Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-1100-A Staff AnalysisDecember 18, 1997 ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: S-1100-A NAME: Capitol Lakes Estates Preliminary Plat LOCATION: Along both sides of Cooper Orbit Road north of Spring Valley Manor DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: John L. Burnett, TR. William L. Dean 1501 N. University Ave. Civil Design, Inc. Suite 800 15104 Cantrell Road Little Rock, AR 72207 Little Rock, AR 72212 AREA: 190.6 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 270 FT. NEW STREET: 24,290 ZONING: R-2 & MF ALLOWED USES: Single Family & Multifamily PROPOSED USE: Single Family & Multifamily with Open Space VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 1. Request for waiver on maximum allowable grade for a segment of the standard collector is to be addressed at the time of final design. 2. Cul-de-sac length waiver is requested for the Bangor cul-de- sac street, the length is only approximately 35 feet longer than specified by the Ordinance. 3. Allow Baton Rouge Dr. to be a cul-de-sac with sidewalk and 26 foot pavement. 4. Variance is requested to allow "pipestem" lots for Lots 88, 111, 97. BACKGROUND• This plat represents a new approach to the preliminary plat after being denied earlier in conjunction with the rezoning. At this time it appears the design items of neighborhood, Master Street Plan and easement issues have been resolved or nearly so. The MF zoning remains in place after having been successful the second time the request was reviewed by the Board of Directors. FILE NO.: S-1100-A Cont. B. C. Im PROPOSALIRE VEST: To develop this 190± acres of difficult terrain with single family and apartments in a design that will blend with the area as close as possible; to provide extension of both collector and arterial streets through the parcel; to provide needed access to several abutting owners. EXISTING CONDITIONS: Except for the roadway of Cooper Orbit Road and some easements, the site is undisturbed and heavily wooded. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: The neighborhood of Spring Valley Manor has a representative that visited the office and viewed the plat. The only comment that may cause discussion is the proposed intersection of the new Cooper Orbit Road and Baton Rouge Drive. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. NPDES and grading permits are required prior to construction, site grading and drainage plan will need to be submitted and approved. 2. The preliminary plat shows proposed minimum ROW widths, variations from minimum widths shall be determined by the street and drainage construction plans for each development phase and incorporated on the final plats. Residential and minor residential street grades will not exceed 17% and 18%, respectively. 3. Minor arterial minimum ROW width is 100, with variations up to 120, in certain locations to accommodate cuts or fills and an extra left turn off of the minor arterial to southbound Rushmore Drive. Street width is planned as 59, back-to-back of curb except for the section at Rushmore Drive intersection which will be 71, back-to- back of curb to provide for the two left turn lanes onto the collector street. 4. Collector minimum ROW width is 90' through Phase 1 and 100, minimum through Phase 3. Greater ROW width in some locations is anticipated due to cut and fill requirements. Normal street width is 36, back-to-back of curb except at the minor arterial intersection where provisions will be made for left turn movements and right turn merge lane for eastbound traffic. 5. Stormwater detention requirements will be met through construction of series ponds located in the areas indicated on the preliminary plat. It is anticipated that all differential runoff strong volumes required for the overall project can be achieved with a pond system involving from four to six ponds in series. Pond system 2 FILE NO.: S-1100-A (Cont.) design will involve permanent pool depths and water supply from shallow groundwater for water level maintenance. Runoff hydrographs, stage -storage relationships, and pond routings for peak discharge limits will be submitted along with street and drainage plans for Phase 1 construction. 6. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 7. All street names will need suffix's added. All cul-de- sacs off of Baton Rouge and Rose Garden will need to be named and approved by this office. Show all sidewalks on Preliminary Plat. E. UTILITIES• Wastewater: Sewer main extension to serve property with easements. AP&L: No comment at this writing. Arkla: OK as submitted. Southwestern Bell: Various easements. Water: 12" main in Cooper Orbit Road to be relocated at developers expense. An acreage charge of $300.00 and $15.00 per front foot on Cooper Orbit applies in additional to normal charges. Water and main extension required. Needs of adjacent owner to be considered. Fire Department: County Planning: No Comment. CATA: No service in this area. Planning Division: Capitol Lakes Collector issue: As a result of agreements made between the Capitol Lakes owner and Spring Valley Manor Association related to the annexation of Capitol Lakes, Staff held several meetings on relocation of Cooper Orbit and the collector pattern. There was agreement between the Capitol Lakes owner and owner to the West (Stephens) to realign to collector. The Collector would turn west before getting to Spring Valley Manor. Staff indicated support of this change as long as an alternate alignment could also be agreed to south of Spring Valley Manor. Discussion with property owners started in order to find a path for this realignment. The developers of Brodie Creek approach the City about a review of the entire street system between Bowman the West Loop, south of Kanis to Colonel Glenn. After several months an agreement was reached to hire a consultant. As a result of this consultant contract, Staff stopped work attempting to find a relocation corridor south of Spring Valley Manor. 3 FILE NO.: S-1100-A (Cont.) In the Fall of 1997, a contract'was signed with Peters & Associates to review the Master Street Plan alignments in the area between Kanis and Colonel Glenn, west of Bowman to the West Loop. Staff has informed the consultants of the agreements related to the realignment of Cooper Orbit north of Spring Valley Manor. Staff expects the consultant will not change the agreed to realignment, but will include it as part of their report. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: 1. 30 feet minimum on pipestems 2. Owner certificate per ordinance 3. Discuss access to owner east of Tract "D", easement, how wide. 4. Show city limits. 5. Show phasing plan. G. ANALYSIS• This plat appears to have adequately addressed all the questions developed the last time. On June 20, 1996 the Commission by vote of 7 ayes, 0 nays, 3 absent and 1 abstained approved the plat with conditions. The plat failed at the Board of Directors level only because the zoning and various waivers failed. At this time staff feels that the plat can be approved as filed if the various Public works and Planning Staff comments are addressed. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Approval of the plat at this meeting if the owner engineer can address concerns in writing and submit in time to forward to Planning Commission with agenda. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (NOVEMBER 20, 1997) In as much as there was no one present on this item, the Committee agreed with staff that the item should be deferred until February meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 18, 1997) The Chairman recognized Richard Wood of the staff for purposes of presenting this item and the staff recommendation. Wood stated that first this item was held on the regular agenda due to the potential for neighborhood objection and for discussion of the several variances that have been requested. Wood pointed out that the item was retained on the regular agenda because the application was not represented at the Subdivision Committee which is the point at which the design issues are discussed and many times resolved. 4 FILE NO.: 5-1100-A (Cont. Wood then proceeded to outline the several variances or waivers that are requested on this application offering that Public Works may want to address the issue of access for several of these lots. Immediately following Wood's comments, the Chairman stated he had one card on this application from someone wishing to speak on the matter. The card was from Terry Easton, a resident of the area immediately to the south. The Chairman asked Ms. Easton if she desired to address the issue at this time. Her response was that she wanted to speak largely in favor of the application but not at this point in the hearing. The Chairman then asked if the applicant was present and wished to address the Commission. He recognized Mr. Jim Hathaway who came forward speaking for the request. Mr. Hathaway pointed out that Mr. Dean, the engineer for the project, was present and would have discussion on the technical design details if there were questions specifically on the waiver requests. Mr. Hathaway identified one issue that he would like to address. An issue he wanted to address was one Ms. Easton would be discussing, the termination of a street. He briefly directed the Commission's attention to a certain page of a graphic in the agenda. It was identifying a specific street by the name of Baton Rouge. He pointed out that Ms. Easton represents a subdivision lying to the south and east of his project and their concern is the intersection of Baton Rouge at Cooper Orbit Road. Mr. Hathaway stated their concern is that the intersection is on a curve fairly close to the entrance of their subdivision. They have some concerns about this intersection. He stated that this developer has been requested by this neighborhood to consider placing a cul-de-sac at the east end of Baton Rouge so as to prohibit that thru street and thereby eliminating the intersection. This would be in the area of Lots 45 and 85. Mr. Hathaway stated that the developer has agreed to do this if it is all right with Public Works. He then moved his remarks to the upper most portion of the plat and proceeded to discuss waivers in this area. He identified these two streets as Frankfort and Bangor. He stated that in discussions with Public Works it was okay on the Bangor and Frankfort Streets' design length issue and his developer is willing to build the cul-de-sac to terminate Baton Rouge. The closure of Baton Rouge as a cul- de-sac would cause the developer to build a sidewalk along this street and build pavement to a 26 foot width. Mr. Hathaway stated that the developer agreed to do that. This would probably resolve the issue which is the concern of the Spring Valley Manor property owners. Mr. Hathaway stated: "In concurrence with the Planning Commission granting the waiver and with the developer's agreement to build the cul-de-sac, sidewalk and the street to the 26 foot standard. This is the developer's position and summary." A FILE NO.: 5-1100-A (Cont. The Chair recognized Commissioner Putnam. Commissioner Putnam posed a question as to what happened to Bangor. This issue seemed to have dropped in the discussion offered by Mr. Hathaway and most of his comments dealt with Baton Rouge. He wanted to know what was the resolution on Bangor. Mr. Hathaway stated that two of the waivers being requested involve Frankfort and Bangor Streets. Both of these streets exceed the allowable street length for a cul-de-sac. If the Commission would allow them to do the same thing on Baton Rouge that is being done on Frankfort and Bangor, then the developer can eliminate the concerns of the Spring Valley property owners. At this point, the Chairman then recognized Commissioner Faust. The question she posed was is the length of the street just for Frankfort and not for Bangor? A general discussion then followed involving Commissioner Faust, the Chairman and Mr. Hathaway as to what was in the agenda, what was the actual request and which street if not both was longer than the permitted length. It was determined that both of these streets exceed the cul-de-sac length, but the agreement with Public Works was they be recognized as minor streets without sidewalk even though they are somewhat longer than the permitted length. The Chairman then put the hearing back on the normal protocol. He asked for the neighborhood representative to come forward and speak to issues that she may be concerned about. She offered concerns that had previously been offered by the neighborhood. She stated that if they could at all possible divert traffic flows upward or to the north and east to Kanis Road, then it would benefit her neighborhood. She said if the cul-de-sac is accomplished on Baton Rouge thereby terminating the access, then the neighborhood has no problem with the Capitol Lakes project. The Chairman then recognized Mr. Bill Dean, the engineer for the project, and asked him if he had any comments. Mr. Dean stated that he had none except to restate the request and ask for approval. The Chairman then asked if there were those present to speak for or against the issue. He stated that he had no cards of others wishing to participate. By receiving no response, the Chairman then moved the discussion to the Commission and asked if they had comments. The Chairman recognized Commissioner Hawn who offered a motion. His motion was that the Commission approve the preliminary plat with accepting the variances on Bangor, Frankfort and Baton Rouge as to cul-de-sac length. He motioned also to include the staff and Public Works' recommendations on the other several variances. At this point David Scherer of Public Works asked the Chairman for permission to address the Commission. Mr. Scherer's comments were that he needed to make clarification on Baton Rouge. "The length of this street dictated that it be a 26 foot pavement which is a standard residential as opposed to 24 feet which is a minor." The residential street would allow up to 1,300 feet. Mr. Scherer pointed out that although there is no waiver required, the developer had agreed to build Rose Garden and Dover 0 FILE NO.: S-1100-A (Cont. Street when constructed as standard 'streets as opposed to minor streets. This is what they had originally been shown on the plat. The plat would be amended to reflect that. The Chairman then redirected the Commission back to the issue which was the motion on the floor. The Chairman recognized Commissioner Faust at this point. She stated that she simply wanted clarification as to whether or not the other several waivers there indicated on the staff write-up still apply. The response was yes. She closed her comment by asking someone to clarify the circumstance of Lot 88. She stated that she could not understand where that lot would take street access. Staff responded by saying: "The lot is accessed on a pipestem over Lot 89 in front of it." The Chairman then recognized Commissioner Earnest who posed a question about the multifamily. The question posed by Commissioner Earnest was clarification of the zoning issue relative to a statement made in the background write-up by staff. Then indicating there was some confusion in the way it was written.- Jim Lawson of the staff indicated that it was poorly written and there was no issues relative to zoning or land use. The Chairman then moved the issue to Commissioner Hawn's motion which was to approve the preliminary plat with the several variances which had been explained in this public hearing. Prior to a vote on the motion, the Chairman received interruption from the representative of Spring Valley Manor. She approached the lectern asking a question as to whether or not the zoning was still the same as previously, MF-12 and not MF-18. Staff responded by saying the zoning was not part of this application and has not been changed since the ordinance was originally adopted for MF-12. At this point, Commissioner Adcock inserted a comment that on the vote she wanted it recorded that she was supporting the plat and the several waivers, except for the pipestem lot issue. She offered for the record that she would be voting for all other aspects of the application but she wanted to be on the record as opposing the pipestem lot and abstaining from voting on this issue. There was a second on the motion. A vote count produced a vote of 11 ayes, 0 nays, and 0 absent on all aspects except Commissioner Adcock's abstaining vote on the pipestem lot request. iA Capitol Lakes Collector issue: As a result of agreements made between the Capitol Lakes owner and Spring Valley Manor Association related to the annexation of Capitol Lakes, Staff held several meetings on relocation of Cooper Orbit and the collector pattern. There was agreement between the Capitol Lakes owner and owner to the West (Stephens) to realign the collector. The Collector would turn west before getting to Spring Valley Manor. Staff indicated support of this change as long as an alternate alignment could also be agreed to south of Spring Valley Manor. Discussion with property owners started in order to find a path for this realignment. The developers of Brodie Creek approach the City about a review of the entire street system between Bowman the West Loop, south of Kanis to Colonel Glenn. After several months an agreement was reached to hire a consultant. As a result of this consultant contract, Staff stopped work attempting to find a relocation corridor south of Spring Valley Manor. In the Fall of 1997, a contract was signed with Peters & Associates to review the Master Street Plan alignments in the area between Kanis and Colonel Glenn, west of Bowman to the West Loop. Staff has informed the consultants of the agreements related to the realignment of Cooper Orbit north of Spring Valley Manor. Staff expects the consultant will not change the agreed to realignment, but will include it as part of their report. April 15, 1999 ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: 5-1100-A NAME: Capitol Lake Estates - Preliminary Plat - Final Plat Time Extension LOCATION: Along both sides of Cooper Orbit Road, north of Spring Valley Manor DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: John L. Burnett, TR. William L. Dean 1501 N. University, Ste. 800 Civil Design, Inc. Little Rock, AR 72207 15104 Cantrell Road Little Rock, AR 72212 AREA: 190.6 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 270 FT. NEW STREET: 24,290 ZONING: R-2 & MF ALLOWED USES: PROPOSED USE: A. BACKGROUND: Single Family & Multifamily Single Family & Multifamily with open space On June 20, 1996 the Planning Commission by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 nays, 3 absent and 1 abstention approved the Capitol Lakes Estates - Preliminary Plat with conditions. The plat failed at the Board of Directors level only because the zoning and various waivers (minor street length, lot depth and width, pipe -stem lots, street grades) failed. The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat resolving design, Master Street Plan and easement issues. On December 18, 1997 the revised preliminary plat was approved by the Planning Commission with a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays except for one (1) abstaining vote on the variance for pipestem lot request. On January 20, 1998, the Board of Directors approved variances for pipestem lots and cul-de-sac length. On February 17, 1998, the Board of Directors approved ordinances establishing the Capitol April 15, 1999 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1100-A Lakes Municipal Property Owner's Improvement District No. 6 and the Capitol Lakes Sewer Property Owner's Improvement District No. 148. According to Chapter 31 of the Little Rock Code of Ordinances Section 31-94(e), "A preliminary plat approved by the Planning Commission shall be effective and binding upon the Commission for one (1) year from the date of approval or as long as work is actively progressing, at the end of which time the final plat application for the subdivision must have been submitted to the Planning Staff." "The Planning Commission may extend the original preliminary approval, for a period not to exceed one (1) year from the date of approval, when it can be demonstrated that there are no changes in the plat design or neighborhood that warrant a complete review." As of this date, the final plat application for the subdivision has not been submitted to the Planning Staff. B. PROPOSAL: The applicant submitted a letter to staff on February 24, 1999 requesting a one (1) year extension for the submittal of the final plat application. The preliminary plat is dependent on construction of approximately two (2) miles of 24 inch off -site sewer main. The applicant notes that the sewer project has been in the design phase for over a year and is near the point of receipt of competitive construction bids. Current plans are for bidding by mid - April with a construction start by June 1, 1999. The Capitol Lakes developer has not been in a position to proceed with the on -site construction due to the lengthy design phase required for the off -site sewer improvements. Based on the currently anticipated schedule for the sewer extension, it appears that on -site construction involving street right-of-way clearing, earthwork and drainage facility installation will not start before this fall. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the one (1) year time extension as requested by the applicant. The applicant will have until April 15, 2000 to submit a final plat application to staff. F April 15, 1999 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: FILE NO.: 5-1100-A (APRIL 15, 1999) The staff presented a positive recommendation on this application, as there were no further issues for resolution. There were no objectors to this matter. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff. A motion to that effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. 3