Vacant, unclassified and zoned "0-2" South - Vacant, unclassified East - Vacant and single family, unclassified West - Vacant and single family, unclassified STAFF ANALYSIS: The proposal is to rezone five areas in what is referred to as Deltic's north slope area, lands between Highway 10 and the 2300 acres that were rezoned in 1987. The total acreage involved is 204.12 acres and the requested districts are "MF -6," "MF -12," "MF -18," "0-2," "C-2" and "C-3." The proposed districts and acreage are: "MF -6" - 107.1 acres "MF -12" - 14.1 acres "MF -18" - 11.4 acres 110-2" - 13.0 acres "C-2" - 31.1 acres "C-3" - 27.4 acres The land in question is beyond the City limits so it is unclassified and the balance will remain unclassified until the City exercises its Extraterritorial zoning authority or the area is annexed. At that time, the land that has not been rezoned for this action will be "R-2." A majority of the area is currently outside the City so it is unclassified. To the east, where the City limits begin, there is some zoning other than "R-2" in place that includes Z-5097. _(pgpn _i n.ued. )._. 1,0-2," "C-2," "MF -12" and "MF -18" which is part of the Johnson Ranch development. Land use is still somewhat fragmented with single family residential being the primary use. In both directions on Highway 10, there are nonresidential uses with the ones in the City being nonconforming. A large percentage of the land on both sides of Highway 10 is still undeveloped. Staff has carefully reviewed the proposed reclassifications and, generally, supports the overall concept of the request. For the most part, the rezonings conform to the adopted plans for the area and should help achieve a quality development pattern along both Highway 10 and the Chenal Mountain Parkway. The rezoning should have little impact on the existing built-up areas and will assist in providing needed services for the residents in the future. The major roadways that will intersect Highway 10 are shown to be commercial nodes and the proposed commercial rezonings are within the established areas. ENG I NEER I„NG_ C0i0MENTS : A traffic impact study is needed. Dedication of 120 foot right-of-way for Chenal Parkway and written commitment to dedicate rights-of-way for other arterials, collectors and residential streets at the time of platting. Dedication of additional right-of-way for Highway 10 for a total of 110 feet will be required. The design of the Highway 10/Chenal Parkway intersection could have an impact on the proposed 15.5 acre "C-3” site. STAFF .... .RECOMMENDATION: Reserved pending review of traffic and other information. Z-5097 (Con.tinued). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: (As presented at the Planning - Commission Public Hearing) Sites No. 102 and 103, approval of "MF -6" as requested. Site No. 105, approval of "C-2" as requested. (The land was rezoned to "OS" in 1987.) Site No. 116, approval of 110-2" with a 40 foot landscaped strip along the Parkway. Site No. 117, approval of "MF -6" as requested. Site No. 119, approval of "MF -12" as requested. Site No. 120, approval of "C-2" as requested. Sites No. 121, 122 and 123, approval of "MF -6" as requested. Sites No. 132 and 133, approval of "MF -6" as requested. Site No. 134, approval of 110-2" as requested. Site No. 135, approval of "C-2" as requested. (The parcel needs to meet the minimum site area unless it is an existing platted tract.) Site No. 140, denial of "C-2" and approval of "0-2." Site No. 141, approval of 110-2" as requested. Site No. 142, denial of "C-3" and approval of "C-2." Site No. 143, approval of "MF -18" as requested. Site No. 144, denial of "C-3" and approval of "C-2." Z-5057 (_Cont i nued_).._..__.... .... _ ____....... ... _... PLANNING COMMISSION A.11 CTION: (November 1, 1988) The first issue that was discussed was Item C, a proposed amendment to the Master Street Plan. Gary Greeson, Planning Director, presented the Staff's recommendation and then addressed the various agreements made between the City and Deltic Farm and Timber. Mr. Greeson reviewed the letters of agreement and discussed all the specifics in detail. A number of individuals spoke about the issue and there was a lengthy discussion. A motion was made to recommend approval of the Master Street Plan Amendment with the exception of the eastern north -south arterial. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. (See Item C for a complete and detailed minute record.) The Planning Commission then discussed the rezoning issue. The applicant, Jack Castin, was present. There were several interested individuals in attendance, including some objectors. Staff then presented the list of recommendations for each of the individual sites. Sites 102 and 103, approval of "MF -6" as requested. Site 105, approval of 11C-2" as requested. Site 116, approval of "0-2" with a 40 foot landscape strip along the parkway. Site 117, approval of "MF -6" as requested. Site 119, approval of "MF -12" as requested. Site 120, approval of "C-2" as requested. Sites 121, 122 and 123, approval of "MF -6" as requested. Sites 132 and 133, approval of "MF -6" as requested. Site 134, approval of "0-2" as requested. Site 135, approval of "C-2" as requested. Site 140, denial of "C-2" and approval of "0-2." Site 141, approval of 110-2" as requested. Site 142, denial of "C-3" and approval of "C-2." Z-5097 (gon t i n.ued)___........ Site 143, approval of "MF -18" as requested. Site 144, denial of "C-3" and approval of "C-2." Jack Castin addressed the Commission and said he was surprised with some of the Staff's recommendations. Mr. Castin expressed some concerns with several of the sites, especially No. 140. He went on to discuss other issues and problems with the recommendations. Gene Pfeifer said he has been working with Deltic on the configuration of the Highway 10/Chenal Parkway intersection and he was not aware of any specific proposal, especially an elevated ramp. Mr. Pfeifer said he was opposed to Deltic's rezoning because of the proposed design of the new intersection. Jerry Gardner of the City Engineering Staff addressed the proposed intersection and the design program for the future. Mr. Gardner also made some comments about right-of-way requirements and future alignments. Joe White said that he had submitted intersection plans in November of 1987 and received approval from the City. Mr. White gave some history on the issue and said that Mr. Pfeifer had not agreed to anything. Mr. Pfeifer spoke again and said that he doubted that there was a need for an elevated roadway at the Highway 10 and Parkway intersection. Bill Meeks, representing Mrs. Glenn Johnson, addressed the Commission and said that Mrs. Johnson's property was adjacent to Sites #132, 133, 134 and 135. Mr. Meeks described the neighborhood as a quality residential area and said there were problems with the proposed "C-2" rezoning for Site #135 because of being directly west of Mrs. Johnson's residence. Brian Morrison made some comments about the homes in the area and said the land was currently outside the City. Mr. Morrison said he was not opposed to development of the area but questioned the need for zoning the land at this time. He said his lot was adjacent to Sites #121, 122 and 123 and he was opposed to the proposed "MF -6" reclassification. Mr. Morrison asked why "MF -6" was necessary and requested that the "MF -6" rezoning be denied. He ended his presentation by saying that the residents have had no input or discussions with Deltic Farm and Timber. Ed Willis said that a decision should be made on the roads before any action was taken on the rezoning of certain sites. Z- 5 ..... ... Jack Castin said that access to Sites #121, 122 and 123 would be from a proposed arterial and asked that the item not be deferred. Mr. Castin said that Deltic wanted "C-2" for Site #140 and Site #144 provided the necessary right-of- way for the Highway 10/Parkway intersection. Additional comments were made by various individuals and Commissioner David Jones suggested that the request be deferred. There was some discussion about a number of the issues and then a motion was made to recommend approval of Sites #102, 103, 105, 116, 117, 119, 120, 141 and 143 as requested. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. A second motion was made to recommend approval of "MF -6" for Sites #121, 122 and 123 but was withdrawn. A final motion was offered to defer the balance of the sites to the December 13, 1988 meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. (At the end of the hearing, Deltic Farm and Timber withdrew their letter of agreement dated November 1, 1988.) AMENDED STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This recommendation covers those sites that were not acted upon by the Commission at the November 1, 1988 meeting. Staff has twice met with the applicant and neighboring property owners to discuss various issues. In addition, a revised design for the intersection of Highway 10 and Chenal Parkway has been prepared and presented to adjacent property owners. To deal with concerns of other property owners, Deltic Farm & Timber Co. has requested that consideration of certain tracts near Glenn Johnson Ranch be deferred to April 4, 1989 and that the "MF -6" area further to the south (Sites No. 121, 122 and 123) be shifted to the other side of the arterial (Site No. 119A). Staff finds the shifted "MF -6" location to be an improvement. In addition, Deltic wishes to have "C-3" uses on Sites No. 142 and 144, and has agreed to the requirement of site plan review and 40 foot landscaped setbacks on Highway 10 and Chenal Parkway, which is acceptable to Staff. Based on the above revisions and further review, the amended Staff recommendation is as follows: Site No. 119A, approval of "MF -6" as requested. Z-5097 (Co,ntinued) Sites No. 121, 122 and 123, approval of request for withdrawal and substitution of Site No. 119A. Sites No. 132 and 133, approval of deferral to April 4, 1989 as requested, in order to work with other property owners in the immediate area. Site No. 134, approval of deferral to April 4, 1989 as requested, in order to work with other property owners in the immediate area. Site No. 135, approval of deferral to April 4, 1989 as requested, in order to work with other property owners in the immediate area. Site No. 140, approval of "C-2" as requested. Since the commercial land and the neighboring residential land have the same owner, the transition and buffering can be adequately handled. In addition, a proposed church site on Chenal Parkway will aid in the transition from commercial to residential uses. Site No. 142, approval of 11C-3" conditioned upon requirement of site plan review by the Planning Commission and provision of a 40 foot landscaped setback adjacent to Highway 10 and the Chenal Parkway. Site No. 144, approval of "C-3" conditioned upon requirement of site plan review by the Planning Commission and provision of a 40 foot landscaped setback adjacent to Highway 10 and the Chenal Parkway.