HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-3975 Staff AnalysisMay 10, 1983
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 1 - File No. 318
NAME:
T r%ORMTn*T.
n PT7vr r%nvn .
Brainard Place "PRD"
S. Valentine and Lamar
ENGINEER:
Harney Construction Mehlburger, Tanner, Renshaw
2723 Foxcroft Road Little Rock, AR
Suite 108 Phone: 375-5331
Little Rock, AR 72207
AREA: 6.41 acres NO. OF LOTS: 2 FT. OF NEW ST.: 0
ZONING: "R-4" (Existing)
PROPOSED USES: Residential
REQUEST:
To reclassify an area from "R-4" to "PRD."
I. DEVELOPMENTOBJECTIVESAND PHILOSOPHY
(A) Accommodates increased rental need generated by
new and existing medical facilities and end of
economic life of existing rental units in the
area.
(B) Sets a -trend for quality development.
II. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
A. Parcel Size - - - - - - - - - 6,800 sq. ft.
B. Existing Zoning - - - - - - - - "R-4"
C. Development Scheme:
1. No. of Units - w - 4 Two -Bedroom Town Houses
2. Unit Type - - - - Duplex (2 Bldgs.)
3. Square Footage - - 3,456 sq. ft.
D. Building Coverage - - - 1,434 sq. ft.
E. Open Space- - - -- - - - 3,864 sq. ft.
May 10, 1983
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 1 - Continued
F. Parking - - - - - - - - - - 4 spaces
III. ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS
None at this time.
IV. STAFF ANALYSIS
This site is located in a multifamily area that
.consists mainly of older housing stock that has been
converted to duplexes, though the property is bordered
on the north by a single family residence. The only
existing structure is a very recently constructed
duplex on the west, which the existing zoning allows.
The applicant is proposing to replat the lot and build
a similar unit on the vacant portion to the east.
Staff is concerned with the possibility that one of the
resulting lots may be sold. That is not advisable
since this would then create lots smaller than usual
for this land use. Also, the plan should be revised
to accommodate the six parking spaces required as
designed, it is doubtful that adequate space exists.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval, subject to comments made.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
Since the applicant was not present, the Committee decided
to pass this to the Commission without recommendation.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors.
The motion was made and passed to defer the item for one
month in order for it to be returned to the Subdivision
Committee and the applicant contacted. The motion passed by
a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
(3-31-83)
Since the applicant was not present. The Committee decided
to passed this to the Commission without recommendation.
May 10, 1983
SUBDIVISIONS
Itqln No. 1 - Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was not in attendance. A letter was presented
to the Commission requesting a deferral of this matter to
May 10,-1983, in order to receive review by the Subdivision
Committee.' There were no objectors in attendance. The
Planning Commission voted 10 ayes, 0 nays to defer the
matte's as requested.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The applicant was present. The Committee passed this to the
Commission, subject to the applicant submitting a revised
parking plan and no endorsement of more than one lot.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
(5-10-83)
The applicant was present. Mr. Larry Dickens of 708 Valmar
spoke in opposition to the project. A motion was made and
passed to approve the proposal, subject to the submission of
a revised plan before the Board meeting, eliminating the lot
line, and relocating the Valentine Street driveway. The
motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 2 noes and 1 absent.
(No votes - Clayton and Schlereth)