HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4247 Staff AnalysisJune 12, 1984
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 6
NAME: Cantrell Place West - A
Condomiumium Development "PRD"
(Z-4247)
LOCATION: Southeast corner of Misty Lane
and Cantrell Road
AGENT/DESIGNER:
Paul Davenport
4213 Wait Street
Phone: 666-6186
nPURMPFR _
ENGINEER/APPLICANT:
Mr. & Mrs. Bruce Constant Thomas Engineering
Unit C-1201 Raven 3721 J.F.K. Boulevard
Hot Springs, AR 79193 North Little Rock, AR 72116
Phone: 753-4463
AREA: 1.78 acres NO. OF LOTS: 1 FT. OF NEW ST.: 0
ZONING: "R-2" (PRD Proposed)
PROPOSED USES: 4 Condominium Detached Units
A. Site History
This was previously the site of one single family
house, which was destroyed by fire. The site is
currently vacant.
B. Proposal
1. The construction of four detached condominium
units on a tract of 1.78 acres at a density of two
units per acre.
2. Units will consist of 2600 square feet of living
space on a single level with a rear courtyard.
All units will be constructed with masonry veneer
and wood shake roofs. The design of development
will be consistent with the area.
3. Ratio of land to building - 67,953:10,400.
4. Access will be provided at three points. Two are
existing and off Cantrell.
June 12, 1984
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 6 - Continued
5. Landscaping will utilize as many existing trees as
possible and a 6' high fence will be built around
the building.
6. Financing and development will begin immediately
after approval and a completion date is set for
one year.
C. Engineering Comments
1. Request only one driveway be planned from Cantrell
Road.
2. Brick fence should be modified as needed to
provide proper site distance at the driveways and
at the corner of Misty Lane and Cantrell Road.
D. Analysis
Staff views this proposal as being very inappropriate
for the area. The land would be better used as two
large single family lots. Approving four units on one
lot may prove detrimental to an area that consists of
only single family homes. If approved by the
Commission, the drive leading to Cantrell should be
reduced to one.
E. Staff Recommendation
Denial.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The Committee reviewed the application. The issues were
identified as: (1) elimination of one drive onto Cantrell;
(2) substantial change in established character of land use
in the area; and (3) Water Works easement (10').
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was not present. Staff reported that no
evidence of notification had been submitted and that the
applicant had requested deferral so that he may prepare a
more comprehensive plan. In light of the fact that there
were 27 persons present from the neighborhood, the Chairman
decided to listen to their concerns. He also informed the
neighborhood that the applicant could legally subdivide the
property into approximately four single family lots, the
same density as proposed condominium project, but without
the restrictions that could be placed on a PUD.
June 12, 1984
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 6 - Continued
Mr. Robert Schultz, President of the Echo Valley Property
Owners Association, represented the neighborhood. He
expresed objection to the multifamily use of the site due to
possible detrimental effects on existing houses, property
values, land use and character of the area, which consists
of large homes on lots two to six acres. He felt that the
PUD use of the property could be leverage for other
multifamily uses in the area, and if this was allowed, the
ultimate result would be a change in the character of the
neighborhood. He also felt that after meeting with
Mr. Davenport, the neighborhood was more concerned with the
practicality of his proposal than before. They now fear
that he would not be able to do what is proposed
financially, and that the ultimate development would be
short-term rental units. After being asked by the staff,
not one of the property owners present at the meeting
indicated that they received notification. A motion for
deferral was made and passed by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 noes and
4 absent.
July 10, 1984
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. D
NAME: Cantrell Place West - A
Condomiumium Development "PRD"
(Z-4247)
LOCATION: Southeast corner of Misty Lane
and Cantrell Road
AGENT/DESIGNER:
Paul Davenport
4213 Wait Street
Phone: 666-6186
nPURMPER:
ENGINEER/APPLICANT:
Mr. & Mrs. Bruce Constant Thomas Engineering
Unit C-1201 Raven 3721 J.F.K. Boulevard
Hot Springs, AR 79193 North Little Rock, AR 72116
Phone: 753-4463
AREA: 1.78 acres NO. OF LOTS: 1 FT. OF NEW ST.: 0
ZONING: "R-2" (PRD Proposed)
PROPOSED USES: 4 Condominium Detached Units
A. Site History
This was previously the site of one single family
house, which was destroyed by fire. The site is
currently vacant.
B. Pro o�sal
1. The construction of four detached condominium
units on a tract of 1.78 acres at a density of two
units per acre.
2. Units will consist of 2600 square feet of living
space on a single level with a rear courtyard.
All units will be constructed with masonry veneer
and wood shake roofs. The design of development
will be consistent with the area.
3. Ratio of land to building - 67,953:10,400.
4. Access will be provided at three points. Two are
existing and off Cantrell.
July 10, 1984
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. D - Continued
5. Landscaping will utilize as many existing trees as
possible and a 6' high fence will be built around
the building.
6. Financing and development will begin immediately -
after approval and a completion date is set for
one year.
C. Engineering Comments
1. Request only one driveway be planned from Cantrell
Road.
2. Brick fence should be modified as needed to
provide proper site distance at the driveways and
at the corner of Misty Lane and Cantrell Road.
D. Analysis
Staff views this proposal as being very inappropriate
for the area. The land would be better used as two
large single family lots. Approving four units on one
lot may prove detrimental to an area that consists of
only single family homes. If approved by the
Commission, the drive leading to Cantrell should be
reduced to one.
E. Staff Recommendation
Denial.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The Committee reviewed the application. The issues were
identified as: (1) elimination of one drive onto Cantrell;
(2) substantial change in established character of land use
in the area; and (3) Water Works easement (10').
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was not present. Staff reported that no
evidence of notification had been submitted and that the
applicant had requested deferral so that he may prepare a
more comprehensive plan. In light of the fact that there
were 27 persons present from the neighborhood, the Chairman
decided to listen to their concerns. He also informed the
neighborhood that the applicant could legally subdivide the
property into approximately four single family lots, the
same density as proposed condominium project, but without
the restrictions that could be placed on a PUD.
July 10, 1984
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. D - Continued
Mr. Robert Schultz, President of the Echo Valley Property
Owners Association, represented the neighborhood. He
expressed objection to the multifamily use of the site due
to possible detrimental effects on existing houses, property
values, land use and character of the area, which consists
of large homes on lots two to six acres. He felt that the
PUD use of the property could be leverage for other
multifamily uses in the area, and if this was allowed, the
ultimate result would be a change in the character of the
neighborhood. He also felt that after meeting with
Mr. Davenport, the neighborhood was more concerned with the
practicality of his proposal than before. They now fear
that he would not be able to do what is proposed
financially, and that the ultimate development would be
short-term rental units. After being asked by the staff,
not one of the property owners present at the meeting
indicated that they received notification. A motion for
deferral was made and passed by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 noes and
4 absent.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The original applicant was not present. Mr. Bob Richardson
reported that he was the new representative and submitted a
new plan. The new submission consisted of a preliminary
plat which divides the property into four single family
lots. There was a discussion on whether or not approval of
these four lots, even though they meet lot size
requirements, represented a detrimental effect on the
surrounding values, whose lot sizes range from 2 to 4 acres.
Staff was instructed to request a legal opinion relative to
the discussion.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
As requested by the applicant, a motion for withdrawal was
made and passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant requested that the item be withdrawn. A
motion was made of 7 ayes, 0 noes and 4 absent.
July 10, 1984
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. D
NAME:
LOCATION:
AGENT/DESIGNER:
Paul Davenport
4213 Wait Street
Phone: 666-6186
nRVRT.nPRR s
Cantrell Place West - A
Condomiumium Development "PRD"
(Z-4247)
Southeast corner of Misty Lane
and Cantrell Road
ENGINEER/APPLICANT:
Mr. & Mrs. Bruce Constant Thomas Engineering
Unit C-1201 Raven 3721 J.F.K. Boulevard
Hot Springs, AR 79193 North Little Rock, AR 72116
Phone: 753-4463
AREA: 1.78 acres NO. OF LOTS: 1 FT. OF NEW ST.: 0
ZONING: "R-2" (PRD Proposed)
PROPOSED USES: 4 Condominium Detached Units
A. Site Histor
This was previously the site of one single family
house, which was destroyed by fire. The site is
currently vacant.
B. Proposal
1. The construction of four detached condominium
units on a tract of 1.78 acres at a density of two
units per acre.
2. Units will consist of 2600 square feet of living
space on a single level with a rear courtyard.
All units will be constructed with masonry veneer
and wood shake roofs. The design of development
will be consistent with the area.
3. Ratio of land to building - 67,953:10,400.
4. Access will be provided at three points. Two are
existing and off Cantrell.
July 10, 1984
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. D - Continued
5. Landscaping will utilize as many existing trees as
possible and a 6' high fence will be built around
the building.
6. Financing and development will begin immediately
after approval and a completion date is set for
one year.
C. Engineering Comments
1. Request only one driveway be planned from Cantrell
Road.
2. Brick fence should be modified as needed to
provide proper site distance at the driveways and
at the corner of Misty Lane and Cantrell Road.
De Analysis
Staff views this proposal as being very inappropriate
for the area. The land would be better used as two
large single family lots. Approving four units on one
lot may prove detrimental Co an area that consists of
only single family homes. If approved by the
Commission, the drive leading to Cantrell should be
reduced to one.
E. Staff Recommendation
Denial.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The Committee reviewed the application. The issues were
identified as: (1) elimination of one drive onto Cantrell;
(2) substantial change in established character of land use
in the area; and (3) Water Works easement (10').
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was not present. Staff reported that no
evidence of notification had been submitted and that the
applicant had requested deferral so that he may prepare a
more comprehensive plan. In light of the fact that there
were 27 persons present from the neighborhood, the Chairman
decided to listen to their concerns. He also informed the
neighborhood that the applicant could legally subdivide the
property into approximately four single family lots, the
same density as proposed condominium project, but without
the restrictions that could be placed on a PUD.
July 10, 1984
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. D - Continued
Mr. Robert Schultz, President of the Echo Valley Property
Owners Association, represented the neighborhood. He
expressed objection to the multifamily use of the site due
to possible detrimental effects on existing houses, property
values, land use and character of the area, which consists
of large homes on lots two to six acres. He felt that the
PUD use of the property could be leverage for other
multifamily uses in the area, and if this was allowed, the
ultimate result would be a change in the character of the
neighborhood. He also felt that after meeting with
Mr. Davenport, the neighborhood was more concerned with the
practicality of his proposal than before. They now fear
that he would not be able to do what is proposed
financially, and that the ultimate development would be
short-term rental units. After being asked by the staff,
not one of the property owners present at the meeting
indicated that they received notification. A motion for
deferral was made and passed by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 noes and
4 absent.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The original applicant was not present. Mr. Bob Richardson
reported that he was the new representative and submitted a
new plan. The new submission consisted of a preliminary
plat which divides the property into four single family
lots. There was a discussion on whether or not approval of
these four lots, even though they meet lot size
requirements, represented a detrimental effect on the
surrounding values, whose lot sizes range from 2 to 4 acres.
Staff was instructed to request a legal opinion relative to
the discussion.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
As requested by the applicant, a motion for withdrawal was
made and passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant requested that the item be withdrawn. A
motion was made of 7 ayes, 0 noes and 4 absent.