Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Sienna Ridge topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council tables Sienna Ridge street-plan item after residents press for more study
Summary
The Maumelle City Council voted March 2 to table a master street plan amendment tied to the proposed Sienna Ridge development to the first April meeting after residents and the planning commission raised traffic, drainage and neighborhood-impact concerns and requested more data.
The Maumelle City Council voted to table ordinance 1170, an amendment to the Master Street Plan connected to the proposed Sienna Ridge development, to the first council meeting in April after multiple residents and the planning commission pressed for more analysis of traffic, drainage and neighborhood impacts.
Residents raised concerns that the currently proposed zoning change and associated street plan could enable high-density development. “There’s not a thing you can do…to stop it” if a developer submits a plan that meets the city requirements, resident Alan Bruce Wagner said, warning the rezoning could permit hundreds of apartments if pursued by a different builder.
Doris Hill, who lives at 106 Sierra Valley Loop, said she moved to Maumelle in 2021 for its low crime rate and family orientation and urged council to “cast your vote for the constituents” by denying or pausing the plan until a final impact study is provided. Teresa Seagull of Lake Valley said the two-lane access to her neighborhood is dark and inadequate and asked that any approved development be held to strict road and safety standards.
Planning commission testimony summarized by Council Member Growald reported mixed recommendations on Land Use 26-1 (Sienna Ridge): some map amendments received a do-pass recommendation, one failed, and the commission deferred the overall RE-26-1 item to March 26 to gather more information.
Todd Huber, a Sierra Valley Loop resident, questioned traffic estimates included in planning materials and asked for the data used to calculate daily trips; the planning packet cited an increase of 3,859 daily trips for the buildout, which Huber said appeared low compared with his own calculations. He also asked about drainage planning for a creek-adjacent portion of the site.
After public comments and brief council discussion, a motion to table ordinance 1170 to the first April meeting carried. The deferral will give staff, the planning commission and neighbors time to gather and review additional traffic and drainage information and reconcile remaining questions about right-of-way responsibilities and road repair bonding.
Next steps: ordinance 1170 will return for further consideration after additional study and the planning commission’s March 26 review.
