Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0503-O Staff AnalysisNovember 16, 1993' ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO • S-503-0 NAME: SANDPIPER CREEK NO. 2 -- PRELIMINARY PLAT LOCATION: West of I-430 and east of Bowman Road, south beyond the present end of Creekside Drive DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: Ronald Tyne Joe White WINROCK DEVELOPMENT CO., INC. WHITE-DATERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2101 Brookwood Dr. 401 Victory St. Little Rock, AR 72203 Little Rock, AR 72201 663-5340 374-1666 AREA: 21 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 74 FT. NEW STREET: 1700 ZONING: R-2 PROPOSED USES: Single-family Residential PLANNING DISTRICT: 11 CENSUS TRACT: 24.04 VARIANCES_REQUESTED: A grade of up to 10% in the "leveling area" at intersections in lieu of the maximum 5% grade as provided in the Subdivision Regulations. STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes the development of a 21-acre tract south of and adjacent to their current Sandpiper Creek Subdivision. Access is proposed to be gained by way of Creekside Drive in the existing Sandpiper Creek Subdivision. The developer proposes to construct 1700 feet of new streets serving 74 new residential lots. A variance is proposed to allow the grade at intersections to exceed the 5% allowable grade in the "leveling area" (the area within 30 feet of an intersection) to permit the grades to be up to 10%. Streets in two places are proposed to extend to the subdivision boundary to allow for future extension of the streets to the south and east. A. PROPOSAL/RE VEST: The applicant requests review and approval by the planning commission of a preliminary plat for a 21-acre subdivision for the development of 74 new residential lots and 1700 feet of new streets. Approval of the Board of Directors is requested for a variance from the requirement that the grade at intersections not exceed 5% within the leveling area (within 30 feet of the intersection), and permit the grades at intersections to be up to 10%. The applicant anticipates November 16, 19*93 ITEM NO.: 2 (Continued) _ FILE NQ___: S-503-0 the future extension of the street system beyond the subdivision boundary to the south and east, and, therefore, proposes to extend the streets to the subdivision boundary. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is currently zoned R-2. It is undeveloped, is heavily wooded, and has a terrain which varies in elevation of up to 55 feet. Bordering the site to the north-east is City -owned property containing the Panther Branch Creek floodway. Five hundred feet beyond the east boundary of the proposed subdivision is I-430; 300 feet to the west beyond the proposed subdivision boundary is Bowman Road. C. ENGINEERING/UTILITY COMMENTS: Engineering comments that sidewalks need to be shown on the plat, and that the detention and excavation ordinances are applicable. Engineering responded that an "in -lieu" fee cannot be considered for the required detention; detention must be provided. The developer needs to initiate with "FEMA" a request to re-evaluate the f loodp lain/ f loodway in the vicinity of the proposed subdivision. Water Works reports that a water main extension will be required. Wastewater reports that a sewer main, with easements, will be required. Arkansas Power & Light Co. will require additional easements. ARKLA Gas approved the submittal without comment. Southwestern Bell reports that easements will be required. The Fire Department approved the submittal without comment. D. ISSUES/LEGALITECHNICAL/DESIGN: The application is to provide: 1) the source of title of the developer; 2) information on the average and minimum size of lots; and, 3) information on the source of water supply and the means of wastewater disposal. A storm drainage analysis showing drainage data for all watercourses entering or leaving the plat boundaries is to be provided. A preliminary storm drainage plan incorporating typical ditch sections is to be included. The plat is to show the names of abutting recorded subdivisions or of land owners of adjacent land. Accurate locations and descriptions of monuments are to be provided. 2 November 16, 1993 ITEM NO.: 2(Continued) FILE NO.: S-503-0 The location of proposed PAGIS monuments are to be shown. The engineering and surveying certifications are to be executed. A phasing plan is to be provided where phasing is proposed. The overlapping lots need to be addressed in the phasing plan. A Bill of Assurance needs to be submitted. The zoning classification of the property within the proposed subdivision boundary and of abutting properties is to be shown. The intersections proposed for grade variances are to be identified, and the actual needed variance for each intersection is to be specified. The adopted Land Use Plan anticipated the development of the site to be "Low Density Multi -family", with "Low -Density Multi -family" immediately to the south and "Mixed Office and Commercial" beyond. E. ANALYSIS• The deficiencies noted in the information needed in the application and on the plat can be easily remedied, and do not present a problem in approving the application. The street layout, however, needs to have further thought. In two instances, the subdivision street system extends to the subdivision boundary with the evident anticipation of further extending the streets. At present, there is only one street providing access to Sandpiper Creek and Sandpiper Creek No. 2, serving a total of 112 lots. There is no plan noted for providing alternate access to the subdivision. Further, with the multi -family and non-residential potential of the land to the south, it would be poor planning to allow the residential streets to extend to the subdivision boundary, then these access points to abut multi -family or non-residential development. There needs to be a provision made to tie the subdivision street system back into Bowman Road. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the application if the items identified are remedied. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 28, 1993) Mr. Ron Tyne, representing Winrock Development, and Mr. Joe White, with White-Daters were present. Staff outlined the request to the Committee. Mr. Tyne and Mr. White, responding to staff comments regarding additional access to the subdivision, mentioned that a bridge may be constructed to gain access to the east and to a Peachtree Street extension from the existing Sandpiper Creek addition. Staff pointed out that there could be 3 November 16, 1993 ITEM NO.: 2 Continued FILE NO.: S-503-0 some resistance to such an extension from the property owners in that area. Providing the alternate access back to the west to Bowman would probably be preferable, staff and the Committee suggested. Mr. Tyne and Mr. White confirmed that the land owner from whom Winrock is purchasing the property for the proposed development, and who owns the remaining property to the south, does, in fact, believe that the property to the south has potential for commercial development. The Committee was concerned that the subdivision street system not open to and have direct access to any future commercial development. With the suggestion by the Committee that the developer give further consideration to these concerns, the Committee referred the item to the Commission for consideration. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (November 16, 1993) Staff presented the item and reported that there are no unresolved issues to be addressed. The item was included on the consent agenda for approval and was approved with the vote of 8 ayes, no nays, 2 absent, no abstentions, and 1 open position. 4 FILE N - -Q NAME: SANDPIPER CREEK NO. 2 -- PRELIMINARY PLAT LOCATION: West of I-430 and east of Bowman Road, south beyond the present end of Creekside Drive DEVELOPER: Ronald Tyne WINROCK DEVELOPMENT CO., INC. 2101 Brookwood Dr. Little Rock, AR 72203 663-5340 AREA: 21 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: ENGINEER: Joe White WHITE-DATERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 401 Victory St. Little Rock, AR 72201 374-1666 74 FT. NEW STREET: 1700 ZONING: R-2 PROPOSED USES: Single-family Residential PLANNING DISTRICT: 11 CENSUS TRACT: 24.04 VARIANCES REQUESTED: A grade of up to 10% in the "leveling area" at intersections in lieu of the maximum 5% grade as provided in the Subdivision Regulations. STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes the development of a 21-acre tract south of and adjacent to their current Sandpiper Creek Subdivision. Access is proposed to be gained by way of Creekside Drive in the existing Sandpiper Creek Subdivision. The developer proposes to construct 17.00 feet of new streets serving 74 new'residential- lots. A variance is proposed to allow the grade at intersections to exceed the 5% allowable grade in the "leveling area" (the area within 30 feet of an intersection) to permit the grades to be up to 10%. Streets in two places are proposed to extend to the subdivision boundary to allow for future extension of the streets to the south and east. A. PROPOSAL IRD EST: The applicant requests review and approval by the planning commission of a preliminary plat for a 21-acre subdivision for the development of 74 new residential lots and 1700 feet of new streets. Approval of the Board of Directors is requested for a variance from the requirement that the grade at intersections not exceed 5% within the leveling area (within 30 feet of the intersection), and permit the grades at intersections to be up to 10%. The applicant anticipates the future extension of the street system beyond the. subdivision boundary to the south and east, and, therefore, proposes to extend the streets to the subdivision boundary. FILE NO.: S-503-0 (Continued) B. C. 4M EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is currently zoned R-2. It is undeveloped, is heavily wooded, and has a terrain which varies in elevation of up to 55 feet. Bordering the site to the north-east is City -owned property containing the Panther Branch Creek floodway. Five hundred feet beyond the east boundary of the proposed subdivision is I-430; 300 feet to the west beyond the proposed subdivision boundary;'is Bowman Road. F ENGINEERING/UTILITY COMMENTS: Engineering comments that sidewalks need to be shown,on the plat, and that the detention and excavation ordinances are applicable. Engineering responded that an "in -lieu" fee cannot be considered for the required detention; detention must be provided. The developer needs to initiate with "FEMA" a request to re-evaluate the floodplain/floodway in the vicinity of the proposed subdivision. Water Works reports that a water main extension will be required. Wastewater reports that a sewer main, with easements, will be required. Arkansas Power & Light Co. will require additional easements. ARKLA Gas approved the submittal without comment. Southwestern Bell reports that easements will be required. The Fire Department approved the submittal without comment. ISSUES/LEGALI TECHNICAL/DESIGN: The application is to provide: 1) the source of title of the developer; 2) information on the average and minimum size of lots; and, 3) information on the source of water supply and the means of wastewater disposal. A storm drainage analysis showing drainage data for all watercourses entering or leaving the plat boundaries is to be provided. A preliminary storm drainage plan incorporating typical ditch sections is to be included. The plat is to show the names of abutting recorded subdivisions or of land owners of adjacent land. Accurate locations and descriptions of monuments are to be provided. P% FILE NO.: S-50 -0 (Continued) The location of proposed PAGIS monuments are to be shown. The engineering and surveying certifications are to be executed. A phasing plan is to be provided where phasing is proposed. The overlapping lots need to be addressed in the phasing plan. A Bill of Assurance needs to be submitted. The zoning classification of the property within the proposed subdivision boundary and of abutting properties is to be shown. The intersections proposed for grade variances are to be identified, and the actual needed variance for each intersection is to be specified. , The adopted Land Use Plan anticipated the development of the site to be "Low Density Multi -family", with "Low -Density Multi -family,, immediately to the south and "Mixed Office and Commercial" beyond. E. ANALYSIS• The deficiencies noted in the information needed in the application and on the plat can be easily remedied, and do not present a problem in approving the application. The street layout, however, needs to have further thought. In two instances, the subdivision street system extends to the subdivision boundary with the evident anticipation of further extending the streets. At present, there is only one street providing access to Sandpiper Creek and Sandpiper Creek No. 2, serving a total of 112 lots. There is no plan noted for providing alternate access to the subdivision. Further, with the multi -family and non-residential potential of the land to the south, it would be poor planning to allow the residential streets to extend to the subdivision boundary, then these access points to abut multi -family or non-residential development. There needs to'be a provision made to tie the subdivision street system back into Bowman Road. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the application if the items identified are remedied. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 28, 1993) Mr. Ron Tyne, representing Winrock Development, and Mr. Joe White, with White-Daters were present. Staff outlined the request to the Committee. Mr. Tyne and Mr. White, responding to staff comments regarding additional access to the subdivision, mentioned that a bridge may be constructed to gain access to the east and to a Peachtree Street extension from the existing Sandpiper Creek addition. Staff pointed out that there could be 3 FILE NO.: 5-503-4 (Continued) some resistance to such an extension from the property owners in that area. Providing the alternate access back to the west to Bowman would probably be preferable, staff and the Committee suggested. Mr. Tyne and Mr. White confirmed that the land owner from whom Winrock is purchasing the property for the proposed development, and who owns the remaining property to the south, does, in fact, believe that the property to the south has potential for commercial development. The Committee was concerned that the subdivision street system not open to and have direct access to any future commercial"development. With the suggestion by the Committee that the developer give further consideration to these concerns, the Committee referred the item to the Commission for consideration. PLANNING COMMA SIGN ACTION: (November 16, 1993) Staff presented the item and reported that there are no unresolved issues to be addressed. The item was included on the consent agenda for approval and was approved with the vote of 8 ayes, no nays, 2 absent, no abstentions, and 1 open position. 4