Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0539-A Staff AnalysisOctober 9, 1984 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 4 NAME: The Ridge Long Form "PRD", Phase II (Z-4254) LOCATION: North of Cantrell at Reservoir nRVRT.OPRR s RNnTNRRR s McClelland Development Co. Robert J. Richardson 1717 Rebsamen Park Road Little Rock, AR 72202 AREA: 8.86 acres NO. OF LOTS: 7 FT. NEW STREET: 50 ZONING: "R-2" PROPOSED USES: Single Family Lots and Attached Residential PLANNING DISTRICT: 2 CENSUS TRACT: 22.04 VARIANCES REQUESTED: None A. Site History This site is currently zoned for "R-2" Single Family. B. Development Objectives: This project employs a concept that combines attached condominium residences and large lot single family detached residences. The applicant has stated that special attention has been given to the minimizing of earthwork, excavation and vegetation removal so as to limit any negative impacts on construction to the existing natural character of the property. The main theme also utilized in the project design was the use of the.existing topography in a manner that will allow the residential use to be naturally isolated from the adjacent arterial street (Cantrell Road) through the use of vertical separation. C. Development Proposal 1. Quantative Data A. Parcel Size ..... 8.86 B. Density ......... 3.4 Units Per Acre October 9, 1984 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 4 - Continued C. Single Family Lots ...... 6 D. Condominiums .......... 24, 2-Bedroom 1100 to 2000 Sq. Ft. E. Building Coverage Condo (10%) or 5.1 acres - Single Family Unknown at this time 2. Topographical Cross Section/Landscaping The tops of the condo roofs are approximately 26' below a horizontal line of sight from Cantrell. Visibility'will be further screened by retention of existing wooded areas, existing chain link security fence and cedar plantings and existing trees or vegetation. Landscaping incorporates to the maximum the existing trees and vegetation. 3. Existing/Proposed Street System Two points access to Cantrell - one will intersect with Reservoir, the other will tie into the previously approved private street system to the east. The developer will provide some modifications to the existing traffic signal at Reservoir. 4. Parking 51 spaces for condos, 24 covered spaces (1 per unit in garages). An additional 27 spaces will be provided without covered parking in areas conveniently located adjacent to the condos. Actual number of single family parking dependent upon builder/buyer preference. 5. Development Schedule Construction will begin in the spring of 1985 and will be completed by the spring of 1986. 6. Condominium Building Size "Traditional" in style with interlocking cedar shake and standing rib copper hiproof as a dominate design feature. Entry treatment to the units will be suitable to the sloped terrain, utilizing extensive landscaping treatment. All units will have patio/wood decks. Also included will be a swimming pool and copper roof gazebo. October 9, 1984 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 4 - Continued D. Engineering Comments 1. The comcept of access to this development from the Cantrell/Reservoir intersection is acceptable; however, a meeting must be held with the City Engineer prior to the final design of the intersection. 2. The developer will be required to contribute to the modification of the signal at Reservoir/Cantrell. E. Analysis Staff is favorable to the project and its design. The applicant has attempted to protect the single family lots to the north by proposing lots for single family, detached structures immediately adjacent and focusing the attached single family condominium units toward Cantrell. Both of these use areas are separated by a private access easement. The proposed land use mix is not a problem since the trend has been established for both types of uses in the area. Staffs major concern relates to the proposed access points onto Cantrell Road and safety. It is felt that the access onto Cantrell should be one-way in/right turns only on the east drive. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, subject to comments made. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW: The applicant was represented by Mr. Ernie Peters and Mr. Bob Richardson. A revised plan was submitted which: (1) indicated a 6' brick wall, (2) reduced single family lots to five, (3) indicated an open space area on the west. The issues discussed related to: (1) how the approval of this proposal would modify the previously approved first phase located to the east; and (2) some means of assuring by covenant that the single family residential lots remained so. The applicant was advised to notify the persons who have purchased land in Phase 1 that the cul-de-sac would be eliminated and the private street system extended through this proposal and to investigate the possibility of October 9, 1984 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 4 - Continued filing a restrictive covenant committing to single family. Traffic decided that the eastern access was fine as proposed by the applicant, so staff modified its position relative to the "Right Way In and Out" signs. Water Works - Access easement should be designated "Access and Utility" easement. An additional 20' easement will be required between Lots 5 and 22. An 8" main extension is required to tie into B Ridge, Phase I. A 10' easement is required for the north side of Highway 10. Two existing fire hydrants may have to be relocated. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The applicant was represented by Mr. Bob Richardson, Civil Engineer, and Mr. Ernie Peters, Traffic Engineer. Numerous persons were present in opposition. Attorney Don Hamilton, a resident of Robinwood and owner of a lot in Robinwood Valley, spoke against the project and submitted a petition with 200 signatures of residents on both the north and sides of Highway 10, who opposed the project. Also submitted were 6-year-old affidavits from Little Rock builders, stating that the land could be developed as single family and that there was, indeed, a market for this type of development. Attorney Hamilton based his objections on Section 9-101.(b) of the subdivision ordinance, which describes the intention of a "PRD"... "to provide a harmonious relationship with the surrounding development, minimizing such influences as land and compatibilities, traffic and congestion, and excessive demands on planned and existing facilities." He also described the project as an "apartment -type, speculative, traffic intensifier and an invitation to commercial." Other persons, such as Attorney Skokus, Mr. Don Ryan and Mr. Robert Marshall, Jr., expressed concerns about traffic safety and adequate buffering on the east'for the houses along Cantrell. The applicant submitted a draft of the restrictive covenant committing the five lots to single family development. The Commission asked what would preclude a change in the covenant. It was decided that some of the residents should participate in such a document. The Commission also was concerned with Traffic's decision and the applicant's proposal not to regulate ingress and egress on Cantrell. Finally, a motion for approval was made and passed, subject to: (1) dedication of 30' of the entrance at the October 91 1984 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 4 - Continued intersection with Reservoir (to be measured from the right-of-way line); (2) involvement of a resident of the neighborhood in the restrictive covenant. The vote was: 6 ayes, 2 noes, 2 absent and 1 abstention.