Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0289-A Staff AnalysisMAD Subdivision Committee Comments November 21, 2002 Item No. 1 S-289-A Brimer Subdivision Replat, located at Mabelvale Cut-off and Brimer Street Planning Staff Comments: 1. Correct the spelling of "Mabelvale" street name on the proposed preliminary plat. 2. Provide the buildable area for Lot 1. 3. Provide the source of title on the proposed preliminary plat. 4. Prove the average lot size in the general notes. 5. Provide the number of lots in the general notes. 6. Indicate in the general notes if any covenants are existing or proposed. 7. Provide the proposed source of water supply to the development in the general notes. 8. Provide the means of wastewater disposal in the general notes. 9. Indicate a phasing plan in the general notes. 10. Provide notification of abutting property owners complete with the certified abstract list, notice form with affidavit executed and proof of mailing. Variance/Waivers: None requested. Puhlic Works: 1. Mabelvale Cut-off is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A dedicationof right-of-way 45-feet from the centerline will be required (the proposed dedication is acceptable). 2. Brimer Road is classified as a local street and a right-of-way width of 50-feet is acceptable. 3. Provide design of Brimer Street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvements to the street including 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development. Provide contribution in -lieu of construction for Mabelvale Cut-off. 4. All residential lots should take driveway access from Brimer or a single access point on Mabelvale Cut-off. 5. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. 6. Plans for all work in the right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. Utilities and Fire Department/County Planning: Little Rock Wastewater: Sewer Main extension required, with easements, if service is required for Lots 1 through 3. Contact Little Rock Wastewater at 688-1414 for additional details. ENTERGY: No comment received. Center -Point Energy: No comment received. Southwestern Bell: Approved as submitted. Central Arkansas Water: A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection (s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the Developer's expense. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional details. County. Planning: No comment received. CATA: Site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on bus radius, turnout and route. Planning Division: No comment. Landscape; No comment. Revised plat/plan: Submit four (4) copies of a revised preliminary plat/revised site plan (to include the additional information as noted above) to staff on Wednesday, November 27, 2002. February 20, 2003 ITEM NO.: J NAME: Brimer Subdivision Replat FILE NO.: S-289-A LOCATION: On the south side of Mabelvale Cut-off and north of Brimer Street near the intersection of Mabelvale Cut-off, University and Woodbridge Streets DEVELOPER: Mystery Properties Inc. P.O. Box 56403 Little Rock, AR 72215 AREA: 1.65 acres ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick 319 President Clinton Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 NUMBER OF LOTS: 8 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, CUP PLANNING DISTRICT: 15 CENSUS TRACT: 41.05 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED Mabelvale Cut-off. BACKGROUND: In -lieu contribution for street construction to On July 13, 1982, the Planning Commission approved a two -lot plat (and a CUP for a Church on Lot A) for the Light House Baptist Temple Lots A and B. The plat was final platted and recorded December 1, 1982. The current proposal includes the land area of Lot A, which has not developed. (Lot B was replatted into Courtney Subdivision.) A. PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to replat Lot A into eight (8) single-family residential lots. The lots will have street frontage on Mabelvale Cut-off and Brimer Road. The lots average 7020 square feet; adequate to meet the minimum requirement of the Subdivision Ordinance. The applicant proposes a 35-foot platted building line adjacent to Mabelvale Cut-off and a 25-foot platted building line adjacent to Brimer Road as required by the Subdivision Ordinance. February 20, 2003 ITEM NO.: J (Cont. FILE NO.: S-289-A the site and the condition of the road in this area the site should not develop as single- family but as a quite neighborhood friendly business. She stated the Committee had shown the site as Mixed on the Future Land Use Plan. She stated a small scale office or commercial development was more appealing to the neighborhood than the proposed three single-family lots adjoining the road with five additional lots facing Brimmer Road. Mr. Fred Worthington spoke in opposition of the proposed development. He questioned the reasoning for the item being reheard by the Commission, when the item was previously denied. He stated if there was no review process then the Commission should change their review policy and not waste citizen's time by coming to address the Commission with no benefit. Mr. L.W. Perry indicated he had no new information to share with the Commission. Mr. Walter Kenzel stated he had no new information to share with the Commission. Chairman Nunnley stated the reasoning for the review of the application was not the threat of a law suite but that the Commission did not follow their own rules. He stated it was unfair to applicants for the City to have rules in place and the applicant meet all the requirements under the ordinance and the city not play by the rules. Commissioner Floyd stated the City should review the Ordinance to allow Staff to administratively sign -off on plats which complied with the requirements of the ordinance. A motion was made to approve the preliminary plat as filed to include all Staff Recommendations and Comments. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent, 1 abstain (Norm Floyd) and 1 Recuse (Fred Allen). 0 February 20, 2003 ITEM NO.: J (Cont.) FILE NO.: STAFF UPDATE Mr. Stephen Giles, Deputy City Attorney, stated an item heard by the Commission at their February 6, 2003 Public Hearing should be reconsidered. He stated to do so several motions and waivers would be required. A motion was made to reconsider the Brimmer Subdivision Replat. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 recuse (Fred Allen). A second motion was made to expunge the previous vote of the February 6, 2003 Public Hearing. The motion was approved by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 recuse (Fred Allen). A motion was made to waive the By -Laws with regard to the applicant being required to file a new application, paying a new filing fee and the required legal notice. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 recuse (Fred Allen). The Commission requested Staff to notify the persons who spoke in opposition of the proposed development at the previous Public Hearing and the Neighborhood Association which were previously notified. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 20, 2003) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the applicant. There were objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval. Staff stated the proposed preliminary plat meet all the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance and the applicant was not requesting any waivers or variances. Chairman Nunnley stated since the item was previously heard the Commission they would only hear new information. Ms. Janet Berry addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed development. She stated she was a resident of the area and was also representing the Southwest United for Progress in opposition of the proposed development. She stated traffic concerns for the area roadways and the increased traffic in the area, primarily residents of Saline County traveling the road to work and shopping. Ms. Berry stated the homes would not be a sufficient distance for the road to allow for noise reduction from the passing motorist. She stated her home was located 100-feet from the roadway and noise was a concern. Ms. Berry stated she had participated in the development of the Neighborhood Action Plan for the area. She stated the plan committee determined due to the topography of 7 February 20, 2003 ITEM NO.: J (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-289-A The applicant has indicated right-of-way will be dedicated and one-half street improvements made to Brimer Road. The applicant has indicated right-of-way dedication but is requesting an in -lieu contribution for street construction to Mabelvale Cut-off. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant with a scattering of trees. Brimer Road is a narrow unimproved (no sidewalk) roadway with open ditches for drainage. Mabelvale Cut-off is an unimproved roadway also with open ditches for drainage. One-half street improvements have been made to the property located to the west of the site on Mabelvale Cut-off. There are single-family residences located in the immediate area with the homes south of Mabelvale Cut-off being on large lots. The homes north of Mabelvale Cut-off, in the Woodbridge Subdivision, are located on similar sized lots as the lots proposed. There is a relatively new single-family home located immediately west of the site. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, Staff has not received any comment from area residents. The West Baseline Neighborhood Association and Southwest United for Progress, along with all abutting property owners were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: is 3 0 5. 6. Mabelvale Cut-off is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45-feet from the centerline will be required (the proposed dedication is acceptable). Brimer Road is classified as a local street and a right-of-way width of 50-feet is acceptable. Provide design of Brimer Street conforming to the Master Street Construct one-half street improvements to the street including sidewalk with the planned development. Provide contribution construction for Mabelvale Cut-off. All residential lots should take driveway access from access point on Mabelvale Cut-off. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Plans for all work in the right-of-way shall be submitted start of work. Plan. 5-foot in -lieu of Brimer or a single for approval prior to 2 February 20, 2003 ITEM NO.: J (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-289-A E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Little Rock Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for Lots 1 through 3. Contact Little Rock Wastewater at 688-1414 for additional details. ENTERGY: No comment received. Center -Point Energy: No comment received. Southwestern Bell: Approved as submitted. Central Arkansas Water: A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection (s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the Developer's expense. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional details. Counter Planning: No comment received. CATA: Site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on bus radius, turnout and route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape Issues: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November21, 2002) Mr. Pat McGetrick, McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers, was present representing the application. Staff gave an overview of the proposed development to the Subdivision Committee indicating there were additional items necessary on the proposed preliminary plat. Staff stated the proposed source of water and the proposed means of wastewater disposal were needed in the General Notes of the proposed preliminary plat. Staff stated the applicant was to include the number of lots and the average lot size in the General Notes as well. 3 February 20, 2003 ITEM NO.: J (C FILE NO.: S-289-A Staff stated there was a concern related to three driveway locations onto Mabelvale Cut-off and requested Mr. McGetrick try to minimize the number of driveway locations. Mr. McGetrick indicated the proposed development would have two driveway locations with Lots 2 and 3 sharing a driveway on the lot line and Lot 1's driveway would be located as far as feasible away from this break as possible. Staff requested Mr. McGetrick indicate the driveway locations on the proposed preliminary plat. Staff stated there were some concerns of the buildability of Lot 1 and requested Mr. McGetrick indicate on the proposed preliminary plat the buildable area of Lot 1. Staff noted comments from Central Arkansas Water and Little Rock Wastewater requesting Mr. McGetrick contact these agencies for additional information. There being no further issues for discussion, the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to Staff addressing most of the issues raised by Staff and the Subdivision Committee. The applicant has indicated in the General Notes the proposed source of water (Central Arkansas Water Association) and the proposed means of wastewater disposal (Little Rock Wastewater Utility). The applicant has also indicated the average lot size and the number of lots. The applicant has indicated on the preliminary plat the proposed dedication of right-of-way to both streets, Brimer Road and Mabelvale Cut-off, and indicated street improvements will be made to Brimer Road. The applicant has also indicated an in -lieu contribution for Mabelvale Cut-off rather than street construction. Staff is supportive of this request. The proposed lots meet the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance, being greater than 60-feet in width and more than 7,000 square feet in area, as required for R-2, Single-family zoning. Staff is supportive of the proposed preliminary plat. Although, the lots are somewhat smaller than the land area of homes located around the site, the lots average 7,020 square feet comparable to the lots to the north of the site in the Woodbridge Subdivision. The applicant has indicated the buildable area for Lot 1 and in that area it appears that a 1,800 — 2,000 single -story home could be constructed on the lot. To Staff's knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed preliminary plat. Staff recommends approval of the proposed plat for the Brimer Subdivision as presented. 4 February 20, 2003 ITEM NO.: J (Cont.) FILE NO.: 5-289-A STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the proposed plat subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. Staff recommends approval of the request to allow an in -lieu contribution for street construction of Mabelvale Cut-off. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 19, 2002) Mr. Pat McGetrick of McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers was present representing the application. There were objectors present. Chairman Lowry stated the Planning Commission's policy was to allow the applicant a deferral option when fewer than nine (9) Planning Commissioners were present. He stated there were only eight (8) Commissioners present. Mr. McGetrick requested the item be deferred to the January 23, 2003 Public Hearing. There was no further discussion. A motion was made to defer the item and approved by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 23, 2003) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the applicant. There were numerous objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval. Staff stated the proposed preliminary plat complied fully with the Subdivision Ordinance. Staff stated the application was not requesting any waivers or variances. Mr. McGetrick stated he had met with the neighborhood on two (2) occasions. He stated the neighborhood was opposed to the size of the lots. He stated the property owner did not want to decrease the number of lots and wanted to proceed as filed. Mr. Fred Worthington spoke in opposition of the proposed development. He stated drainage was a concern. He stated the property drained across his property and drainage was currently an issue without development. Mr. Worthington stated Staff had commented the lot sizes were similar to lot sizes to the north of Mabelvale Cut-off but the proposed lot sizes did not compare to the lot sizes to the south of Mabelvale Cut- off. He stated south of Mabelvale Cut-off the lots were near one (1) acre. Mr. Worthington stated he was not opposed to single-family development and suggested the applicant reconsider and subdivide the site into five (5) lots. Two (2) lots on Mabelvale Cut-off and three (3) lots on Brimmer Street. 5 February 20, 2003 ITEM NO.: J (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-289-A Mr. Troy Laha spoke in opposition of the proposed preliminary plat. He stated he represented the Southwest United for Progress and the Association had voted to support the Legion Hut Neighborhood Association in their opposition of the proposed development. Ms. B.J. Wyrick, City Director Ward 7, spoke in opposition of the proposed preliminary plat. She stated the proposed plat was not conducive to the surrounding neighborhood. She stated the neighborhood was in favor of three single-family lots accessing Brimmer Street and a single lot development as a commercial or office development accessed by Mabelvale Cut-off. Mr. Jay Reba spoke in opposition of the proposed development. Mr. Reba stated the proposed development was too intense for the road. He stated three (3) driveway locations on Mabelvale Cut-off was excessive. He stated the neighborhood had met with Mr. McGetrick on two (2) occasions and made recommendations for modifications to the proposed plat. Mr. Reba stated the applicant was unwilling to take the advice of the neighborhood and reduce the number of lots. Mr. L.W. Perry stated he lived adjacent to the site and was opposed to the proposed development. He stated his home was built in 1994 and was 100-foot off the roadway. Mr. Perry stated the proposed plat only indicated a 35-foot platted building line, which was to close to the roadway. He stated the site sloped from north to south five (5) to fifteen (15) feet. He stated drainage was an issue for the site and would continue to be an issue once the site was developed. Mr. Perry stated cars traveled Mabelvale Cut-off at an excessive rate of speed even though the posted speed limit was 35 miles per hour. Mr. Perry stated cars backing out of their drives onto the street would be in great danger. Mr. Perry stated the applicant had indicated the sales price of the homes to be $80,000. Mr. Perry stated his home was recently appraised at $107,000. Mr. Perry stated there was more to a neighborhood than selling houses. He stated the proposed lots would not allow for a yard, which was out of character with the neighborhood. He stated the proposed development would change the appearance of Brimmer Road. There was a general discussion concerning the Commission's role when the applicant met the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. Mr. Giles stated Richardson vs. the City of Little Rock had determined the Commission was required to approve the request. A motion was made to approve the application as filed. The motion failed by a vote of 5 ayes, 3 noes, 1 abstain (Robert Stebbins), 1 recuse (Fred Allen) and 1 absent. A