Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4183 Staff AnalysisMarch 27, 1984 Item No. 7 - Z-4183 Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Jonathan Hudson Franklin J. Daley West 22nd at Nichols Rezone from "R-2" Single Family to "R-4" Two Family Duplex 1.34 acres + Existing Use: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" South - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" East - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" West - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The proposal is to construct two duplexes, four units total, on eight lots. This would be the same number of units that could be constructed on the lots if the property remained "R-2." The area was outside the City until 1982 so the development pattern is very mixed. The neighborhood's land uses includes single family residences, mobile homes, churches and some commercial structures. A majority of the lots are vacant and this type of a project could encourage further new construction in the area which would benefit the entire neighborhood. The "R-4" zoning or use should not have a negative impact on the neighborhood. 2. The site is vacant and heavily wooded. There is some grade to the land, but it should not create any problems for the proposed development. 3. Nichols Street has only 40' of right-of-way so additional dedication is necessary to increase the right-of-way to 50' for a residential street. West 22nd Street has a 50 -foot right-of-way. March 27, 1984 Item No. 7 - Continued 4. There have been no adverse comments received from the reviewing agencies at this time. There is no sewer in the area so septic systems will be used, and it is the staff's understanding that the applicant has received the necessary approvals for using septic tanks. 5. There are no legal issues. 6. The property was annexed into the City in October 1982. There is no documented neighborhood position on the site. 7. The staff supports the request and the proposed development scheme. The duplex use should not create any problems for the neighborhood and the new construction should be viewed as a positive step for the area. It is recommended that the existing alley be abandoned and a replat of the lots be accomplished. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request as filed. March 7, 1984 Little Rack Planning Corrunission Office of Comprehensive Planning City Hall Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Re: Rezonincr of Lots 1,2,3,4,21,22,23 & 24 Block 6 Hick's Interurban, North side of west 22nd between Wilson and Nichols streets. To Whom It May Concern: We would like to go on record as opposing the application for zone classification change from R2 single family district to R4 two family district. We feel that this change of zoning classification would lower the value of our property in this area and would possibly cause other R4 two family properties to be built in our area. This would bring in more people to the area and take away our rights as to privacy and would create more noise, traffic and other nuisances, such as Partying, etc. that migh be present where people are renting and do not own their own residences. We would greatly appreciate your consideration in this matter and hope our area can remain a single family district. Sincerely, 1'eu. V.�. Mr. & Mrs. George E. Legg 2015 Wilson Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72205 Attache -encs Residents opposing zone change - Mr. & Mrs. James H. King Mr. & Mrs. E. A. Lauderdale 2106 Wilson Road 2023 Nichols Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72205 Little Hock, Arkansas 72205 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE LITTLE ROCK PLANNING C01MISSION ON AN APPLICATION TO REZONE PROPERTY To ALL owners of land lying within 200 feet of the boundary of property at: North side of w. 22nd between Wilson & Nichols st. Address: General Location: Lots1,2,3,4,21,22,23.& 24 Block 6, .a,,r` r rc T r+ r r. Y.l-. 2 n Owned by: Jonathan Hudson NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT an application for rezoning of the above property requesting a change of zone_ classification from R2 single family District to " R4two family District has been filecT—with the Office of Comprehensive Planning. City Hall. A public hearing on said application will be held by the Little Rock Planning Commission in the Board of Directors Chamber, 2nd Floor, City Hall on March 27 , 19 $-4— at 1:DO p.m. — ALL PARTIES IN INTEREST MAY APPEAR and be heard at said time and place or may notify the Planning Commission of their views on this matter by letter. All persons interested in this request are invited to call or visit the Office of Comprehensive Planning, City Hall, 371-4790, and to review the application and discuss same with the planning staff. AFFIDAVIT I hereby certify that I have notified all the property owners of record within 200 feet of the above property, that subject property is being considered for rezoning and that a Public Hearing will be held by the Little Rock Planning Commission at the time and place described above. Applicant (owner or authorized agent): m e )! 3- z- i��-= ---- (date) March 27, 1984 Item No. 7 - Z-4183 Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: Jonathan Hudson Franklin J. Daley West 22nd at Nichols Rezone from "R-2" Single Family to "R-4" Two Family Duplex 1.34 acres + Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" South - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" East - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" West - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The proposal is to construct two duplexes, four units total, on eight lots. This would be the same number of units that could be constructed on the lots if the property remained "R-2." The area was outside the City until 1982 so the development pattern is very mixed. The neighborhood's land uses includes single family residences, mobile homes, churches and some commercial structures. A majority of the lots are vacant and this type of a project could encourage further new construction in the area which would benefit the entire neighborhood. The "R-4" zoning or use should not have a negative impact on the neighborhood. 2. The site is vacant and heavily wooded. There is some grade to the land, but it should not create any problems for the proposed development. 3. Nichols Street has only 40' of right-of-way so additional dedication is necessary to increase the right-of-way to 50' for a residential street. West 22nd Street has a 50 -foot right-of-way. March 27, 1984 Item No. 7 - Continued 4. There have been no adverse reviewing agencies at this the area so septic systems staff's understanding that the necessary approvals for 5. There are no legal issues. comments received from the time. There is no sewer in will be used, and it is the the applicant has received using septic tanks. 6. The property was annexed into the City in October 1982. There is no documented neighborhood position on the site. 7. The staff supports the request and the proposed development scheme. The duplex use should not create any problems for the neighborhood and the new construction should be viewed as a positive step for the area. It is recommended that the existing alley be abandoned and a replat of the lots be accomplished. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The applicant, Franklin Daley, was present. There were four objectors also in attendance. Sherry Anhalt expressed concerns over additional septic systems in the neighborhood, an inadequate street system and the lack of City improvements since being annexed. Cindy Spiller reinforced Ms. Anhalt's comments and asked that the City make improvements to the area before allowing more people. A third person voiced concern over addtional septic systems in the area. Bob Lane of the City Engineering staff addressed the improvement issue and said that the City could only improve the street surfaces. Also, no off-site improvements would be required with this project. Mr. Daley addressed the septic system issue and stated that he had received all the necessary approvals. He said that there would be one septic system for each duplex. Mr. Daley understood that he would have to file a replat. A motion was made to recommend approval subject to a replat being filed. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. NOTE: This item will not be forwarded to the Board of Directors until a replat is filed.