Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0503-L Staff AnalysisSUBDIVISION COMMITTEE/STAFF REPORT DEFFERED MATTERS: A. T. B. Devine Returns after failure of notice Issues remain same a. Proper plat boundary b. Street improvement to industrial standards C. Plat submittal requirements including floodway. d. Written request with justification for waivers Note: This issue has received one deferral. B. (Anna's Case on Heritage Church) C. Johnson Short -form PCD Returns after request for six weeks deferral All issues remain: a. Floodway, handicapped ramps b. Bill of Assurance C. Compatibility with adopted plan d. Large neighborhood objection D. _[Tony's Zoning Case) 1. Hugh Wells Preliminary Plat Issues are: a. Master Street Plan Right -of -Way on Raines Road 45 feet from centerline. b. Curb, gutter and sidewalk on both streets. C. Drainage easement on Lot 1 d. A water main to serve Lots 2 and 3 will be required. Staff Recommendations: Approval subject to completing the plat filing requirements: ( a ) certificates (b) tie to land corner (c) PAGIS Monuments Staff supports improvement waivers but right-of-way must be dedicated. 2. Rvburn Preliminary Plat Issues are: a. Master Street Plan Right -of -Way and improvements for Colonel Glenn Road plus sidewalk.55 feet from centerline. b. Redesign intersection to meet traffic division recommendations. C. Name Street d. Detention and excavation ordinance's apply. e. Complete plat filing requirements. f. Sewer main extension required with easements. g. Water main extension required. Staff Recommendations: Approval of the plat with changes to accommodate items noted above. No to both waivers. Issues are: a. Sidewalks will be required. b. Water main required on each element of Phase V with access easement platted as public service, access and utility easement at minimum 24 feet. 3. Windsor Court Patio Homes Issues are: a. Sidewalks will be required. b. Water main required on each element of Phase V with access easement platted as public service, access and utility easement at minimum 24 feet. C. Complete plat filing requirements. d. Section through site east -west with structures. Staff Recommendations: APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ABOVE 4. Sandgiper West Preliminary Block 7 Issues are: a. Complete plat submittal requirements. b. Verify right-of-way needed on Bowman Road and the improvements will be required plus sidewalk. C. Provide record of creek right-of-way ownership. d. Sidewalk on one side of Creek Side Drive. e. Name short cul-de-sac. f. Some lots appear to be less than 60 feet at building line. g. 35 feet building line on Lots 1 and 36 plus 10 feet vehicle access prohibition zone. h. Drainage at point of plat entry. i. PAGIS Monuments j. Redesign entry to conform to Traffic Engineering recommendation. k. Stormwater and excavation ordinance apply. 1. Sewer main extension required. M. 12 inch water main extension required in Bowman Road to be coordinated with later road improvements. n. Complete rezoning action prior to final plat. o. Need phasing plan if not to be one phase. Staff Recommendations: APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ABOVE BEING RESOLVED. Staff supports the variance on the cul-de-sac, the horizontal radius, 15 foot building line and the in lieu for Bowman Road. 5. South Bend Acres Revised Preliminary Plat Issues are: a. Clarify who is engineer/surveyor. b. Complete plat submittal requirements. C. Sewer main extension is required with easements. d. The 12 inch water main across Lots 35 and 42 requires an easement 7.5 feet on each side of the line. This may be cause for design adjustment. e. Explain offset in Alexander Road Right -of -Way. f. Explain dimension difference between this preliminary plat and the previous plat along the boundary of Lot 45. g. Note about side yard maximum applies to lots in Alexander city limits only. h. Show dedication on Alexander Road at 45 feet from centerline with 30 feet pavement, sidewalks are required. i. Excavation and detention ordinance apply. j. Clarify city limits line. k. Show access easement overlay the rear lot drive on Lots 38-45. Staff Recommendations: Approval subject to above/waivers still good. 6. Savell's PCD (Short -form) Issues are: a. No access on Baseline from the site. b. Dailey Drive to be collector standard. Thirty-six feet of pavement in a 60 foot right-of-way, with sidewalk. C. Conformance with the landscape and buffer standards. Screen dumpster site. d. Increase width of handicapped space. e. Screen mobile home park from parking. Staff Recommendations: Approval subject to above. 71. Park Lane PRD Issues are: a. Quantify plan on drawing. b. Provide elevations of building's showing texture and form. C. Need specific landscape plan. d. Identify all structural elements. e. Show treatment of land outside landscape and hard surface areas. f. Provide additional 9 feet of right-of-way plus curb, gutter and sidewalk on Park Lane. g. Provide repair of curb and construct sidewalk on East 15th Street. Staff Recommendations: APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ITEMS ABOVE. May 19, '19 9 2 ' ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: S-503-L NAME: Block 7, Sandpiper West LOCATION: Section 9, T-1-N, R-13-W, Pulaski County, Arkansas DEVELOPER• WINROCK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 2101 Brookwood Drive Little Rock, AR 72203 501-663-5340 AREA: 9.24 Ac. NUMBER OF LOTS: ZONING: MF-18 PROPOSED USES: PLANNING DISTRICT: 11 NAME: CENSUS TRACT: 24.01 VARIANCES REQUESTED: ENGINEER• WHITE-DATERS AND ASSOC., INC. 401 Victory Street Little Rock, AR 72201 501-374-1666 36 FT. NEW STREET: 1,300 Single Family I-430 1. Length of cul-de-sac (1,100 feet) 2. Horizontal radius (75 feet) 3. 15 foot building setback on Lot 25 as shown. A. PROPOSAL RE VEST: This proposal consists of a preliminary plat for 36 residential home sites adjacent to a significant drainage course, which lies along the north boundary of the property. This land area appears to be the last residential parcel for this subdivision development lying east of Bowman Road. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The existing land area is generally undisturbed, except for a small area which was involved in the placement of soils from another site. The terrain is somewhat steep falling into a large drainage way which runs from the north part of the plat to the southeast corner. The site is not easily accessed at this time due to a curve problem, both vertically and horizontally on Bowman Road. 1 May 19, 1992- SUBDIVISION ITEM NO. 4 (Continued) FILE NO. 5-503-L C. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Sidewalk will be required on one side of Creekside Drive unless a redesign or a variance is pursued. The short cul-de-sac should be provided with a street name. Drainage at the point of entry of the plat should be provided. A redesign of the entry of the street into Bowman Road should be accomplished to move the street to a better site distance relationship to the south. Storm Water and Excavation Ordinances will apply. D. ISSUES/LEGAL/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: The staff has determined that the only one of these several items that apply is design. The design problem being access to Bowman Road to provide vehicle ingress and egress in a safe fashion. E. ANALYSIS• The Planning staff's review of this preliminary plat indicates that it is an entirely proper use of the land if the several issues raised by the Public Works Department can be resolved. Additionally, there are some plat submittal issues that staff would like to point out which are the typical kinds of preliminary plat items that are omitted. These items are verifying the right-of-way need for Bowman Road and reflecting such on the plat. Providing a record of the creek right-of-way ownership. Provide a notation that all of the lots will be a minimum of 60 feet at the building line as several give the appearance of being narrower. Provide a 35 foot building line on lots adjacent to Bowman Road or request a variance. Provide a ten foot vehicle access prohibition zone along the rear of lots abutting Bowman Road to prohibit direct driveway access to residences. Locate the PAGIS Monuments as required by Ordinance. Provide comment on resolution of the water main extension required and the sewer main extension. The rezoning action filed concurrent with this preliminary plat should be resolved prior to the staff's signing a final plat. A phasing plan should be submitted if the plat is not to be concluded as one final plat. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of this preliminary plat subject to the resolution of the several items noted above. The staff supports the variances requested which include length of the cul-de-sac, horizontal street centerline radius, the E May 19, 1992 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 4 Continued FILE NO.: S-503-L approval of in lieu contributions to improvement for Bowman Road and the 15 foot building setback on Lot 25. There may be other variances or waivers after further review of the plat. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 30, 1992) The engineer and the owner were present. A lengthy discussion of this plat and the several issues was held with the resolution being that the engineer would pursue the design questions dealing with the Bowman Road access to the plat, and providing the additional plat content as pointed out by the staff. In as much as there was a concentration on the redesign of the roadway, that issue will prevail over determining rather or not a number of the variances will be required. Therefore, resolution of the issues will follow at the public hearing after further work by the project engineer. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 19, 1992) Planning staff presented the application and offered comments on the preliminary plat with the recommendation of approval. Approval is subject to submittal of a phasing plan by the engineer of record and resolution of the several items attendant to the Bowman Road right-of-way and construction requirement. The Chairman then asked Mr. Joe White, the applicant, to present his case. Mr. Joe White was present and offered the following comments relative to the several issues attendant to this preliminary plat. Mr. White indicated that the Mr. Tyne and Mr. Rogers of Winrock were present being the developers of the project. There were no objectors in attendance at the meeting. Mr. White pointed out that the primary issue was one of site distance at the point of entry of the subdivision. Mr. White reported that he had met the previous week with Jim Lawson and Mr. Bill Henry of Public Works for discussion of resolution of the site distance problem. That meeting resulted in a suggestion that if the developer could obtain from Elgor Properties an easement of way on the west side of Bowman Road, that the in lieu monies normally contributed for the road improvements could be used to lower the grade on Bowman Road. It was felt by all parties involved in this discussion, this would resolve the site distance problem. The treatment given the roadway in this instance would be similar to that adjacent to a subdivision immediately to the north. Mr. White indicated this approach to site distance problem would not cause a change in the subdivision plat layout. A commissioner queried Mr. White as to whether or not the Elgor Properties' people had agreed to this arrangement. Mr. White indicated that they had agreed. 3 May 19, 1992- SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 4 (Continued) _ FILE NO.: 5-503-L Mr. White then moved to the subject of sidewalks and indicated this was a point of discussion earlier at Subdivision Committee. However, the developer has now reflected sidewalks on the plat and is no longer an issue. Richard Wood of staff indicated that the sidewalk termination point, at the south bend in the street, would be an appropriate stopping point and would comply with the Ordinance intent. Mr. White then asked the Commission to address the subject of phasing of his plat since he had not previously made a request for phasing. Staff indicated that it would not be a problem if he would reflect this on the preliminary plat. Mr. White agreed to submit a revised plat to reflect the plan. Mr. White then moved to the subject of storm water detention. The nine acre plat involved here lies adjacent and on the Panther Creek or branch floodway. He indicated that he had discussed with Jerry Gardner the possibility of contributing to an regional detention as opposed to placing detention within the boundary of the plat. The Chairman and commission accepted Mr. White's proposal on the detention, with the understanding that Mr. Gardner and Public Works agreed with this approach with the idea, the City could utilize the monies as appropriate for the Panther Branch floodway area. A motion was then made to approve the preliminary plat as offered, with the following several conditions and amendments: 1. The easement from Elgor Properties be produced for the public record and the right-of-way modification and elevations be accomplished with the funds which would normally be contributed as in lieu for street improvements. 2. Mr. White will modify the preliminary plat to indicate a phasing plan. 3. The developer will offer in lieu funds to a regional detention facility for Panther Branch in lieu of constructing on -site detention facilities. The motion included a recommendation to the City Board for approval of the variances for cul-de-sac length, for horizontal radius of street centerline, and the 15 foot building setback line on Lot 25. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. 4 FILE NO.: S-503- NAME: Block 7, Sandpiper West LOCATION: Section 9, T-1-N, R-13-W, Pulaski County, Arkansas DEVELOPER: WINROCK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 2101 Brookwood Drive Little Rock, AR 72203 501-663-5340 ENGINEER• WHITE-DATERS AND ASSOC., INC. 401 Victory Street Little Rock, AR 72201 501-374-1666 AREA: 9.24 Ac. NUMBER OF LOTS: 36 FT. NEW STREET: 1,300 ZONING: MF-18 PROPOSED USES: Single Family PLANNING DISTRICT: 11 NAME: I-430 CENSUS TRACT: 24.01 VARIANCES REQUESTED: 1. Length of cul-de-sac (1,100 feet) 2. Horizontal radius (75 feet) 3. 15 foot building setback on Lot 25 as shown. A. PROPOSAWREOUEST: This proposal consists of a preliminary plat for 36 residential home sites adjacent to a significant drainage course, which lies along the north boundary of the property. This land area appears to be the last residential parcel for this subdivision development lying east of Bowman Road. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The existing land area is generally undisturbed, except for a small area which was involved in the placement of soils from another site. The terrain is somewhat steep falling into a large drainage way which runs from the north part of the plat to the southeast corner. The site is not easily accessed at this time due to a curve problem, both vertically and horizontally on Bowman Road. 1 FILE NO:: S-503-L (Continued) C. �9 E. F. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Sidewalk will be required on one side of Creekside Drive unless a redesign or a variance is pursued. The short cul-de-sac should be provided with a street name. Drainage at the point of entry of the plat should be provided. A redesign of the entry of the street into Bowman Road should be accomplished to move the street to a better site distance relationship to the south. Storm Water and Excavation Ordinances will apply. ISSUES/LEGAL/TECHNICALIDESIGN: The staff has determined that the only one of these several items that apply is design. The design problem being access to Bowman Road to provide vehicle ingress and egress in a safe fashion. ANALYSIS• The Planning staffs review of this preliminary plat indicates that it is an entirely proper use of the land if the several issues raised by the Public Works Department can be resolved. Additionally, there are some plat submittal issues that staff would like to point out which are the typical kinds of preliminary plat items that are omitted. These items are verifying the right-of-way need for Bowman Road and reflecting such on the plat. Providing a record of the creek right-of-way ownership. Provide a notation that all of the lots will be a minimum of 60 feet at the building line as several give the appearance of being narrower. Provide a 35 foot building line on lots adjacent to Bowman Road or request a variance. Provide a ten foot vehicle access prohibition zone along the rear of lots abutting Bowman Road to prohibit direct driveway access to residences. Locate the PAGIS Monuments as required by Ordinance. Provide comment on resolution of the water main extension required and the sewer main extension. The rezoning action filed concurrent with this preliminary plat should be resolved prior to the staff's signing a final plat. A phasing plan should be submitted if the plat is not to be concluded as one final plat. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of this preliminary plat subject to the resolution of the several items noted above. The staff supports the variances requested which include length of the cul-de-sac, horizontal street centerline radius, the E FILE NO.: S-503-L (Continued) approval of in'lieu contributions to improvement for Bowman Road and the 15 foot building setback on Lot 25. There may be other variances or waivers after further review of the plat. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 30, 1992) The engineer and the owner were present. A lengthy discussion of this plat and the several issues was held with the resolution being that the engineer would pursue the design questions dealing with the Bowman Road access to the plat, and providing the additional plat content as pointed out by the staff. In as much as there was a concentration on the redesign of the roadway, that issue will prevail over determining rather or not a number of the variances will be required. Therefore, resolution of the issues will follow at the public hearing after further work by the project engineer. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 19, 1992) Planning staff presented the application and offered comments on the preliminary plat with the recommendation of approval. Approval is subject to submittal of a phasing plan by the engineer of record and resolution of the several items attendant to the Bowman Road right-of-way and construction requirement. The Chairman then asked Mr. Joe White, the applicant, to present his case. Mr. Joe White was present and offered the following comments relative to the several issues attendant to this preliminary plat. Mr. White indicated that the Mr. Tyne and Mr. Rogers of Winrock were present being the developers of the project. There were no objectors in attendance at the meeting. Mr. White pointed out that the primary issue was one of site distance at the point of entry of the subdivision. Mr. White reported that he had met the previous week with Jim Lawson and Mr. Bill Henry of Public Works for discussion of resolution of the site distance problem. That meeting resulted in a suggestion that if the developer could obtain from Elgor Properties an easement of way on the west side of Bowman Road, that the in lieu monies normally contributed for the road improvements could be used to lower the grade on Bowman Road. It was felt by all parties involved in this discussion, this would resolve the site distance problem. The treatment given the roadway in this instance would be similar to that adjacent to a subdivision immediately to the north. Mr. White indicated this approach to site distance problem would not cause a change in the subdivision plat layout. A commissioner queried Mr. White as to whether or not the Elgor Properties' people had agreed to this arrangement. Mr. White indicated that they had agreed. 3 FILE -NO.: 5=503-L Continued Mr. White then moved to the subject of sidewalks and indicated this was a point of discussion earlier at Subdivision Committee. However, the developer has now reflected sidewalks on the plat and is no longer an issue. Richard Wood of staff indicated that the sidewalk termination point, at the south bend in the street, would be an appropriate stopping point and would comply with the Ordinance intent. Mr. White then asked the Commission to address the subject of phasing of his plat since he had not previously made a request for phasing. Staff indicated that it would not be a problem if he would reflect this on the preliminary plat. Mr. White agreed to submit a revised plat to reflect the plan. Mr. White then moved to the subject of storm water detention. The nine acre plat involved here lies adjacent and on the Panther Creek or branch f loodway. He indicated that he had discussed with Jerry Gardner the possibility of contributing to an regional detention as opposed to placing detention within the boundary of the plat. The Chairman and commission accepted Mr. White's proposal on the detention, with the understanding that Mr. Gardner and Public'Works agreed with this approach with the idea, the City could utilize the monies as appropriate for the Panther Branch floodway area. A motion was then made to approve the preliminary plat as offered, with the following several conditions and amendments: 1. The easement from Elgor Properties be produced for the public record and the right-of-way modification and elevations be accomplished with the funds which would normally be contributed as in lieu for street improvements. 2. Mr. White will modify the preliminary plat to indicate a phasing plan. 3. The developer will offer in lieu funds to a regional detention facility for Panther Branch in lieu of constructing on -site detention facilities. The motion included a recommendation to the City Board for approval of the variances for cul-de-sac length, for horizontal radius of street centerline, and the 15 foot building setback line on Lot 25. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. 4