HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0813-B Staff AnalysisJanuary 26, 1988
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 8
NAME:
LOCATION:
DEVELOPER!
Winrock Development Co.
2101 Brookwood Drive
P.O. Box 8080
Little Rock, AR 72203
Phone: 663-5350
Spring Tree Village PRD
Approximately 2,000 feet east of
the Intersection•of Chicot and
Yarberry
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
401 Victory Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
Phone: 374-1666
AREA: 9.W acres NO. OF LOTS: 4
ZONING: "R-2"
PROPOSED USES: Single Family
A. Proposal/Request:
FT. NEW STREET: 1850
1. To develop a single family detached zero lot line
development on 9.27 acres in two phases of 30 lots
each.
2. The development will consist of 61 new affordable
homes on lots of 38 to 40 feet in width and 100 to
110 feet in depth, which will be built for sale to
first-time and moderate -income home buyers.
3. Approximately 1.35 acres will be dedicated as open
space easements which will be restricted in the Bill
of Assurance. Density is 6.5 lots per acre. A
30-foot easement containing floodplain buffers a
single family area to the south.
4. House sizes will be 700 to 1,000 sq. ft. with an
18 by 20 foot parking pad.
5. Due to plans of targeting a market in the range of
$40,000 to $50,000, several alternatives to the
normal development requirements are requested: (a)
construction of a 3.0-foot walk at the curb line of
the street, (b) allow sidewalks to be constructed at
the time each lot is developed since lots are narrow
and much of the sidewalk would be removed to
construct parking pads, (c) allow construction of
January 26, 1988
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 8 - Continued
the 18 by 20 foot parking pads to begin at the curb
line or at the back of sidewalk where sidewalk is to
be constructed, (d) allow 50-foot centerline radius
as shown on Minor Loop Street, (e) allow
construction of a four -inch high drive - over curb
to eliminate expensive curb cuts for each lot, (f)
waiver of stormwater detention requirements because
of absolute zero impact that those requirements have
on adjacent floodplains for this project, (g) omit
prime coat application (an expensive questionable
value) for asphalt pavement.
B. Existing Conditions:
The area is a typical fringe area, rural in nature with
various uses such as mobile homes, commercial and
industrial. A single family brick structure is located
on a 100 foot lot to the immediate east of the property.
An existing affordable homes subdivision is located
north of the site.
C. Issues/Discussions/Le al/Technical/Desi n:
1. Further review of potential open space is needed.
2. Applicant is asked to provide the usual street
standards.
3. Applicant is asked to provide a transition zone on
the northwest quadrant between the larger existing
single family homes and the proposed smaller lot
homes.
D./ Engineering Comments:
✓ 1. Five-foot sidewalks at curb or four -foot sidewalk at
property line. No three-foot sidewalk at curbs.
2. Stormwater detention facilities' location and
calculations.
3. Excavation, sediment and erosion control sketch
plan.
January 26, 1888
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 8 - Continued
E. Staff Recommendation:
Deferral until comments are addressed.
F. Subdivision Committee Review:
The Applicant explained that the requests outlined under
the proposal are for "cost-cutting" features necessary
for affordable housing development. He also pointed out
that there were 500 to 600 feet between this site and
Deer Meadows. This is undeveloped and owned by the
Developer. The Applicant was asked to meet with Parks
and Staff and work out acceptable open space and
recreational areas.
There was a question as to the acceptability of the area
behind the lots that is open space. Another major issue
was identified as parking, since the City Ordinance
restricts parking on the streets. This project leaves
no room for visitor parking in the whole Subdivision.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The proposal was represented by Mr. Ron Tyne of Winrock
Development Company, and Mr. Joe White, Engineer, of.
White-Daters and Associates. Mr. Tyne revised his request
to eliminate any waivers and to dedicate 1.5 acres of
additional open space adjacent to the southern portion of
the site. He also presented alternate plans for on -site and
off -site parking. It was agreed that he would provide two
Joff-street parking spaces per unit, 27' separation between
driveway and no on -street parking on curbs.
The Builder, Mr. John Wright, was also present. He
presented pictures of the homes to be built.
January 26, 1888
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 8 - Continued
Mr. Bill Wilson of 6720 Yarberry was concerned about the
maintenance and upkeep of the open space and the fact that
Yarberry Lane did not have existing curb and gutter.
Mr. Olin Wahrmund of 11301 Kerry Drive felt that there was
not a market for this type of development, and he felt that
the concentration of small -lot homes in this one area would
adversely affect property values. He strongly felt that it
was the City's responsibility to protect existing
neighborhoods against this sort of thing. He argued futher
that the Planning Commission's responsibility was to help
balance the orderly growth of the City. Mr. Wahrmund
explained that the Southwood Subdivision, which is located
across the street from this proposal, has homes of 700
sq. ft. and has not sold very well. He explained that out
of 104 units, 20 had sold. Perry Place is also a nearby
Subdivision of homes of 1,000 sq. ft., that was not selling
very well.
Finally, a motion for approval was made and passed .by a vote
of: 7 ayes, 3 noes, 1 absent (no vote: Grace Jones,
Riddick, and'Leek).
January 26, 1988
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 8
NAME:
LOCATION:
DEVELOPER:
Winrock Development Co.
2101 Brookwood Drive
P.O. Box 8080
Little Rock, AR 72203
Phone: 663-5350
AREA: 9.W acres
ZONING: "R-2"
Spring Tree Village PRD
Approximately 2,000 feet east of
the Intersection of Chicot and
Yarberry
RNnTWRRRs
White-Daters and Associates
401 Victory Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
Phone: 374-1666
NO. OF LOTS:
PROPOSED USES: Single Family
A. Proposal/Re uest:
)q FT. NEW STREET: 1850
1. To develop a single family detached zero lot line
development on 9.27 acres in two phases of 30 lots
each.
2. The development will consist of 61 new affordable
homes on lots of 38 to 40 feet in width and 100 to
110 feet in depth, which will be built for sale to
first-time and moderate -income home buyers.
3. Approximately 1.35 acres will be dedicated as open
space easements which will be restricted in the Bill
of Assurance. Density is 6.5 lots per acre. A
30-foot easement containing floodplain buffers a
single family area to the south.
4. House sizes will be 700 to 1,000 sq. ft. with an
18 by 20 foot parking pad.
5. Due to plans of targeting a market in the range of
$40,000 to $50,000, several alternatives to the
normal development requirements are requested: (a)
construction of a 3.0-foot walk at the curb line of
the street, (b) allow sidewalks to be constructed at
the time each lot is developed since lots are narrow
and much of the sidewalk would be removed to
construct parking pads, (c) allow construction of
January 26, 1988
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 8 - Continued
the 18 by 20 foot parking pads to begin at the curb
line or at the back of sidewalk where sidewalk is to
be constructed, (d) allow 50-foot centerline radius
as shown on Minor Loop Street, (e) allow
construction of a four -inch high drive - over curb
to eliminate expensive curb cuts for each lot, (f)
waiver of stormwater detention requirements because
of absolute zero impact that those requirements have
on adjacent floodplains for this project, (g) omit
prime coat application (an expensive questionable
value) for asphalt pavement.
B. Existing Conditions:
The area is a typical fringe area, rural in nature with
various uses such as mobile homes, commercial and
industrial. A single family brick structure is located
on a 100 foot lot to the immediate east of the property.
An existing affordable homes subdivision is located
north of the site.
C. Issues/Discussions/Le al/Technical/Desi n:
1. Further review of potential open space is needed.
2. Applicant is asked to provide the usual street
standards.
3. Applicant is asked to provide a transition zone on
the northwest quadrant between the larger existing
single family homes and the proposed smaller lot
homes.
D . / Engineering Comments:
1. Five-foot sidewalks at curb or four -foot sidewalk at
property line. No three-foot sidewalk at curbs.
2. Stormwater detention facilities' location and
calculations.
3. Excavation, sediment and erosion control sketch
plan.
January 26, 1888
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 8 - Continued
E. Staff Recommendation:
Deferral until comments are addressed.
F. Subdivision Committee Review:
The Applicant explained that the requests outlined under
the proposal are for "cost-cutting" features necessary
for affordable housing development. He also pointed out
that there were 500 to 600 feet between this site and
Deer Meadows. This is undeveloped and owned by the
Developer. The Applicant was asked to meet with Parks
and Staff and work out acceptable open space and
recreational areas.
There was a question as to the acceptability of the area
behind the lots that is open space. Another major issue
was identified as parking, since the City Ordinance
restricts parking on the streets. This project leaves
no room for visitor parking in the whole Subdivision.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The proposal was represented by Mr. Ron Tyne of Winrock
Development Company, and Mr. Joe White, Engineer, of.
White-Daters and Associates. Mr. Tyne revised his reauest
to eliminate any waivers and to dedicate 1.5 acres of
additional open space adjacent to the southern portion of
the site. He also presented alternate plans for on -site and
off -site parking. It was agreed that he would provide two
Joff-street parking spaces per unit, 27' separation between
driveway and no on -street parking on curbs.
The Builder, Mr. John Wright, was also present. He
presented pictures of the homes to be built.
January 26, 1888
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 8 - Continued
Mr. Bill Wilson of 6720 Yarberry was concerned about the
maintenance and upkeep of the open space and the fact that
Yarberry Lane did not have existing curb and gutter.
Mr. Olin Wahrmund of 11301 Kerry Drive felt that there was
not a market for this type of development, and he felt that
the concentration of small -lot homes in this one area would
adversely affect property values. He strongly felt that it
was the City's responsibility to protect existing
neighborhoods against this sort of thing. He argued futher
that the Planning Commission's responsibility was to help
balance the orderly growth of the City. Mr. Wahrmund
explained that the Southwood Subdivision, which is located
across the street from this proposal, has homes of 700
sq. ft. and has not sold very well. He explained that out
of 104 units, 20 had sold. Perry Place is also a nearby
Subdivision of homes of 1,000 sq. ft., that was not selling
very well.
Finally, a motion for approval was made and passed by a vote
of: 7 ayes, 3 noes, 1 absent (no vote: Grace Jones,
Riddick, and' Leek)•.
NAME:
VMG&W iOl11A
DEVELOPER:
Winrock Development Co.
2101 Brookwood Drive
P.O. Box 8080
Little Rock, AR 72203
Phone: 663-5350
Spring Tree Village PRD
Approximately 2,000 feet east of
the Intersection of Chicot and
Yarberry
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
401 Victory Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
Phone: 374-1666
AREA: 9.17 acres NO. OF LOTS: 60 FT. NEW STREET: 1850
ZONING: "R-2"
PROPOSED USES: Single Family
A. Proposal/Request:
1. To develop a single family detached zero lot line
development on 9.27 acres in two phases of 30 lots
each.
2. The development will consist of 61 new affordable
homes on lots of 38 to 40 feet in width and 100 to
110 feet in depth, which will be built for sale to
first-time and moderate -income home buyers.
3. Approximately 1.35 acres will be dedicated as open
space easements which will be restricted in the Bill
of Assurance. Density is 6.5 lots per acre. A
30-foot easement containing floodplain buffers a
single family area to the south.
4. House sizes will be 700 to 1,000 sq. ft. with an
18 by 20 foot parking pad.
5. Due to plans of targeting a market in the range of
$40,000 to $50,000, several alternatives to the
normal development requirements are requested: (a)
construction of a 3.0-foot walk at the curb line of
the street, (b) allow sidewalks to be constructed at
the time each lot is developed since lots are narrow
and much of the sidewalk would be removed to
construct parking pads, (c) allow construction of
S2rin2 Tree Village PRD - Continued
the 18 by 20 foot parking pads to begin at the curb
line or at the back of sidewalk where sidewalk is to
be constructed, (d) allow 50-foot centerline radius
as shown on Minor Loop Street, (e) allow
construction of a four -inch high drive --over curb
to eliminate expensive curb cuts for each lot, (f)
waiver of stormwater detention requirements because
of absolute zero impact that those requirements have
on adjacent floodplains for this project, (g) omit
prime coat application (an expensive questionable
value) for asphalt pavement.
B. Existing Conditions:
The area is a typical fringe area, rural in nature with
various uses such as mobile homes, commercial and
industrial. A single family brick structure is located
on a 100 foot lot to the immediate east of the property.
An existing affordable homes subdivision is located
north of the site.
C. Iss.ues/Discussions/Legal/Technical/Desi n:
1. Further review of potential open space is needed.
2. Applicant is asked to provide the usual street
standards.
3. Applicant is asked to provide a transition zone on
the northwest quadrant between the larger existing
single family homes and the proposed smaller lot
homes.
D. Engineering Comments:
1. Five-foot sidewalks at curb or four -foot sidewalk at
property line. No three-foot sidewalk at curbs.
2. Stormwater detention facilities' location and
calculations.
3. Excavation, sediment and erosion control sketch
plan.
S rin Tree Villa a PRD - Continued
Mr. Bill Wilson of 6720 Yarberry was concerned about the
maintenance and upkeep of the open space and the fact that
Yarberry Lane did not have existing curb and gutter.
Mr. Olin Wahrmund of 11301 Kerry Drive felt that there was
not a market for this type of development, and he felt that
the concentration of small -lot homes in this one area would
adversely affect property values. He strongly felt that it
was the City's responsibility to protect existing
neighborhoods against this sort of thing. He argued futher
that the Planning Commission's responsibility was to help
balance the orderly growth of the City. Mr. Wahrmund
explained that the Southwood Subdivision, which is located
across the street from this proposal, has homes of 700
sq. ft. and has not sold very well. He explained that out
of 104 units, 20 had sold. Perry Place is also a nearby
Subdivision of homes of 1,000 sq. ft., that was not selling
very well.
Finally, a motion for approval was made and passed by a vote
of: 7 ayes, 3 noes, 1 absent (no vote: Grace Jones,
Riddick, and Leek).
Sprinq _Tree Village ^PRD-rContinued
E. Staff Recommendation:
Deferral until comments are addressed.
F. Subdivision Committee Review:
The Applicant explained that the requests outlined under
the proposal are for "cost-cutting" features necessary
for affordable housing development. He also pointed out
that there were 500 to 600 feet between this site and
Deer Meadows. This is undeveloped and owned by the
Developer. The Applicant was asked to meet with Parks
and Staff and work out acceptable open space and
recreational areas.
There was a question as to the acceptability of the area
behind the lots that is open space. Another major issue
was identified as parking, since the City Ordinance
restricts parking on the streets. This project leaves
no room for visitor parking in the whole Subdivision.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The proposal was represented by Mr. Ron Tyne of Winrock
Development Company, and Mr. Joe White, Engineer, of
White-Daters and Associates. Mr. Tyne revised his request
to eliminate any waivers and to dedicate 1.5 acres of
additional open space adjacent to the southern portion of
the site. He also presented alternate plans for on -site and
off -site parking. It was agreed that he would provide two
off-street parking spaces per unit, 27' separation between
driveway and no on -street parking on curbs.
The Builder, Mr. John Wright, was also present. He
presented pictures of the homes to be built.