HomeMy WebLinkAboutpc_02 11 1986subLITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISIONS
SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD
FEBRUARY 11, 1986
1:00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A quorum was present being 8 in number.
II. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting
The minutes were not approved at this meeting.
III. Members Present:
IV. Members Absent:
Jim Summerlin, Acting Chairman
J. Schlereth
R. Massie
J. Nicholson
W. Rector
D. Arnett
D.J. Jones
F. Perkins
William Ketcher, Chairman
B. Sipes
I. Boles
V. City Attorney Present: Pat Benton
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUMMARY OF SUBDIVISION ACTIVITIES
FOR
February 11, 1986
DEFERRED ITEMS:
A. Alley in Block 81, John Barrow Addition
B. High Street Name Change
C. Tri -party Agreement Ordinance
D. Alley in Block 277
E. Signature Subdivision
F. Ati Day Yisroel CUP (Z- 2840 -A)
T1 TfTT T.lT1T 'ATV T1T 1TA _
1. Hillsboro Subdivision, Phase VC
2. Kanis Commercial Park
3. Granite Ridge Addition
4. Landmark Park, Phase II
SITE PLAN REVIEW:
5. Landmark Mobile Home Park, Phase II
6. Bill Brandon
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT:
7. United Cerebral Palsy Group Home (Z -4566)
iT/1LTTITTTAITT T rT[Tr1 TILT "L m-
8. South Park Street Duplex (Z -4600)
9. Walton Heights (Z -4601)
10. Morrison Road (Z -4602)
71T7T T nTLTO T TILT T: T.771 TT70n .
11. Breedlove Building Line Waiver (Lot 124, Pine Forest)
OTHER MATTERS:
12. Leewood Mountain Addition Replat (Lot 89)
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. A - Other Matters
NAME:
T.00ATTnN
OWNER /APPLICANT:
All of the Alley in Block 81
of John Barrow Addition
Lying between West 28th and
West 29th Streets in the
block west of Zion Street
M.E. Bolding
By: W.W. Kelley
REQUEST: To abandon all of the alley and join with adjacent
lots for replatting.
STAFF REVIEW:
1. Public Need for this Right -of -Way
None, inasmuch as this alley has never been in use as a
street or public way.
2. Master Street Plan
There are no requirements.
3. Need for Right -of -Way on Adjacent Streets
West 28th Street is a collector, 36' in pavement and
60' in right -of -way; therefore, 10' of additional
right -of -way may be required.
4. Characteristics of Right -of -Way Terrain
Moderate slope to the south and at grade with the
adjoining lots.
5. Development Potential
This right -of -way is useful only to the abutting owners
and the replatting of these lots.
6. Neighborhood Land Use and Effect
The abutting properties are occupied by single family
in all directions for a distance of several blocks.
There remain in the general area several vacant lots.
This action should have little or no effect on the
neighborhood inasmuch as the alley has not been in use.
It will be better utilized as part of the replatting of
this block.
L
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. A - Continued
7. Neighborhood Position
None expressed at this writing.
8. Effect on Public Services or Utilities
None reported; however, the right -of -way will probably
be retained as a utility easement unless the owner or
applicant gains total release from the several
utilities.
9. Reversionary Rights
The alley once closed will revert to the abutting
owners.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of this abandonment with a
cautionary note to the petitioner that recombining these
lots may cause dedication requirements along West 28th
Street. This would occur if it is determined that less than
60' in right -of -way exists. Additionally, street
improvements along 28th may be assessed if the matter
requires Planning Commission review.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present and offered a discussion of his
proposal. The Planning staff added additional commentary.
A lengthy discussion followed involving issues attached to a
proposed preliminary plat which will be reviewed by the
Planning Commission in February. At the end of the
discussion, it was determined that it would be appropriate
to hear the abandonment issue in conjunction with the
proposed plat. A motion was made to defer this matter to
February 11. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes
and 0 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (2- 11 -86)
The Planning staff offered comments to the effect that this
owner has decided to abandon his platting issue and pursue
the alley closure only at this time. Staff changed its
recommendation upon receipt of this information from the
applicant to reflect a position of denial of the abandonment
unless tied to the plat. The applicant was represented and
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. A - Continued
made a brief comment concerning what his owner desired from
this process. A brief discussion involving all parties then
followed whereby it was determined that the Planning
Commission did not favor the alley abandonment without the
opportunity of reviewing the subdivision plat. The
applicant stated that he understood this and would accept a
withdrawal of this petition without prejudice. A motion was
then made to accept the withdrawal of this petition. The
motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 3 absent.
February 11, 1986
111 SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. B - Other Matters - Street Name Change
NAME: High Street
LOCATION: Between I -630 on the north
and West 36th Street on the
south
OWNER /APPLICANT: Muskie Harris
Committee Chairman for Petition
REQUEST:
To rename South High Street to Martin Luther King Drive in
this 2.3 mile segment.
ABUTTING USES AND OWNERSHIPS:
The existing High Street intersects four major traffic
arteries with commercial centers on each. At the present
time, there are 29 business activities, 53 single family
dwellings, 23 duplexes, 7 multifamily structures, 6 offices,
1 Little Rock public school and 1 college.
�./ NEIGHBORHOOD EFFECT:
The only effect to be experienced from this change will be
the disruption of neighborhood mail and services until the
new name is recognized by all involved agencies. A
short -term effect will be the disruption of the yellow page
listings for those several businesses which utilize that
advertising.
NEIGHBORHOOD POSITION:
None has been expressed at this writing; however, the
publication of the legal ad and posting of notices will
undoubtedly introduce some objection especially from the
commercial sector.
EFFECT ON PUBLIC SERVICES:
No long -term effect expected.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of the proposal with a recommendation to the
Planning Commission and City Board that the approval
resolution take effect a minimum of 30 days after passage.
This is required in order to provide sufficient
lead time
for the Post Office, Public Works Department and the State
Highway Department to make the many changes required.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. B - Continued
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE ACTXON:
The Committee received a report from staff on the financial
aspects of the proposed street name change. Henk Koornstra
of the Traffic Engineering Office provided the following
information relative to the signs and structures which will
require modification.
A. PROPOSED CHANGE - FULL NAME - MARTIN LUTHER KING DRIVE
City signs, 32 in number, at a cost of $1,190.
Additional signage, $390 for a total of $1,480. The
cost of installation by City crew, $475 for a subtotal
of $2,050.
Arkansas Highway Department signs, 11 in number, 2 of
which at $60,000, 2 at $3,600, 2 at $3,200, 5 guideway
signs at $800 for a subtotal of $67,600 and a grand
total for a fully spelled out name $70,000 even.
B. AN ABBREVIATED NAME STRUCTURE - M.L. KING, JR. DRIVE
City signs, a total of 32 signs at $800. Fifteen side
street signs - $300 for a total of $1,100 in material.
Installation at $475 for a subtotal of $1,600.
Arkansas State Highway signs, a total of 9 signs, 2 at
$2,400, 2 at $2,200, 5 at $500 for a total of $5,100.
The grand total of signs in the abbreviated form would
be $6,700.
C. ALTERNATE STREET NAME PROPOSAL TO AVOID HIGH COST OF
SIGN REPLACEMENT
The City Engineering's staff and Highway Department
offer as an alternate to High Street, changing the name
of Battery Street approximately one -half mile to the
west which has significant length and also intersects
the interstate. The cost of change out on these signs
for a fully spelled out name on each sign would be
$2,100 for both City and State costs. An abbreviated
sign blank for both City and State would be a total of
$1,600.
The Committee received this information, discussed briefly
and made no comment for the record at this time.
U
February 11, 1986
- SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. B - Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The Planning staff offered a brief overview of the issue at
hand offering additional information relative to objection
filed since the initial application was submitted.
Mr. Muskie Harris was present and made a request of the
Commission that this matter be deferred for 30 days or until
the February 11 meeting in order to allow the petition
signers to develop their case and decide on the street to be
chosen for change. After a brief discussion of the
proposal, the Commission voted on a motion for deferral.
The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (2- 11 -86)
The applicant was not in attendance. There were several
persons present interested in the proposal that did not
request permission to speak when the issue was identified by
the Chairman as a matter for withdrawal; therefore, these
persons were assumed to be objectors to the petition. There
was no discussion of the matter, and motion for withdrawal
was made and passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 3 absent.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. C - Other Matters - Ordinance Amendment
REQUEST: Planning Commission review of a staff proposal to
amend the Subdivision Ordinance dealing with tri -party
agreements and enforcement.
PROPOSED TEXT: Attached is the first draft of the proposal
for your review.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The staff offered an overview of this proposed ordinance
amendment identifying the basic changes involved. A brief
discussion of the proposal then followed. It was determined
by several members that they required sufficient review time
in order to digest the material as presented. It was
suggested a deferral to February 11 would be in line. A
motion for that deferral was made and passed by a vote of
11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (2- 11 -86)
The Planning staff made a brief presentation of the proposed
ordinance. There was no discussion of the proposal. A
motion was made to recommend the ordinance as drafted to the
City Board of Directors. The vote - 8 ayes, 0 nays,
3 absent.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. D - Other Matters -Alley Abandonment
NAME:
Alley in Block 277 of
Original City of Little Rock
LOCATION: West 150' of the east /west alley
lying between Izard and Chester
Streets, north of West Markham
Street
OWNER /APPLICANT: Frank Whitbeck
By: Tom Buford
REQUEST: To abandon this portion of an open alley for
redevelopment with the west half of the block.
STAFF REVIEW:
1. Public Need for this Right -of -Way
There are certain owners /users in this block taking
access over the right -of -way to Chester Street. These
owners at present have only one physical access to a
dedicated right -of -way inasmuch as Izard Street north
of Markham and the east end of this alley have been
abandoned.
2. Master Street Plan
There are no Master Plan requirements attached to this
request.
3. Need for Right -of -Way on Adjacent Streets
None evidenced in our review.
4. Characteristics of the Right -of -Way Terrain
A gentle slope to the north and west and at grade with
the adjacent lots.
5. DeveloRment Potential
This right -of -way can only be utilized in conjunction
with properties lying immediately adjacent in the form
suggested by this developer.
I---
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. D - Continued
6. Neighbor .hood Land Use and Effect
The abutting lots are office or parking lots using the
alley. Some commercial uses lie across Chester Street
to the west and Markham to the south.
7. Neighborhood Position
None expressed at this writing. However, notice will
be provided to those persons in the eastern portion of
this block who have voiced strong opposition to
abandonment when proposed in the past.
8. Effect on Public Services or Utilities
If the alley is abandoned and the development proposal
pursued, certain utilities presently within this
right -of -way will be required to be relocated to
accommodate the building.
9. Reversionary Rights
This right -of -way will revert to a single owner owning
all of the abutting property.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommendation will be one of conditioned support.
This recommendation is based in the knowledge that there are
persons with strong feelings concerning the abandonment of
this right -of -way. Although we feel that a proper
redevelopment of this owner's property would be best served
by abandonment, we could not encourage the abandonment of
the right -of -way without support of all current owners in
the block. As reflected in our analysis above, there does
not seem to be a problem with the abandonment except with
respect to those several owners in the east half of the
block. If this petitioner provides a release or specific
support of this proposal from all owners involved, then the
staff recommendation will be approval as filed.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. D - Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant, Mr. Frank Whitbeck, was in attendance and was
represented by several parties including Mr. Moses and
Mr. Redden of the architectural firm. The applicant made a
lengthy presentation of the proposal involving not only the
alley closure in the block, but discussion of the item on
this agenda dealing with a resubdivision of the lots in the
west half of the block. Planning staff offered additional
commentary and recommendation relative to the abandonment
and the plat which indicated support for the proposals.
This support is conditioned upon removal of the objection of
adjacent property owners.
Mr. Ben Allen, an adjacent property owner, was present
representing his properties and several companies housed in
his building as well as McClelland Engineers lying south of
the alley. Mr. Allen made a lengthy presentation of the
problems perceived by him and his tenants associated with
the abandonment of the alley. There were letters of
objection submitted including a petition with 12 signatures
of tenants in buildings in this block. It was noted for the
record that there was also a letter in the file from
Mr. Allen as an objector. The Commission requested a report
from Henk Koornstra, City Traffic Engineer. Mr. Koornstra
offered comments which generally supported the abandonment
of the alley. He discussed the existing intersection as a
potential traffic problem, also indicating that the access
to the proposed parking lot would be more acceptable.
A lengthy discussion of this matter then followed, both
sides presenting additional comments. The Commission
determined that it would be in the best interest of all of
the involved parties to defer this matter until February 11
and give the parties an opportunity to meet and discuss
resolution of their differences. It was noted by staff and
Commission that access to Markham Street along the east side
of the proposed development would be suitable resolution of
the problem. Both sides indicated that a meeting could be
held and discussions held toward resolution of the
differences. A motion was then made to defer this
application to February 11, 1986. The motion passed by a
vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 1 abstention (Richard
Massie).
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. D - Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (2- 11 -86)
The staff offered brief comments on this petition and the
plan to resolve the objections of Mr. Allen and
Mr. McClelland, adjacent property owners on the east and
north. The petitioner was present and offered a plan which
depicted resolution of the objection as follows. A drive
was indicated across the lot now occupied by City employees'
parking. The drive easement ran north and south between the
current east /west alley and West Markham Street. The drive
consisted of an 18 -foot wide paved strip of land on the
existing parking lot adjacent to Mr. McClelland's building.
Mr. McClelland also had agreed to include a one -foot strip
of land from his lot. A common access would result which
would serve all of the east half of the block through a
single drive entrance to West Markham Street. The City
parking lot would be redesigned so as to reduce the
east /west dimension and lose several parking stalls. The
existing curb opening on to Markham would be closed, access
to City parking would be by way of the new access drive.
During discussion of the plan, it was determined that
additional landscaping would not be required inasmuch as no
new paved surfaces or increase in paving would occur. The
end result of the plan presented would be:
1. Mr. Allen will receive title to all of the existing
alley adjacent to his property and north of the City
parking lot plus approximately 12 feet off the north
end of the City lot which will allow his parking to be
900 and more accessible.
2. All of the alley in the block will be closed for a
distance of 225 feet.
3. This petitioner will receive all of the west 150 feet
of the closure.
4. A six -foot wood fence will be erected to separate
Mr. Allen's parking area from the City parking lot.
This fence is to run east and west along the north line
of the new City parking lot.
The Commission briefly discussed the abandonment and the
suggested agreement. The Commission determined that
although it did not have the signed instrument of agreement
in hand that it would be appropriate to take action on the
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. D - Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (2- 11 -86)
petition. For the record, it was noted that a public need
was present and hardship circumstances prevailed attached to
this proposal. Additionally, it was determined that the
alley is no longer needed by the public due to provision of
an alternative route acceptable to all involved parties. A
motion was then made to recommend approval of the petition
subject to three items. (1) Mr. McClelland providing
one -foot of his lot to fill out the 19 -foot minimum driveway
dimension as required by the Traffic Engineer.
(2) Conformance with the Traffic Engineer's design comments.
(3) Planning staff to approve the subdivision plat
incorporating all of the lands at issue so as to provide a
permanent public record of the easements, access and land
transfers. The motion passed by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 noes,
3 absent, 1 abstention (Richard Massie).
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. E
NAME: Signature Subdivision
LOCATION: NE Corner of West Markham Street
at Chester Street Running North
to La Harpe Boulevard
DEVELOPER: ENGINEER:
Signature Life Ins. Co. Allison Moses Redden
1130 Savers Federal Bldg. Heritage Center East
Little Rock, AR Little Rock, AR
Phone: 372 -3355 Phone: 375 -0378
AREA: 0.7 acres NO. OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW ST.: 0
ZONING: "I -2" Light Industrial District
PROPOSED USE: Office Building for Signature Life Insurance
and Others
VARIANCES REQUESTED:
Requested reduction of setbacks from the "I -2" standard to
the "0-3" requirements which will generally eliminate 50'
building line requirements.
A. Existing Conditions
A gentle slope that has been cleared of structures and
natural foliage. The site is platted in residential
size lots with three lots fronting on West Markham
Street and three partial lots on La Harpe Boulevard.
An alley bisects the ownership and provides access to
businesses on the east end of the alley.
B. Development Proposal
(1) To abandon the alley and recombine it with the
adjacent lots for a single user.
(2) Recombine the lots as a single platted lot for
office usage for a single structure. Off- street
parking would be provided in the area of the
Markham Street frontage with the building
extending across the alley portion of the block.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. E - Continued
C. Engineering Comments
No adverse comment.
D. Analysis
The subject properties have been cleared of structures
for several years. Redevelopment has been hampered by
the shallow depth of the north parcel and the alley
which bisects the block. The alley becomes the
significant issue for resolution of this plat. A
petition for abandonment has not been filed at this
writing which would draw other owners into this
platting matter. This should be accomplished to avoid
the appearance of avoidance of the single most
important issue in this block. As to the request for
"0-3" setbacks as proposed, we have no concerns in this
area because most of the area buildings are offices and
provide little or no setbacks.
E. Staff Recommendation
Approval of the replat as proposed, subject to
resolution of the alley issue. We also recommend
approval of the building line to "0-3" standards.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The applicant stated that a petition to close the noted
alley has been filed. Objectors are expected to be present
at the Public Hearing.
Water Works - A main extension is required in the easement
along the east side of the alley property before main in
alley can be abandoned.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. The only issue discussed
involved the alley closure (see minutes to item 15). A
motion for deferral for 30 days was made and passed by a
vote of: 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. E - ,Continued
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The applicant was not present. He reported that he had not
yet met with objector, Senator Ben Allen, but a meeting was
set for the following week.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (2- 11 -86)
The applicant was present. A motion was made for approval
of the agreed upon plan and entry, subject to: (1) one -foot
access easement dedication from McClellan's property,
(2) Traffic Engineering comments, (3) staff approval of
replat, (4) no additional landscaping required. The vote:
7 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 abstention (Commissioner
Massie abstained).
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. F
NAME:
Ati Day Yisroel Conditional
Use Permit (Z- 2840 -A)
LOCATION: West of the intersection of
Rodney Parham Road and
Rocky Valley Drive
(3700 N. Rodney Parham Road)
OWNER /APPLICANT: Ati Day Yisroel /Emily M. Lewis
PROPOSAL:
To bring into conformance an existing church and a day -care
center which currently cares for 36 children, on land that
is zoned "R -2."
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1. Site Location
Adjacent to an arterial on the east (Rodney Parham
Road), and two residential streets (Valley Club Circle
- South and Doral Drive - West).
2. Compatibility with Neighborhood
The church and day -care center are existing uses. A
school is located to the north, with single family uses
adjacent on the remaining three sides. The proposal is
compatible with the surrounding area.
3. On -Site Drives and Parking
This property is served by two existing access drives
(Valley Club Circle and Rodney Parham Road) and
approximately 87 parking spaces.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. F - Continued
4. Screening and Buffers
This site is heavily wooded and well screened from the
surrounding area.
5. Analysis
The staff has no problem with this proposal. The site
plan should be revised to include an existing drive on
Valley Club Circle and to change Pine Crest Lane to
Valley Club Circle (as it is on the ground).
6. Engineering Comments
None.
7. Staff Recommendation
Approval subject to the previous comments.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The applicant was not present. The staff stated that the
applicant had requested that their item be deferred until
the February 11, 1986, Planning Commission meeting due to a
problem with their notification procedures.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was not present. The Commission voted
11 ayes, 0 noes to defer this application until the
February 11, 1986, Planning Commission meeting.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
~' Item No. F - Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
(February 11, 1986)
The applicant was present. The Commission voted 8 ayes,
0 noes, 3 absent to approve the application as recommended
by the staff, reviewed by the Subdivision Committee and
agreed to by the applicant.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 1
NAME:
LOCATION:
DEVELOPER:
Big K Development
13700 Beckenham
Little Rock, AR 72212
Hillsborough Phase V -C
West end of Saddle Hill Drive
ENGINEER:
Richardson Engineer
1717 Rebsamen Park Road
Little Rock, AR 72212
Phone: 664 -0003
AREA: 2.5 acres NO. OF LOTS:, 6 FT. NEW STREET: 353
ZONING: "R -2"
PROPOSED USES: "R -2"
A. Existing Conditions
The site is located in an area that is primarily
developed as single family. The land consists of
elevations ranging from 680' to 7051.
B. Development Proposal
The applicant has resubmitted plans to develop this
site as six lots on 2.5 acres.
C. Engineering Comments
None.
D. Analysis
Previously, the Commission decided not to approve this
part of Hillsborough, Phase V due to water service
restrictions placed on land above 695' elevation.
Since then, the Commission has approved a revised
preliminary plat for Marlowe Manor where the same
question of water service to lots above 695 M.S.L. was
not raised as an issue.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 1-- Continued
On January 14, 1986, in the agenda session, and before
the latter plat was approved in the public hearing, the
applicant brought out the above fact and the Commission
agreed that the issue apparently was resolved since
Water Works had not raised objections to Marlowe Manor.
Staff has found no problems with the proposal, provided
Water Works agrees to the finished floor elevations
shown on the plat.
E. Staff Recommendation
Approval, subject to comments made.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
Water Works requested a 695 -foot maximum floor elevation,
wtih restrictions to be placed in the Bill of Assurance.
The applicant agreed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
A motion was made for approval, subject to comments made.
The motion was passed by a vote of: 8 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 2
NAME: Kanis Commercial Preliminary
LOCATION: Near the Southwest Intersection
of Bower and Kanis - West of
John Barrow, South of Arkansas
Systems Office Building,
immediately West of Little Rock
Fire Station
DEVELOPER: ENGINEER:
McKay Properties Marlar Engineering Co., Inc.
5800 Forest Place 5318 JFK
Little Rock, AR North Little Rock, AR 72116
Phone: 665 -0010 Phone: 753 -1987
AREA: 14.8 acres NO. OF LOTS: 24 FT. NEW STREET: 2,000
ZONING: "C -3"
PROPOSED USES: "C -3"
A. Existing Conditions
The property is located in an area with mix uses,
consisting primarily of multifamily, office and
commercial uses. Much of the site is currently denuded
of all vegetation with the remainder consisting of
scattered trees and underbrush.
B. Development Proposal
This is a proposal to plat 24 commercial lots on 14.8
acres. Detention proposals will be submitted to the
City Engineers. Two 601/30' streets will be built.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 2 - Continued
C. Engineering Comments
(1) Right -of -way dedication and boundary street
improvements are required on Kanis Road.
(2)' Show the detention volumes and the detention areas
on the plat.
D. Analysis
The applicant has asked to clarify the replatting of
Lots 15/16; also, any changes regarding the Arkansas
Systems parking lot. All areas abutting residential
zoning must provide the required buffers and screening.
E. Staff Recommendation
Approval, subject to comments made.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
Mr. Forrest Marlar, Engineer, clarified the replatting
issue. He indicated that the owners of Lot 15 were buying
Lot 16 and that the parking would not be effected. He
agreed to clarify this on the plat and provide the required
buffers and screening.
Water Works - An 8 -inch main extension looped from Kanis
Road to Jo�Fin Barrow Road is required.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
A motion for approval, subject to Subdivision Committee
comments was made and passed by a vote of: 8 ayes, 0 noes
and 3 absent.
0 WA
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 3
NAME: Granite Ridge Addition
LOCATION: North side of Woodyard Road,
approximately 300 feet from
Southwest intersection of
Dixon Road and Woodyard Road
TIF.VF.T.(IAF.R
RMaTWRRR e
Metropolitan Trust Co. Thomas Engineering Company
3901 McCain Park Drive 3810 Lookout Road
No. Little Rock, AR 72116 North Little Rock, AR 72116
Phone: 758 -1212 Phone: 753 -4463
AREA: 28.86 acres NO. OF LOTS:
ZONING: Outside City
PROPOSED USES: Single Family
A. Existing Conditions
63 FT. NEW STREET: 3,425
This area is currently located in a community outside
of the City that is mainly composed of single family
and industrial uses. The land involved is wooded and
elevations range from 300' to 3701.
B. Development Proposal
This proposal contains 28.86 acres, 63 lots and 3,425
linear feet of new street. Sewer will be provided by
septic tanks.
C. Engineering Comments
(1) Right -of -way and boundary street improvements will
be required of Woodyard Road. The right -of -way is
a total of 501, and a paved width of 27'.
Therefore, one -half of the street improvements and
right -of -way dedication will be required.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 3 - Continued
(2) Stormwater detention required on -site.
D. Analysis
This site is located in a mining area which is
experiencing some development pressure. The applicant
should provide: (1) proof of percolation ono sample
lots and provide a State Health Department letter;
(2) change the name of Castle and Callen Drives; and
(3) look at the elimination of part of Gurden Drive in
Block 4 and the provision of a cul -de -sac. Staff feels
that the lots are a little small for septic tanks.
E. Staff Recommendation
Approval, subject to comments made.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The applicant, Mr. Basil Shoptaw, agreed to provide the
requested cul -de -sac, but reported that he hadn't gone to
the Health Department as of yet. The applicant asked for
reduced street standards. It was requested that he meet
with Engineering and discuss street standards and meet with
the State Health Department also.
Water Works - Main extension required plus an acreage charge
of $100 per acre will apply.
PANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
A motion for deferral, as requested by the applicant, was
made and passed by a vote of: 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 4
NAME:
LOCATION:
DEVELOPER:
Ralph Watkins
Continental Investment Co.
Los Angeles, CA
Landmark Park, Phase II
West side of Chicot Road and
North of Claybrood Drive -
behind Whispering Hills
Mobile Home Park
PWnTATTi V0.
A.M.I. Engineering /Delbert
Vandlandingham
1615 Louisiana Street
Little Rock, AR
Phone: 376 -6838
AREA: 9.71 acres NO. OF LOTS: 75 FT. NEW STREET:
(p iris vate 2,240 linear feet)
ZONING: "R -2" Existing, "R -7" (Proposed)
PROPOSED USES: Mobile Home Park
VARIANCES REQUESTED:
1. Continuation of existing 20 -foot wide private street
(27 -foot required).
2. Continuation of 35 -foot wide street easement (50 feet
required).
A. Existing Conditions
The land involved is basically flat and covered with
mature vegetation. It is abutted on the north and east
by an existing mobile home park and on the south and
west by single family zoning.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 4 - Continued
B. Development Proposal
This is a proposal to plat 9.7 acres into 75 lots for
mobile home development. Private streets consist of
2,240 linear feet. Variances requested include:
(1) continuation of existing 20' wide private street;
(2) continuation of 35' wide street easement.
C. Engineering Comments
1. Stormwater detention shall be required on -site.
It is suggested that the area for stormwater
detention be located in the vicinity of Lot 1 on
the southeast corner of the project.
2. The utility easements shown at various corners on
the plat should be rounded instead of squared.
D. Analysis
� This proposal is an extension of an existing mobile
home park. Staff has no problems with the requested
waivers, provided the drives are platted as
access /service easements. The applicant should also
reduce the amount of lots on the western boundary to
six due to its proximity to the single family area. A
50' undisturbed "OS" strip should be provided.
E. Staff Recommendation
Approval, subject to comments made.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
Due to the failure of the rezoning request on this property
to pass the Commission, the applicant asked to withdraw the
item.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 4 - Continµed
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
A motion for withdrawal was made and passed by a vote of:
8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent.
%1
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 5
NAME:
Landmark Mobile Home Park
Phase I Site Plan Review
(Z- 4594 -A)
LOCATION: The West side of Chicot Road
North of Claybrook Road
OWNER /APPLICANT: Continental Development and
Investment Company /Delbert
Vanlandingham
PROPOSAL:
To receive approval of a site plan that creates 75 new
mobile home sites on 9.71 acres of land that is zoned "R -2.
1. Analysis
The site plan generally conforms to the "R -7" site plan
requirements. The storage area (13,000 square feet
provided, 12,950 square feet required) and the open
space (237,583 square feet provided, 77,000 square feet
required) both exceed ordinance requirements. The
primary concern of the staff is the relationship of the
mobile homes to the single family subdivision located
to the south. The staff would like to see Lots 1 -12
revised so as to reduce the number of lots to six while
allowing an angular placement which would provide a
minimum 50 feet setback from the south property line.
The staff also feels that the plan should be revised to
show termination of the southwestern most stub - street.
Finally, the ordinance requires both a 6 foot opaque
screening fence and a dense evergreen planting.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 5 - Continued
2. City Engineering Comments
(1) Stormwater detention shall
is suggested that the area for
located in the vicinity of Lot
corner of the proposal and (2)
shown at various lot corners o
rounded instead of squared.
3. Staff Recommendation
be required on site. It
stormwater detention be
1 on the southeast
The utility easement
n the plat should be
Approval provided the applicant agrees to: (1) submit
a revised site plan that includes the twelve lots on
the south property line reduced to six, provides for an
angular placement of mobile homes, allows a 50 foot
rear setback, and provides for both a 6 foot opaque
screening fence and a dense evergreen planting; (2)
termination of the southwestern most stub - street; and
(3) comply with Enginering Comments number 1 and 2.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The applicant was not present. The staff stated that the
applicant had indicated a desire to withdraw the item.
There was no further discussion.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was not present. The Commission voted 8 ayes,
0 noes, 3 absent to withdraw the item.
February 11, 19,86
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 6
NAME:
T nt/ Am Tn%T.
MLTT7LT7 ^Tl LTT]
Lockerby /Maxwell
8100 Scott Hamilton
Little Rock, AR 72209
Phone: 562 -5282
Bill Brandon Site Plan Review
8100 Scott Hamilton Drive
E1Tn TLT�T77'f
Jack R. Wofford
4219 Jacksonville -Cato Road
North Little Rock, AR 72116
Phone: 835 -1161
AREA: 11.1 acres NO. OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0
ZONING: "I -2"
PROPOSED USES: Office /Warehouse
1. Proposal
The construction of an office /warehouse development on
11.1 acres.
2. Site Data
(a) Existing Building ........... 38,500 sq. ft.
(b) Building A .................. 37,750 sq. ft.
(c) Building Under Construction.. 30,000 sq. ft.
(d) Future Building .............. 30,500 sq. ft.
(e) Future Building .............. 27,500 sq. ft.
(f) Future Building .............. 27,500 sq. ft.
3. Parking .......................... 161 spaces
4. Engineering Comments
(1) The north entrance should be redesigned as a 90°
intersection with Scott Hamilton Road. Please
coordinate this design with Henk Koornstra,
Traffic Engineer.
February 11, 1986
L" SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 6 - Continued
(2) Stormwater detention is required on -site.
5. Analysis
This site is located in
area. The applicant is
plan that indicates the
circulation pattern and
and a breakdown of squa
required.
6. Staff Recommendation
what is primarily an industrial
requested to submit a revised
amount of existing parking,
landscaping. A one lot replat
re footage as related to uses is
Approval, subject to comments made.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The applicant felt that there were no problems with
complying with Engineering's comments. He was asked to get
Kenny Scott's approval of the landscaping. Since both lots
are in the same ownership, with no plans for selling off any
portion of the property, it was decided that a one -lot
replat was not necessary.
Water Works - On -site fire protection required, plus a
pro -rata charge of $2.50 per foot.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
A motion for approval, subject to conformance with the
parking requirements, which will be reviewed by staff, was
made and passed by a vote of: 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 7
NAME: United Cerebral Palsy
(Z -4566)
LOCATION: 10910 West 36th
T% LIT 7 LET nn L"D .
Ed Benton
c/o 10400 West 36th
Little Rock, AR 72204
Phone: 224 -6067
CT7At7WVr D .
Bob Lowe
10510 I -30, Suite 5
Little Rock, AR 72209
Phone: 562 -7215
AREA: 33,544 sq.ft. NO. OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET:
ZONING: Existing "R -2," Proposed "PRD"
PROPOSED USES: Group Home
A. Objectives
To provide an alternative living arrangement, besides a
nursing home or state administrated institution, for
persons with cerebral palsy or other physical
disabilities.
B. Proposal
(1) The construction of a 15 -bed group home of 8,000
square feet on 34,000 square feet.
(2) The facility design will be of conventional frame
construction with veneer siding and will have a
residential design.
(3) Construction is estimated to begin in
approximately 8 months.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 7 - Continued
C. Engineering Comments
(1) Right -of -way dedication and boundary street
improvements will be required on 36th Street.
This street is a minor arterial, therefore, a
required 40' dedication from centerline is
required. Also, 24' of street pavement is
needed from centerline of the road for a total of
48' on West 36th Street.
(2) Stormwater detention on -site is required.
D. Analysis
Due to the fact that this parcel of land has been
separated from a larger ownership, the applicant is
required to submit a plat.
E. Staff Recommendation
Approval, subject to comments made.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The applicant agreed to preliminary plat all three acres and
do a final plat and street improvements on the one acre that
is planned for the group home.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
A motion for approval subject to comments made was made and
passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, and 3 absent.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 8
NAME: South Park Street Duplex
Conditional Use Permit
(Z -4600)
LOCATION: Just South of 22nd Street on the
West side of South Park Street
(2224 South Park Street)
OWNER /APPLICANT: Miriam Ford /Garland Ford
FafTOTIZORWIM
To convert an existing 2,140 square feet single family house
to a duplex and pave three parking spaces on land that is
zoned "R -3."
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1. Site location
Adjacent to a residential street (South Park).
2. Compatibility with Neighborhood
The property adjacent to the south is used as a duplex
while the surrounding adjacent uses are single family.
The proposed use is compatible with the surrounding
area.
3. On -Site Drives and Parking ,
The proposal contains one paved access (South Park
Street) and three paved parking spaces.
4. Screening and Buffers
No landscape plan has been submitted.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
u
Item No. 8 - Continued
5. Analysis
The proposed use is compatible with the surrounding
area. The proposal to renovate the existing structure
will enhance the neighborhood as the structure is
currently condemnable condition. The applicant needs
to be advised that he will be required to meet City
landscape requirements.
6. City Engineering Comments
The parking area should be approved by the Traffic
Engineer prior to construction.
7. Staff Recommendation
The staff recomends approval as filed and: (1) reminds
the applicant that he will be required to meet City
landscape requirements; (2) approval is subject to City
Engineering comments.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The applicant was present and agreed to comply with staff's
recommendations.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (February 11, 1986)
The applicant was not present. The Commission voted 8 ayes,
0 noes, 3 absent to defer the application until the
March 11, 1986, Planning Commission meeting.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 9
NAME:
Walton Heights Conditional
Use Permit (Z -4601)
LOCATION: Just Southwest of the
Intersection of Southridge and
Rivercrest Drive
OWNER /APPLICANT: Little Rock Water Works/
Alltel Mobile Communications of
Arkansas, Inc., Hermann Ivester
PROPOSAL:
To construct a 180 square foot prefabricated building
adjacent to the existing water tank and to construct an
antenna on the existing water tank (to be no taller than the
existing tank) on land that is zoned "R -2."
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1. Site Location
On an easement that ties in to a residential street
(Southridge Drive).
2. Compatibility with Neighborhood
The proposal is to make additional use of an existing
facility. This proposal is compatible with the
surrounding area.
3. On -Site Drives and Parking
One 10 foot access drive with a small turnaround
services this site. The access drive is paved from
Southridge Drive westward approximately one half the
distance to the water tank.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 9 - Continued
4. Screening and Buffers
No landscape plan has been submitted.
5. Analysis
The staff foresees no problem with this proposal. The
proposed building will be sited below grade and the
antenna will not be any taller than the existing tank.
The applicant will be required to meet City landscape
requirements.
6. City Engineering Comments
None.
7. Staff Recommendation
Approval subject to comments made.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The applicant was present and stated that the antenna would
be 2 to 4 feet taller than the existing tank. Water Works
pointed out the applicant's need to obtain the right to use
the existing ingress and egress easement. The applicant
agreed to comply with staff's recommendations.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. The Commission voted 8 ayes,
0 noes, 3 absent to approve the application as recommended
by the staff, reviewed by the Subdivision Committee and
agreed to by the applicant.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 10
NAME:
Morrison Road Conditional Use
Permit (Z -4602)
LOCATION: Approximately 1/4 of a mile
west of the end of Morrison
Road
OWNER /APPLICANT: Melvin and Darlene Bell and
C. Randolph and Barbara Warner/
Alltel Mobile Communications of
Arkansas, Inc. /Hermann Ivester
PRnPnRAT.
To construct a 180 square foot prefabricated building and a
150 -foot antenna tower on land that is zoned "R -2."
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1. Site Location
The end of an easement that begins at the end of a
residential street (Morrison Road).
2. Compatibility with Neighborhood
The site is surrounded by vacant land on three sides
and a utility use on the east. The proposal is
compatible with the surrounding area.
3. On -Site Drives and Parking
The site will be served by a 12 foot gravel access
road.
�a1
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 10 - Continued
4. Screening and Buffers
The area is isolated and heavily wooded.
5. Analysis
This proposal is compatible with the surrounding area.
The staff foresees no problem with the proposal.
6. City Engineering Comments
None.
7. Staff Recommendation
Approval as filed.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The applicant was present. Water Works stated that they had
a 25 -foot easement along the north side of Lots 501 -504,
Marlowe Manor, and pointed out the applicant's need to
obtain the right to an ingress /egress easement.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. The Commission voted 8 ayes,
0 noes, 3 absent to approve the application as recommended
by the staff, reviewed by the Subdivision Committee and
agreed to by the applicant.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 11
NAME:
LOCATION:
DEVELOPER:
Charles Breedlove
1808 Princeton Drive
Little Rock, AR 72204
Phone: 663 -8610
REQUEST:
Breedlove Building Line
Waiver (Lot 124, Pine Forest
Addition)
1808 Princeton
SURVEYOR:
G.S. Denham
212 South Victory Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
Five -foot encroachment into an area established by a 38 -foot
building line.
A. Existing Conditions
This site is located in an older residential area with
platted building lines of 351. The lot is abutted on
all sides by residential uses.
B. Development Pro2osal
This is a request for approval of an 8' x 21' addition
that encroaches 5' into a 35' platted building line.
C. Engineering Comments
None.
D. Analysis
Staff has no adverse comments since the Zoning
Ordinance requires only 25'. The usual one lot final
replat and amended Bill of Assurance is required.
E. Staff Recommendation
\__1 Approval, as requested.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 11
SUBDIVISJON COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The applicant was present. The item was reviewed and passed
to the Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
A motion for approval, subject to one -lot final replat was
made and passed by a vote of: 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 12
NAME:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT /DEVELOPER:
REQUEST:
Leawood Mountain Addition
Replat (Lot 89)
8407 Leatrice
William Youkhana
8407 Leatrice
Little Rock, AR 72207
The replatting of one lot into two lots for construction of
a single family home.
A. Existing Conditions
This site is in an area consisting of single family
residences. The land is irregularly shaped, and the
terrain is basically flat. A lake borders on the
southwestern tip. The existing use on the lot is a
fourplex, which is nonconforming. The owner presently
lives in the structure.
B. Development Proposal
The applicant is requesting to replat 1.5 acres into
lots. No change is planned for the fourplex lot. The
owner hopes to build a single family home for himself
on the new lot. Access is to be provided by an
easement to the rear lot.
C. Engineering Comments
The minimum floor elevation for the proposed structure
on Lot 89A is required to be at least 1' above the
100 -year flood elevation of Foreman Lake.
u
February 11, 1985
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 12 - Continued
D. Analysis
Staff is concerned about the current access to the rear
lot. It is recommended that platted access be provided
by an elbow -type design to the east, or construction of
a turnaround in addition to what is now proposed on the
west. The Subdivision Ordinance requires each lot to
abut on a public street.
E. Staff Recommendation
Approval, subject to comments made.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The applicant was present. The Committee discussed the
proposal. The applicant agreed to redesign the access to
the new lot and submit it to the staff before the public
hearing.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
A motion was made and passed for approval, subject to:
(1) fire and water service approval, and (2) approval of
easement by City Engineering. The vote: 8 ayes, 0 noes and
3 absent.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 13 - Other Matters - Street Abandonment
NAME:
Baker Street
LOCATION: Between Nickell and Farris Sts.
1 Block North of Kanis Road
(all 3 streets on paper only)
PETITIONER:
REQUEST:
T.M. White and Ralph Clement
To abandon an existing right-of-way in order to clear title
to the land.
ABUTTING USES AND OWNERSHIPS:
A large auto salvage yard lies to the east extending to
Gamble Road. The uses and lots on the west and south are
single family. The land lying to the north is vacant and
platted lots.
NEIGHBORHOOD EFFECT:
There should be no adverse effect on the owners or lands
within this two -block street element inasmuch as the street
has existed only on paper.
NEIGHBORHOOD POSITION:
None expressed at this writing.
EFFECT ON PUBLIC SERVICES:
None inasmuch as the only use which may occupy such a
right -of -way is a utility and an easement right will be
retained.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 13 - Continued
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the abandonment as requested
subject to the closure ordinance, including the standard
utility protection clause.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objectors in
attendance. After a brief discussion of the proposal, the
Planning Commission voted on a motion to recommend approval.
The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 3 absent.
`u
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 14
NAME:
LOCATION:
DEVELOPER:
Mrs. Thelma Richardson
6420 Stagecoach Road
Little Rock, AR 72204
Mrs. Thelma Richardson
Preliminary Plat
6420 Stagecoach Road
ENGINEER:
Dillenger Engineers, Inc.
7311 West 12th Street
Little Rock, AR 72204
AREA: No. of New Lots: 3 No. Ft. New Street: 0
ZONING: "R -2" Single Family
PROPOSED USE: Single Family
VARIANCES:
Pipe stem lot length and width.
A. Existing Conditions
The site contains three residential structures. A
principal dwelling facing on Stagecoach Road, an
accessory dwelling approximately 300 feet from the
front property line and a new small dwelling
approximatly 350 feet from the front property line.
Additionally, the owner holds out for sale a vacant lot
on the rear of the subject property. This land is
generally flat and has no drainage problems nor access
problems due to grade or street. The units 2, 3 and
the vacant lot take access over a gravel driveway along
the south property line without benefit of a proper
easement record.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 14 - Continued
B. Development Proposal
The owner proposes the completion of a house which was
started prior to annexation and has been permitted by
the City. The owner proposes the sale of the third lot
at the rear of the site. A lot stubout to
Stagecoach Road is the only reasonable solution to
access for the three lots as now situated.
C. Engineerinq Comment
Specific comments have not been received at this
writing inasmuch as an appropriate plat has not been
submitted for their review. The Stagecoach Road
right -of -way will require a 100 foot right -of -way by
the Master Street Plan. Approximately 20 feet of
dedication will be required. The actual amount to be
determined by the City Engineer upon receipt of an
accurate survey and plat.
D. Analysis
This applicant is beset by a set of circumstances not
entirely of her design. The third house which is
almost complete except for water connections was
started prior to the referendum annexation of 1985.
Apparently, none of her contractors bothered to check
subdivision requirements. The owner was equally
ignorant of the platting requirements established by
the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the City. After
annexation, she was instructed to apply for a permit to
complete the work on the house. This permit was issued
apparently without instruction to deal with the
subdivision requirements. The end result is a lot with
three residences and potentially poor access. The
solution will be somewhat unconventional, but if
properly drafted and recorded will provide the needed
assurances of access for future owners.
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 14 - Continued
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of the preliminary plat with three lots as
proposed subject to:
1. Lot 1, the front lot facing Stagecoach Road to include
the first two residential structures thereby committing
the second house to be an accessory dwelling.
2. The second lot to include the new house and access by
way of a platted 15 foot wide stem to Stagecoach Road.
3. The third lot now vacant to be accessed by way of an
easement stub parallel to Lot 2 access and platted as a
portion of the lot. This stem would also be 15 feet in
width.
4. Lots 2 and 3 to share a common drive easement
overlaying the platted 15 foot pipe stems.
5. No further platting or replatting of this ownership.
6. Dedication of the needed right -of -way on
Stagecoach Road.
7. Waiver of street improvements along Stagecoach Road.
8. The building setback lines one each lot to be
established by the current housing alignments, but in
no instance less than the ordinance standards.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (2- 11 -86)
The applicant was present. The staff offered a brief update
which included a recommendation of approval with staff to
follow up on a utility fire hydrant and basic plat
conformance to the ordinance. The Commission received this
report and recommendation and briefly discussed the matter.
A motion was then made to approve the plat as recommended by
the staff. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes,
3 absent.
P L A N N I N G C O M M I S S I O N
V 0 T E R E C O R D
DATES are,
• ITEM NUMBERS
ZONING SUBDIVIS70N
��
KIM
no
Flumpi0mmmarl.0
.
_
winN
�e
°eve
°o�o��o�o
°e°r.
°emii
°o
J. Nicholson
o'eoP�i�'eo��aao�o�vooe���
cQo�rn.���oovs000eoo
■
■■
W. Ketcher
��o�oocc
v�oe��v000
■■
� �o�r�o�o����i000000�o�o
■■
r�r�o�c�o�ovoovoo�000
■■
VAYE 0 NAYE A ABSENT '!t5ABSTAIN
February 11, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned
at 1:23 p.m.
Chairman
e retary
Date