Broken Arrow City Council
Meeting of: January 19, 2016
To: Mayor and City Council Members
From: Development Services Department
Title:
title
Consideration and possible approval of BACP 149 (Comprehensive Plan Change), Battle Creek Patio Homes, 20.37 acres, Level 6 and Public Recreation to Level 2, north of Albany Street, one-half mile east of Aspen Avenue
End
Background:
BACP 149 is a request to change the Comprehensive Plan designation for 20.37 acres of undeveloped, unplatted property from Level 6 and Public Recreation to Level 2. This property which is part of Battle Creek PUD 94 is located north of Albany Street, about one-half mile east of Aspen Avenue and has an underlying zoning of CG (Commercial General). BACP-149 is for a proposed single-story patio home development.
The property associated with BACP 149 is located between the Battle Creek Golf Course and the Stone Wood Crossing II neighborhood/Broken Arrow Post-Acute Health Care Campus and is west of the St. John Hospital. This area was classified as Level 6 based upon the Battle Creek PUD concept plan that was approved in 1995 and for a proposed street. An office park and hotel/conference center were proposed in this area.
The Battle Creek PUD contained 786.5 gross acres. For a project of this magnitude, the conceptual master plan for Battle Creek has been generally followed, with a couple of exceptions. The exchanging of property in 2005, which resulted in minor adjustments to the golf course, changed the land use configurations in the area south of Granger Street. The remnant parcel remaining between the golf course and the Stone Wood Crossing II neighborhood will be difficult to develop as commercial or office uses because of the narrowness of the property. Expansion of Level 2 into this area is a better use of the property and is more compatible with the adjacent existing uses.
A draft PUD has been submitted with BACP 149 for informational purposes only. As noted in this draft PUD, applicant proposes to construct one-story, single-family attached patio homes on the property with each dwelling unit individually owned. They propose to develop a gated neighborhood with an active homeowners association that in addition to maintaining the interior private streets, will also maintain all the landscaping on the property. Marketing of the property will be oriented towards mature buyers that have downsized but still desire independent living. The units will be designed for low-maintenance with the exterior facades containing at least 90 percent masonry of either brick, stone, EIFS, stucco, or Hardie Plank cementitious siding. The lots associated with each unit will be at least 28 feet in width and contain 2,800 square feet. The development will be similar to an existing residential development under construction north of Houston Street, about one-quarter mile east of Garnett Road.
A landscape reserve area of at least 10 feet in width will be provided along all public streets and along the entire east boundary. Sidewalks will be constructed along the perimeter public streets. While sidewalks will not be required along the interior private streets, a concrete trail of at least four feet in width will be provided that links open space reserve areas inside the development.
On December 3, 2015, the applicant conducted an informational meeting with the surrounding property owners. According to the applicant, 15 property owners attended this meeting. The Planning Commission, in their meeting of December 17, 2015, reviewed and unanimously (3-0 vote) recommended that BACP-149 be approved as recommended by Staff. There were no protestants.
Cost: $0
Prepared By: Farhad K. Daroga
Reviewed By: Legal Department
Acting Assistant City Manager
Approved By: Michael L. Spurgeon, City Manager
Attachments: Fact Sheet from Planning, Dec. 17, 2015 meeting
Case Map
Aerial Photo
Draft PUD
November 9, 2015 letter sent to surrounding property owners
PUD 94 Concept Plan
BACP 111 case history map
Recommendation:
Approve BACP-149, subject to the property being platting, a PUD being submitted that is similar in context to the draft PUD, and as recommended by the Planning Commission and Staff.
FKD/kf