Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0754 Staff AnalysisApril 7, 1987 SUBDIVISIONS Item 6 - File No. 751 NAME: Castle Valley South LOCATION: Along the south side of Castle Valley Drive west off Chicot Road DEVELOPER: Mrs. Mary F. Damour 1022 Hickory Hill Court Apartment A9 Clinton, IA 52732-3602 Telephone: Marla Engineering Company, Inc. 5318 J.F.K. Blvd. North Little Rock, AR Telephone: 753-1987 AREA: 4.47 Acres NO. OF LOTS: ZONING: "R-2" Single Family PROPOSED USE: Single Family PLANNING DISTRICT: 15 10 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CENSUS TRACT: 41.05 REQUESTS: Approved with 4 phases of development. VARIANCES REQUESTED: None, except that clarification of sidewalk location is requested (north or south side of this collector). A. Existing Conditions A single row of 100' parcels vacant and partially covered by brush and trees. A roadway serves this April 7, 1987 SUBDIVISIONS Item 6 - Continued site running west off Chicot Road and providing the primary residential and business access to the golf course. B. Development Proposal The owner is responding to a subdivision violation notice to her realtor. She desires to create 10 single family lots along the current street and provide improvements to collector standard. C. Engineering Comments Street improvements are required on Castle Valley Road. Contact Engineering Department for roadway requirements. Stormwater detention required on -site. Show on the drawing where the detention facilities will be located and also the calculations for these facilities. D. Analysis This plat is in good technical compliance with the ordinance. There are only two issues of substance. (1) The out parcels causing breaks in the plat boundary where illegal transfers have occurred but are in third party hands. Owners of these out parcels will not receive building permits until plat action is taken. (2) Sidewalks along Castle Valley Road were not specifically located by the City when the several previous plats were reviewed encompassing all of the original golf course lands. This applicant has requested a determination as to whether they will be assessed against the north side or his client on the south side. A specific waiver was not granted on the previous preliminary plat. E. Staff Recommendation Approval, subject to resolving the sidewalk issue. We feel the development on the north side should provide sidewalks inasmuch as that owner has the larger body of development. As to the out parcels, staff feels they will be corrected and plats submitted as permits are requested. April 7, 1987 SUBDIVISIONS Item 6 - Continued F. Subdivision Committee Review The item was reviewed: by .the Commission. Staff explained its recommendation requiring the sidewalks on the north side of Castle Valley Road, which would free this developer from improvements on the south side of the road. Utilties - Additional easements required between Lots 3 and 4 and along the south side of Lots 14 and 15. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Mr. Ed Turbin represented Dillon Construction Company, the Developer of Whispering Pines Subdivision, and owner of land abutting the golf course. The three concerns he expressed were: (1) that the area should not be subdivided, (2) there should be a buffer between this proposed residential area and the golf course which he owns, and (3) since the golf course is possibly in the route of the proposed South Loop Expressway, the plat should be deferred until more specific details are available on the actual alignment. Mr. Turbin felt that this was important since three or four holes of the golf course would be affected. If the plat were to be approved, he felt that liability and access questions regarding lots in this Subdivision, which is next to his golf course, needed to be worked out. Engineering explained that there would probably be only a minor variation in the alignment in this area that would probably shift it only 1,600' to 1,700' to the south at the most; so there would be no great impact. The Commission felt that the real issue was a private one; -and it was not their duty at this point to assess the implications of the South Loop. A motion for approval was made and passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes, and 1 abstention. April 7, 1987 SUBDIVISIONS Item 5 - File No. 754 NAME: Kings Pointe Addition -r- LOCATION: Lying on the east side of Kirby Road south of Markham Place Circle TL0[7VT AnLSD . Marion K. Birmingham and Vernon K. Brown 13500 Rock Creek Parkway Little Rock, AR 72211 Telephone: 225-5946 ENGINEER: Robert D. Holloway, Inc. 200 Casey Drive Maumelle, AR 72118 Telephone: 851-3366 AREA: 2.5 Acres NO. OF LOTS: 9 ZONING: "R-2" Single Family PROPOSED USE: Single Family PLANNING DISTRICT: 17 CENSUS TRACT: 42.03 VARIANCES REQUESTED: None. FT. NEW STREET: 224 A. Existing Conditions A"heavily wooded site served by a two-lane, narrow, county standard roadway. April 7, 1987 SUBDIVISIONS Item 5 - Continued B. Development Proposal To plat nine lots on 2.5 acres taking access by way of a short cul-de-sac off Kerby Road. The lots are to be utilized as detached single family residences. C. Engineering Comments (1) Existing downstream drainage does not exist through Parkway Place Subdivision. Therefore, the developer is required to provide some means to detain the water and spread the water instead of concentrating when it drains back to the northeast. (2) Boundary street improvements are required on Kirby Road. Due to the topography in the south end of Kirby Road (steep hill), the Engineering staff would like to discuss with the developer the possible reconstruction of the hill in lieu of other improvements on Kirby Road. Please the Engineering staff for further details. D. Analysis The plat as filed is in good shape except for three areas of concern: (1) sidewalks along Kerby Road, (2) 30' building line on Kerby Road, and (3) site distance on Kerby south of the entrance. E. Staff 'Recommendation Approval as filed with compliance requirement on sidewalks and building line. We defer to the City Engineer on the site distance question. F. Subdivision Committee Review Engineering explained that the hill to the south needed to be lowered since it created a very dangerous situation. The applicant's engineer had not yet informed his client of this requirement. He was asked to work with Engineering regarding the extent of his involvement in this matter. April 7, 1987 SUBDIVISIONS Item 5 - Continued The Committee felt that no sidewalk improvements would be required due to the cost involved if the applicant participates in the reconstruction of the hill. Utilities - Water main extension plus on -site fire protection required. Acreage charge of $300 per acre may apply. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The applicant was present. There were no objectors. Staff reported that Winrock Development Company was concerned that Kings Pointe Cove did not line up with Summit Ridge Drive, which is their plat to the west. Kings Pointe Cove is located 20' to 25' south of Summit Ridge. Both engineers were present and worked out an agreement regarding the off -set. Engineering recommended that the final plat be conditioned upon City participation in the improvement of the site distance on Kirby Road and the cutting down of the hill. The owner understood that without City approval and funding, his development costs would be an additional $10,000. A motion was made for approval, subject to working out an alignment of the intersection with Engineering. The vote was 11 ayes,•0 noes, and 0 absent.