HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4564 Staff Analysis1. Name: Edgerstoune "Long -Form - PRD" (Z-4564)
2. Location: Northeast corner of North Martin and
"I" Street
3. Applicant: David McCreery/Flake & Company
4. Existing Use: Vacant/Public Easement
5. Proposed Use: Condominiums
6. Staff Recommendation:
Approval of the plan subject to a specific treatment
scheme for the slope and long concrete block wall.
There was substantial opposition at the public hearing.
Questions raised included: (1) whether a public
utility should be allowed to sell public land for
private development gains; and (2) whether the proposal
was appropriate since tfe easement was not yet owned by
the developer.
7. Planning Commission Recommendation:
Approval, subject to staff's comments. The vote 10
ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
NAME!
Edgerstoune "Long -Form PRD"
(Z-4564)
LOCATION: NE Corner of North Martin and
"I" Street
AGENT:
ARCHITECT!
David McCreery/Flake Ed Scharff
and Company Glascock, Carter, Langford &
P.O. Box 990 Wilcox
Little Rock, AR 72203 303 West Capitol
376-8005 Little Rock, AR
376-6671
Area: 7.33 acres No. of Lots: 1 Ft. New St.: 0 feet
ZONING: 11R-5"
PROPOSED USES: Condominiums
r
PLANNTNG nTSTRTCT!
CENSUS TRACT:
VARIANCE REQUESTED:
A. DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES:
1. To provide a development with a "dramatic setting"
and with a "spectacular view of Riverdale, the
Arkansas River, Big Rock and the adjacent Hills."
2. To provide an urbane and distinctive living
environment which will become one of the City's
most prestigious addresses.
3. To market mainly to higher income individuals
40 years of age and older, many of whom will
be vacating large homes in the Heights and
Pleasant Valley area.
4. To comply with the Heights/Hillcrest plan by
providing selective infield development that
is compatible with the existing neighborhood
and will not materially increase residential
densities.
Z-4564 Continued
B. PROPOSAL:
1. The construction of 26 condominium units in three
buildings on a total of 7.33 acres.
2. PROJECT DATA:
A. Tract B Cook Alworth Subdivision ........ 5.57 acres
AP&L easements/Water Works profit...... 1.76 acres
Total 7.33 acres
B. Density of own land......... 4.67 units per acre
Density on easement area .... 3.55 acres
C. Three structures with 11 units in one, 12 in
another and three in the other.
D. Buildings will be two to three stories and
incorporate "Italicin architectural style."
E. Access will be from Martin and Interior Drive.
F. Parking will consist of two garages under each
building and 1 visitor's space per unit along
the access drive.
G. Landscaping will be extensive and will address
the raw and unattractive cut created when the
Cantrell Road frontage was developed for
commercial purposes ten to fifteen years ago.
Internally, there will be patios and pedestrian
walkways.
H. Property Owner's Association will be responsible
for management and maintenance responsibility.
I. DEVELOPMENTAL TIME FRAME:
1986 - begin construction
Early 1987 - first phase completed (easternmost
three unit townhouse and the three story twelve
unit structure) after 1987 - second phase
(eleven unit three story structure near Martin).
Z-4564 Continued
3.
UNIT BREAKDOWN:
UNIT
TYPE NO. OF UNITS
SIZE(SQ. FT.)
TOTAL
2
A
2,225
4,250
2
B
2,687
5,374
8
C
2,853
22,824
6
D
2,458
14,748
4
E
2,687
10,748
4
F
2,653
10,612
26
68,556
4. OTHER DATA:
Total building coverage ... ....... 31,598
Paved areas...... ........ ....38,226 sq. feet
Structures and drives constitute about 22 percent
of the total land area leaving 78 percent
undeveloped.
C. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
No adverse comments.
D. ANALYSIS:
This applicant has submitted a condo proposal in an
area of mixed residential uses. He feels that the
proposed density is equivalent to or lower than a
Single Family zoning district. On September 27, 1985,
the Water Commission granted a Developer an easement
over their property (1.76 acres), which is currently
occupied also by an AP&L easement.
Use of the easement for parking will require
authorization from the City Board. Staff requests
specific treatment scheme for slope and for a long
concrete block wall. _
Z-4564 Continued
Staff is not opposed to the project. The location
of garages under the units is a good concept. The
proposed density is not a problem, since the property
is now "R-5", which allows 36 units per acre without
any review by the Commission. Staff feels the "PUD"
process along with the easement provide for a better
development than what could legally be built. Thus
we are supportive of the project.
E. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval subject to comments made.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The applicant agreed to comply with staff's suggestions.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
Mr. Nathaniel Griffin of Flake and Company and
Mr. David McCreery represented the materials submitted. A
representative of Peters and Associates, who conducted a
traffic study, reported that their conclusions revealed that
North Martin could easily accommodate the additional traffic
created by the project. Approximately 208 cars would be
generated by the project in a 24 hour period.
Staff reported that a letter from Real Estate Central had
been received in opposition.
Mr. Walter Riddick represented the neighborhood. He felt
that the issue was not whether the street will have the
capacity to carry the added traffic, but what impact the
traffic would have on the neighborhood. He felt that the
effect would be detrimental, and the result would be a less
pleasant neighborhood. Also, he felt that a
Ms. Edwina Walls would be especially affected since cars
exiting the project would shine their headlights into her
living room. He stated that there has been a history of
apartment buildings in the area that has gradually increased
and the neighborhood was "sick and tired of being
mutilated."
Other issues raised involved: (1) whether a public utility
should be allowed to sell public land for private
development gains; and (2) whether the proposal was
appropriate since the easement was not yet owned by the
developer. It was determined that the latter was not a
problem since the Ordinance allowed another to act as agent
if authorized by the owner. It was also pointed out that
Z-4564 Continued
the current zoning allowed approximately 198 units to be
placed on the project without the easement.
A motion was finally made for approval, subject to comments
made. The vote 10 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent.