HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-1010 Staff AnalysisJune 14, 1994
ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: S-1010
NAME: APPLE SUBDIVISION -- PRELIMINARY PLAT
.0
LOCATION: Approximately 100 feet south of Frazier Pike Ave.,
approximately 0.2 miles east of Stout Street
DEVELOPER:
ENGINEER:
JESSIE DOYNE, PRESIDENT PAT MCGETRICK
COLLEGE STATION COMMUNITY MCGETRICK ENGINEERING
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 11225 Huron Ln., Suite 200
P. O. Box 626 Little Rock, AR 72211
College Station, AR 72053 223-9900
AREA: 1.48 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 5 FT. NEW STREET: 200
ZONING: AF PROPOSED USES: Single -Family Residential
PLANNING DISTRICT: 24
CENSUS TRACT: 40.01
VARIANCES REQUESTED: None
STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes a 5-lot residential subdivision on a 1.5
acre tract involving the construction of 200 feet of new street.
The north boundary of the subdivision is 97 feet south of the
centerline of Frazier Pike Ave., and the preliminary plat which
has been submitted indicates a 60 foot wide right-of-way
connecting Frazier Pike Ave. with the site and extending
southward alongside the east boundary of the site. However, this
right-of-way is apparently not dedicated, and the applicant
proposes no roadway construction to tie the tract to Frazier Pike
Ave.
A. PROPOSAU REQUEST:
Approval of a preliminary plat is requested of the Planning
Commission for the subdivision of a 1.5 acre tract to
provide 5 residential lots which are proposed to have
frontage on a 200 foot long internal street. The center
line of the internal street is 223.5 feet south of the
centerline of Frazier Pike Ave., and a 60 foot wide right-
of-way is shown extending south from Frazier Pike Ave. to
the site and lying along the east boundary of the site.
This right-of-way is not a platted right-of-way. The
applicant proposes no roadway construction off site to
connect the proposed development with Frazier Pike Ave.
June 14, 1994
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A L(Zantinued) FILE NO 5-1010
B. EXTSTING CONDITIONS:
The site is undeveloped and wooded. The area designated on
the plat as a 60 foot right-of-way extending southward from
Frazier Pike Ave. has been cleared at one time and is
overgrown in weeds and brush. The site is level.
The existing zoning of the site is A-F, with A-F zoning on
all the surrounding land except for an R-2 area to the north
of the tract.
C. ENGINEERINGIUTILITY COMMENTS:
Engineering notes that the internal road designated Apple
Blossom Lane must be constructed to meet Master Street Plan
requirements. The applicant is to comply with Sec. 31-401
of the Code regarding installation of street lighting.
Water Works reports that a water main extension will be
required. Apple Drive is apparently not a dedicated
right-of-way and lies on private property. An acreage
charge in addition to the normal charges will be applied.
Wastewater notes that a sewer main extension with easements
will be required.
Arkansas Power and Light Co. will require easements.
Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. and Southwestern Bell Telephone
Co. approved the submittal without comment.
D. ISSUES/LEGAL/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
The site of the proposed subdivision is apparently land -locked.
It does not have access to Frazier Pike Ave. along the Apple
Drive right-of-way shown, since that right-of-way does not
exist; it has apparently never been platted or dedicated. For
access to the site, right-of-way will have to be acquired and
Apple Drive will have to be constructed to Master Street Plan
standards. Since the information indicated on the plan is
incorrect which shows the right-of-way, this incorrect
information must be deleted from the plan.
It is reported that the applicant has additional land which
is contiguous to the proposed platted area. If this is the
case, this additional land needs to be included in the
preliminary plat and can, if necessary, be shown as a tract
for future development.
2
June 14, 1994
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A Continued FILE NO.:
The plat as submitted has minor deficiencies: the owner,
surveying, and engineering certifications must be executed;
the ownership and deed information on abutting properties
need to be shown; and, the zoning classifications of the
site and of abutting properties need to be shown.
Additional requirements are: the PAGIS monuments must be
denoted and set; a Bill of Assurance must be submitted; etc.
E. ANALYSIS•
The proposed plat has a fatal flaw in that it is land -locked
and no provision has been made to provide access to the
site. The plat cannot be approved in its current form or
status.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends either denial of the request, or, if the
applicant feels that a deferral would allow time to remedy
the deficiencies, then staff will concur with such a
request.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:
(MARCH 3, 1994)
Mr. Pat McGetrick, the project engineer, was present. Staff
presented the request and the discussion centered on the apparent
fact that the proposed subdivision is land -locked; that the
60 foot right-of-way shown on the drawing to connect Frazier Pike
Ave. with the site has never been dedicated. There was also
discussion about the applicant proposing no street construction
to connect the site with Frazier Pike Ave. Mr. McGetrick
reported that the applicant was going to attempt to get
assistance from the City to construct the off -site street
improvements. Since the subdivision cannot be approved without
resolution of the access problem, there was very little other
discussion. The Committee indicated that the applicant needs to
defer pursuing approval of the preliminary plat until the access
problem is resolved and a determination is made on the
construction of Apple Lane.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
Staff reported that the City has been in
applicant regarding funding for off -site
improvements, and that, in order for the
to pursue options available for funding,
(MARCH 22, 1994)
contact with the
and on -site street
City and the applicant
the City has suggested
01
June 14, 1994
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Continued) FILE NO.: 5-1010
and the applicant has agreed to request a deferral until the
June 4, 1994 Commission hearing. The item was included on the
Consent Agenda for deferral, and the deferral was approved with
the vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent, and 1 abstention.
Staff reported that the Commission Bylaws require written
notification of a request for a deferral to be submitted at least
five (5) days prior to the Commission hearing date. In this
case, the agreement to seek a deferral was by mutual agreement
between the City and the applicant, and no written request was
made. Consequently, a waiver of the Bylaws requirement needs to
be approved by the Commission. The waiver was approved with the
vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent, and 1 abstention.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 14, 1994)
Staff explained that a letter from the applicant's engineer had
been received, asking for a 90-day deferral. Staff indicated,
though, that the applicant's engineer had related that the
applicant was considering adding additional property to the
proposed subdivision, necessitating a complete re -design. Staff
also recounted that the applicant was counting on Community
Development Block Grant Funds for the needed funding for off -site
and on -site street improvements, and that there was no access to
the site. Staff recommended, then, that in lieu of the 90-day
extension, the item be withdrawn. The applicant could then
re -apply when funding is in place and the scope of the project is
established. The Commission approved the recommendation to
withdraw the application. The vote was 10 ayes, 0 nays,
2 absent, and 0 abstentions.
4