HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-1520-A Staff AnalysisFILE NO.: S-1520-A
NAME: Royal Oaks Subdivision Revised Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: Located East of Chicot Road on Royal Oaks Drive
DEVELOPER:
JSC Construction, LLC
29 Stoneledge Drive
Maumelle, AR 72113
ENGINEER:
Civil Design, Inc.
15104 Cantrell Road
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 9.985 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 38 FT. NEW STREET: 1,832 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 15 — Geyer Springs West
CENSUS TRACT: 41.06
VARIANCESNVAIVERS REQUESTED:
1. A variance to allow the placement of the required sidewalk at the back of curb along
Royal Oaks Drive.
2. A waiver of the required sidewalk placement along Ponderosa Drive.
BACKGROUND:
On May 11, 2006, the Commission approved a preliminary plat which included the
subdivision of 9.985 acres into thirty-six (36) single-family residential lots and two tracts
designated as open space and detention. Access to the new lots was proposed by an
extension of a new residential public street from Chicot Road to the east 1,194 feet
connecting with Shady Grove Lane. The applicant also proposed the removal of two
residential lots from Perry Place Phase III to allow access to Ponderosa Drive. A total
of 1,832 linear feet of new street was proposed, constructed to Master Street Plan
standard.
FILE NO.: S-1520-A (Cont.)
The proposal included an average lot size of 65-feet by 140-feet or 0.21 acres and a
minimum lot size of 60-feet by 130-feet or 0.18 acres. There were no waivers or
variances requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is now proposing a revision to the previously approved preliminary
plat to relocate the placement of the sidewalks. The approved preliminary plat
showed the sidewalks along Royal Oaks Drive to be located at the right of way
line. The transformer pads and telephone pedestals were installed just inside the
right of way line in the intended path of the sidewalk. The developer is
requesting to place the sidewalk at the back of curb or just off the back of curb
within 1 foot of the curb. The developers are also requesting a waiver of the
required sidewalk placement along Ponderosa Drive.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
New homes are being constructed to the east of the site in Perry Place Phase III
and are in various states of completion. The street has been constructed and the
utilities are presently in place. Chicot Road is an unimproved roadway with open
ditches for drainage and no sidewalk in place.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area property owners.
The abutting property owners along with the Deer Meadow Neighborhood
Association, the Legion Hut Neighborhood Association, the Yorkwood
Neighborhood Association and Southwest Little Rock United for Progress were
notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. The Master Street Plan requires the back of sidewalks on residential streets
to be installed at the property line or the front of the sidewalk about 7 to 8 feet
from the back of curb. The preliminary plat was approved by the Planning
Commission for the back of the sidewalk to be installed at the property line. It
is believed one of the main reasons for moving the sidewalk off the back of
curb is for pedestrian safety.
2. Due to the location of the utility pull boxes being located in the wrong place,
staff can support the majority of the sidewalk to be located at the property line
but other sections of sidewalk at the boxes can meander closer to the street.
The closest pull box to the back of curb is 4.5 feet and the furthest is 8 feet.
At the narrowest locations where the utility boxes are located, per ADA
guidelines only 3 feet of clearance space must be maintained for the
proposed 5 foot sidewalk. This would leave about 1.5 feet of clearance
between the closest pull box and the back of curb.
2
FILE NO.: S-1520-A Cont.
3. Due to the location of the utility pull boxes being located in the wrong place,
staff can support a sidewalk easement to be installed on the final plat for the
sidewalk to be located behind the utility pull box.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this property.
Enter : Approved as submitted.
Center -Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: No objection to sidewalk placement. Need to rectify
the discrepancy in the connecting street to the north, Grove Lane and Shady
Grove Lane in the development.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 18, 2007)
The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an
overview of the proposed development stating there were no remaining
outstanding technical issues associated with the request. Staff stated the desire
was to relocate the sidewalk along Royal Oaks Drive nearer the street than
previously approved. Staff stated they were working with the applicant to
determine the location for best placement of the sidewalk. There was no further
discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full
Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
A revised preliminary plat was not required to address the issues raised at the
October 18, 2007, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant is seeking a
revision to the previously approved preliminary plat to allow the placement of
3
FILE NO.: S-1520-A (Cont.
sidewalks nearer the curb than was previously approved. Staff is not supportive
of placing the entire length of the sidewalk at the back of curb and feels from a
safety standpoint the sidewalks should be located as far away as possible from
the driving lanes. Since the utility boxes were located within the right of way and
not within an easement located on the front of the lots, staff can support the
majority of the sidewalk being located at the back of the right of way but other
sections of sidewalk located at the utility boxes can meander closer to the street.
The closest utility box to the back of curb is 4.5 feet and the furthest is 8 feet. At
the narrowest locations where the utility boxes are located to the street, per ADA
guidelines only 3 feet of clearance space must be maintained for the proposed 5
foot sidewalk. This would leave about 1.5 feet of clearance between the closest
utility box and the back of curb.
The applicant is also seeking a waiver of the required sidewalk placement along
Ponderosa Drive. Staff is not supportive of the request. Staff feels the
placement of sidewalks or alternative pedestrian paths to allow connectivity
through neighborhoods is an important aspect of subdivision development.
Although sidewalks are not in place on the remainder of the street staff feels it is
important to develop the newly developing area per the current ordinance
standards.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends denial of the request as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
(NOVEMBER 8, 2007)
Mr. James Dreher was present representing the applicant. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff presented the item stating they were not supportive of the
application as filed.
Mr. Dreher stated the owners were requesting to amend the application and place the
walks at 18-inches from the curb. He stated the request no longer included a waiver of
the sidewalk placement on Ponderosa Drive. He stated the City had design standards
which allowed the placement of sidewalks as requested by the developer but staff had
indicated the Commission would have to approve any variation from the originally
approved plat. Mr. Dreher stated staffs suggestion for a meandering sidewalk was not
desirable to the developer. He stated the walks which did not hit the drives
perpendicular did not give the desired look the developer was trying to achieve.
The Commission questioned why the walks could not be placed at the back of the right
of way. Mr. Dreher stated the utility companies placed their facilities on the wrong side
of the easement which encroached into the sidewalk.
The Commission questioned if the engineer did not set pins to establish the placement
of utilities. Mr. Dreher stated the pins were not put in place until after the utilities were in
place. The Commission once again questioned if it was not the developers
responsibility to tell the utilities were to place the pull boxes and pedestals.
M
FILE NO.: S-1520-A (Cont.
Staff stated they were not supportive of placing the sidewalk at 18 inches. Staff stated
this was a case where the developers came and were approved a plan and then for
some reason chose not to build the plan. Staff stated they felt the developers should
build the plan as approved by the Commission or seek a variance prior to beginning
construction of some alternative plan.
A motion was made to approve the request. The motion failed by a vote of 2 ayes,
9 noes and 0 absent.
5