HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0259 Staff AnalysisNAME: Meadow Park Addition
LOCATION: North side of Baseline Road,
3,000' west of Highway 5
DEVELOPER: ENGINEER:
Butler -Avery Homes Manes, Castin, Massie, &
West Memphis, AR McGetrick
2501 North Willow
North Little Rock, AR
Phone: 758-1360
AREA: 55 acres NO. OF LOTS: 263 FT. NEW STREET: 7,200
ZONING: Outside City
PROPOSED USE: Single Family
A. Development Concept
(1) To develop a zero lot line subdivision with 41.40
acres of a larger 55.1 acre tract.
(2) Basic design rationale followed was the City's
land use plan - Southwest District Plan. The plan
calls for a mixture of single family, multifamily,
and park and recreational uses in this area.
B. Proposal
(1) The construction of a small lot, single family
detached, residential subdivision for zero lot
line homes ranging in size from 800 to 1,200
square feet. Typical lot size is 40' x 110'.
(2) The property will be divided into 264 lots and
7,200' of new street.
(3) The density of the total plan including the
"MF-18" parcels adjacent to Baseline is 6.37 units
per acre. The single family portion as a density
of one to five units.
Meadow Park Addition - Continue
(4) Average lot coverage is 15 to 27 percent.
(5) Sidewalks - developer requests that sidewalks be
constructed at the time each unit is built, and
tied to building permit/certificate of occupancy,
since for most lots, almost half of the sidewalk
would be inc.o.rporated into a double -wide driveway.
Developer guarantees construction of all walks
within 18 months of final plat approval.
(6) Development Schedule
Project will be phased. The first phase includes
81 lots. The remainder of development will be
in two or possible three successive phases that
would contain 60 and 90 lots. One phase per year
will be developed with first phase scheduled for
construction during latter portion of 1987.
C. Engineering Comments
(1) Multifamily parcels should be indicated as
Tracts A and B and improvement should be done on
Baseline Road. The ordinance mandates that the
entire ownership of the applicants should be
shown. If under separate title, include on plat.
(2) Ninety degree right-of-way on Baseline, provide
five -lane section.
(3) Show abutting ownerships, and floodplains/floodway
dedication.
(4) Indicate intersection of Baseline with Wimbledon
Loop.
(5) Stormwater detention required.
(6) Excavation site plan required and square footage
of landscaped area.
(7) Redesign typicals to reflect 10' drive entrys to
accommodate on -street parking.
(8) Redesign Daphne and Winterbury intersection (see
Henk).
Meadow Park Addition --- Continued
D. Issues/Legal/Technical/Design
(1) Redesign plan to provide for more variety and to
break up linear design.
(2) Provide common open areas.
(3) Graphically show sidewalks on typicals to
illustrate requests made.
(4) Specify other phases.
(5) Typical are deficient - shows three different size
configurations, but no dimensions or whether
structures are one or two stories.
E. Staff Recommendation
Reserved, until comments addressed.
Staff is favorable to addressing the need for
affordable, small lot housing in the City; however, it
is felt that the plan could be improved. Livability
could be greatly enhanced by cul-de-sacs and loop
streets, and open areas. Due to the small lot size and
tying in of the site to multifamily tracts, internal
park -like areas could greatly enhance the proposal.
Staff is not favorable to phasing sidewalk construction
since it is difficult to keep track of.
F. Subdivision Committee Review
Staff and Engineering comments were discussed. The
Applicant, took exception with number C-1, D-1, and
D-2. He stated a preference for doing street
improvements on Baseline at the time the multifamily
was done. No agreement was reached, so he decided to
meet with Engineering and discuss phasing of
improvements and a timetable for development of
multifamily tracts. The Applicant felt that
redesigning the plan for more variety wasn't necessary.
Henk Koornstra, Traffic Engineer, felt that "No Parking
Anytime" signs should be placed on the streets or a
restriction in the Bill of Assurance against on -street
parking. The Applicant did not feel that this was
necessary due to the pad for four parking
Meadow 'Park Addition - Continued
spaces on the site. Traffic explained that their
experience was that this was not a deterrent to
on -street parking and to place a restriction on the
on -street parking would help circumvent future problems
and complaints from citizens. The Applicant also felt
that internal open spaces were not necessary due to the
property's location to the "Future City Park."
He did agree to specify phases and provide more
information on typicals and to certify that all
sidewalks would be built within 18 months of the
beginning development date if phasing was allowed.
Staff recommends approval, subject to previous
comments, plus: (1) dedication of park and floodway
land north of the site, (2) redesign of driveways to
"bulb form", and (3) provision of secondary access to
the park area.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (6-30-87)
The Planning staff presented the application and an update
on the efforts to solve the various issues developed at the
last hearing. Mr. Greeson stated that the concerns that
were previously addressed have been resolved to the
satisfaction of City staff. Mr. Castin and the owners have
presented a letter and other materials for documentation of
the files. Additionally, the parking design on the front
yard parking pads has been modified to eliminate the wider
driveways as requested by the Traffic Engineer. The
floodway lying along the north boundary of this plat will be
dedicated, and the balance of the floodplain between the
floodway and this plat will be offered to the City for
purchase at an agreed upon price. The Planning staff
recommends approval of the plan and plat and other Planned
Unit Development items. Mr. Jack Castin was present
representing the developer. A brief discussion was held
followed by a motion to approve the PRD as recommended by
the staff and recommend the approval to the City Board of
Directors. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes,
2 absent, 1 abstention (Richard Massie).