HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4924 Staff AnalysisNAME: Zion Terrace "Short -Form
PRD" (Z-4924)
LOCATION: 38th and Zion
DEVELOPER: ENGINEER:
Greval Dev. Co., Inc. Barry Ferguson
721 Beech Street 318 Depot
NLR, AR 72114 Lonoke, AR 72086
Phone: 375-6177 Phone: 676-3305
AREA: 1.69 acres NO. OF LOTS: 16 FT. NEW STREET: 600
ZONING: "R-4" PROPOSED USE: Detached Single Family
A. Develo mental Concept
This submittal represents an attempt to utilize an
undeveloped tract of land lying within the boundaries
of the City by in filling it with quality low cost
homes. The developers wish to address the needs of
what they consider to be a "neglected" moderate income
market in this older part of town. The City has in the
past eliminated sewer and drainage problems in the
area.
B. Proposal/Request
(1) The construction of 16 small lot single family
homes and 600' of new street on 1.69 acres.
(2) Concrete pads for parking on each lot.
(3) Private park to be managed by the resident
property owners association. Park to be
surrounded by bicycle/jogging trail and will
contain a small central spa with common hot tub
facilities. An outside recreation area for kids
will also be included.
- Continued
B. Issues/Legal/Technical/Design
(1) Indicate number of people and employees involved.
(2) Show north arrow and location map.
C. Engineering Comments
Show landscaping strip adjacent to 10' alley.
D. Staff Recommendation
Deferral until issues addressed.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The applicant's architect explained that there would be
live-in employees, bedroom space for eight, and room for
four more with the "future" addition. The issue was
identified as parking, since only 11 spaces were shown. It
was determined that there was no ordinance standard, but if
the patients usually drove to the site, then it would be
based on one space per room. The applicant agreed to
research the parking issue.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The Applicant was present. There were no objectors. A
motion for approval was made and passed by a vote of 10
ayes, 0 noes, and 1 absent.
Name:
Location:
Developer En ineer:
Rist:
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
bion Terrace "Short -Form" PRD (Z-4924)'
38th and Zion
Greval Dev. Co./Barry Ferguson
PRD approval for the development of
affordable homes.
Approval, subject to working out the street improvement issue
with engineering.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The Applicant submitted revised plans. No one was present in
objection. There was a question of proper notice; the City
Attorney determined that the item could be heard.
A motion for approval was made and passed, subject to: (1) filing
the notices within 24 hours; (2) submission of the Bill of
Assurance; and (3) filing of the alley closure petition. The
vote was: 10 ayes, O noes, and 1 absent.
NAME: Zion Terrace "Short -Form
PRD" (Z-4924)
LOCATION: 38th and Zion
DEVELOPER: ENGINEER:
Greval Dev. Co., Inc. Barry Ferguson
721 Beech Street 318 Depot
NLR, AR 72114 Lonoke, AR 72086
Phone: 375-6177 Phone: 676-3305
AREA: 1.69 acres N0. OF LOTS: 16 FT. NEW STREET: 600
ZONING: "R-4" PROPOSED USE: Detached Single Family
A. Developmental Conce t
This submittal represents an attempt to utilize an
undeveloped tract of land lying within the boundaries
of the City by in filling it with quality low cost
homes. The developers wish to address the needs of
what they consider to be a "neglected" moderate income
market in this older part of town. The City has in the
past eliminated sewer and drainage problems in the
area.
B. Proposal/Rest
(1) The homesoandr600'oofonew6small street ont1.69gfamily
acres
(2) Concrete pads for parking on each lot.
(3) Private park to be managed by the resident
property owners association. Park to be
surrounded by bicycle/jogging trail and will
contain a small central spa with common hot tub
facilities. An outside recreation area for kids
will also be included.
C. Issues/Discussion/Legal/Technical/Design
(1) Improvement of streets.
(2) Submit sketch grading plan because clearing will
be more than 25 percent on an acre.
(3) Abandon alley right-of-way if legally bisects
property. May need improvements.
(4) Submit survey.
(5) Submit typicals, profile on units, and additional
information as required by site plan submission
requirements.,
(6) Give more detail on park and its necessity, and
maintenance and Bill of Assurance.
(7) Lots 13, 14, and 16 need front yard landscaping.
Submit landscaping plan with minimum requirements
for each lot.
(8) Hatched area needs to be indicated as maximum
buildable area.
D. Engineering Comments
(1) Fifty foot right-of-way instead of 40'.
(2) Radius on the corner.
(3) Eighteen foot pavement and curb/gutter on
developer's side of street (27', 18' from back of
curb).
E. Staff Recommendation
Reserved until further information is received.
Staff was prohibited in its review of the proposal due
to inadequate information. Engineering's input is
crucial due to the number and status of the
rights-of-way abutting the property. Decisions need to
be made regarding whether or not all of them should be
extended and developed.
Staff is very supportive of the concept of infill
development with moderate income homes.in this area.
F. Subdivision Committee Review
The applicant asked to defer this item to the December
meeting.
G. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION (11-3-87):
A motion for deferral as requested by the applicant was made
and passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes, and 1 absent.
H. Subdivision Committee Review
Staff's recommendation on the revised plan: (1)
Submit Bill of Assurance with indication for
maintenance of park; (2) explain phasing; (3) extend
lots in the park area in case future maintenance ceases
- do this in Bill of Assurance.
The main issue was identified as street improvements.
The applicant requested a waiver of street improvements
or construction to rural standards. He explained that
phase I would include 4 through 10, 14 through 16, and
Phase II would include Lots 1 through 3, 11 through 13,
and the proposed park.
He was asked to: (1) close the whole alley and
indicate an easement; (2) properly note plat name; (3)
provide 10' separation between driveways to lessen
concrete; (4) show utility and access easement; (5)
work out street with Engineering; (6) submit floor
plan.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The Applicant was present. There were no objectors. There
was discussion on whether or not to hear the item since the
Applicant had not submitted his notice receipts. The City
Attorney decided that the item could be heard, provided the
Applicant submitted proof of notice in 24 hours.
The main issue was identified as street improvement, since the
Applicant had agreed to comply with the other comments. It was
agreed that 38th Street would be improved with 18 feet of
pavement/curb and gutter; 37th Street would be improved with the
normal improvements and 1/2 of the 27' pavement; and Cobb and
Zion Street would be improved with normal improvements and 1/2 of
the 27' pavement.
A motion for approval of the Project was made and passed subject
to: (1) filing of notices in 24 hours; (2) submission of the
Bill of Assurance, and (3) filing of the alley closure petition.
The vote - 10 ayes, 0 noes, and 1 absent.
Item No. --A
NAME:
LOCATION:
DEVELOPER:
Greval Dev. Co., Inc.
721 Beech Street
NLR, AR 72114
Phone: 375-6177
Zion Terrace "Short -Form
PRD" (Z-4924)
38th and Zion
ENGINEER:
Barry Ferguson
318 Depot
Lonoke, AR 72086
Phone: 676-3305
AREA:
1.69 acres N0.
OF LOTS: 16 FT. NEW
STREET: 600
ZONING:
"R-4`° PROPOSED
USE: Detached Single
Family
A. Develo mental Conce t
This submittal represents anatte Phitotutilize an
he boundaries
undeveloped tract of land lying
of the City by in filling it with quality low cost
homes. The developers wish to address
themodneedsrateiof
what they consider to be a "neglected"
market in this vldeepand drainage problemscity
inathen the
past eliminated sewr
area.
B. Proposal/Re uq est
(1) The construction of
fsli
16 small
lotsngle family
homes and 600 of new
(2) Concrete pads for parking on each lot.
(3) Private park to be managed by the resident
property owners association. Park to be
surrounded by bicycle/jogging trail and will
contain a small central spa with common hot tub
facilities. An outside recreation area for kids
will also be included.
Item No. A - Continued
C. Issues/Discussion/Le al/Technical/Desi n
(1) Improvement of streets.
(2) Submit sketch grading plan because clearing will
be more than 25 percent on an acre.
(3) Abandon alley right-of-way if legally bisects
property. May need improvements.
(4) Submit survey.
(5) Submit typicals, profile on units, and additional
information as required by site plan submission
requirements.
(6) Give more detail on park and its necessity, and
maintenance and Bill of Assurance.
(7) Lots 13, 14, and 16 need front yard landscaping.
Submit landscaping plan with minimum requirements
for each lot.
(8) Hatched area needs to be indicated as maximum
buildable area.
D. Engineering Comments
(1) Fifty foot right-of-way instead of 401.
(2) Radius on the corner.
(3) Eighteen foot pavement and curb/gutter on
developer's side of street (271, 18' from back of
curb).
E. Staff Recommendation
Reserved until further information is received.
Staff was prohibited in its review of the proposal due
to inadequate information. Engineering's input is
crucial due to the number and status of the
rights-of-way abutting the property. Decisions need to
be made regarding whether or not all of them should be
extended and developed.
Staff is very supportive of the concept of infill
development with moderate income homes in this area.
Item No. A - Continued
F. Subdivision Committee Review
The applicant asked to defer this item to the December
meeting.
G. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION (11-3-87):
A motion for deferral as requested by the applicant was made
and passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes, and 1 absent.
Item'No. A-- Continued
H. Subdivision Committee Review
Staff's recommendation on the revised plan: (1)
Submit Bill of Assurance with indication for
maintenance of park; (2) explain phasing; (3) extend
lots in the park area in case future maintenance ceases
- do this in Bill of Assurance.
The main issue was identified as street improvements.
The applicant requested a waiver of street improvements
or construction to rural standards. He explained that
Phase I would
include
through through 16, 3, a
nd
Phase II w
3, 11 through
w 13,
and the proposed park.
He was asked to: (1) close the whole alley and
indicate an easement; (2) properly note plat name; (3)
provide 10' separation between driveways to lessen
concrete; (4) show utility and access easement;
work out street with Engineering; (6) submit floor
plan.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objectors. There
were discussion on whether or not to hear the item since the
Applicant had not submitted his notice receipts.
vie City
Attorney decided that the item could be heard, Pro
he
Applicant subimitted -roof of otice in 24 hours.
The main issue was identified as street improvement► since
the Applicant had agreed to comply with the other comments.
It was agreed that 38th Street would be unproved with 18
feet of pavement/curb and gutter; 37th Street would be
improved with the normal improvements and 1/2 of the 27'
pavement; and Cobb and tion Street would abproved with
normal improvements and 1/2 of the 27' pavement'.
A motion for approval of the Project was made and passed
subject to: (1) to filing of notices in 24 hours; (2)
submission of the Bill of Assurance. and (3) filing of the
alley close partition. The vote - 10 ayes, 0 noes, and 1
absent.
Item No. 14 - Continued
B. Issues/Legal/Technical/Desi
(1) Indicate number of people and employees involved.
(2) Show north arrow and location map.
C. Encineerinq Comments
Show landscaping strip adjacent to 10' alley.
D. Staff Recommendation
Deferral until issues addressed.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The applicant's architect explained that there would be
live-in employees, bedroom space for eight, and room for
four more with the "future" addition. The issue was
identified as parking, since only 11 spaces were shown. It
was determined that there was no ordinance sUandard, but if
the patients usually drove to the site, then it would be
based on one space per room. The applicant agreed to
research the parking issue.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The Applicant was present. There were no objectors. A
motion for approval was made and passed by a vote of 10
ayes, 0 noes, and 1 absent.
December 15, 1987
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No.A
NAME: Zion Terrace "Short -Form
PRD" (Z-4924)
LOCATION: 38th and Zion
DEVELOPER: ENG'
Greval Dev. Co., Inc. Barry Ferg-son
721 Beech Street 318 Depot
NLR, AR 72114 Lonoke, AR 72086
Phone: 375-6177 Phone: 676-3305
AREA: 1.69 acres NO. OF LOTS: 16 FT. NEW STREET: 60.0
ZONING: "R-4" PROPOSED USE: Detached Single Family
A. Develo mental Conce t
This submittal represents an attempt to utilize an
undeveloped tract of land lying within the boundaries
of the City by in filling it with quality low cost
homes. The developers wish to address the needs of
what they consider to be a "neglected" moderate income
market in this older part of town. The City has in the
past eliminated sewer and drainage problems in the
area.
B. Proposal/Request
small
(1) The homesoandr600'oofonew6street on 1.69 single
1.69acres.
(2) Concrete pads for parking on each lot.
(3) Private park to be managed by the resident
property owners association. Park to be
surrounded by bicycle/jogging trail and will
contain a small central spa with common hot tub
facilities. An outside recreation area for kids
will also be included.
December 15, 1987
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. A - Continued
C. Issues/Discussion/Legal/Technical/Design
(1) Improvement of streets.
(2) Submit sketch grading plan because clearing will
be more than 25 percent on an acre.
(3) Abandon alley right-of-way if legally bisects
property. May need improvements.
(4) Submit survey.
(5) Submit typicals, profile on units, and additional
information as required by site plan submission
requirements.
(6) Give more detail on park and its necessity, and
maintenance and Bill of Assurance.
(7) Lots 13, 14, and 16 need front yard landscaping.
Submit landscaping plan with minimum requirements
for each lot.
(8 ) Hatched area needs to be indicated as maximum
buildable area.
D. Enqineerinq Comments
(1) Fifty foot right-of-way instead of 40'.
(2) Radius on the corner.
(3) Eighteen foot pavement and curb/gutter on
developer's side of street (27', 18' from back of
curb).
E. Staff Recommendation
Reserved -until further information is received.
Staff was prohibited in its review of the proposal due
to inadequate information. Engineering's input is
crucial due to the number and status of the
rights-of-wav abutting the property. Decisions need to
be made regarding whether or not all of them should be
extended and developed.
Staff is very supportive of the concept of infill
development with moderate income homes in this area.
December 15, 1987
SUBDIVISIONS _�, - ------ -
No^ A .Continued
Committee Review
F. Subdivision �- --�—"
The -applicant asked to defer this item to the Deco`-n`�e r
The a Pp
meeting -
PLp,N ING CCM_ I++IYSSION ACTION _� 1_1-3-87 i
G. - -Ynested-by the applicant was
A motion for deferral as req
r ayeS, 0 noes, and 1 absent.
ally passed by a vote of 1
December 15, 1987
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. A - Continued
H. Subdivision_Committee Review
Staff's recommendation on the revised plan:
(1)
Submit Bill of Assurance �rii�'n ind
cation maintenance of park; (Z) explain phasing; (3) extend
io-.s in the park
laofain case Assurance future maintenance ceases
- do this in R
The main issue �ajtedtferreet improvements.
esidentified as
ofstreetimprovements
The aPPli:an - i
standards. He explained that
or construction to rural
would include 4 through 10, 14 through lnraal
Phase I ts 1 through 3, 11 through
13,
Phase II would include Lo
and the proposa,3 nark.
He was asked to: (1) closer e who e alleyte aname; (3)
indicate an easement; (2. p �'
provide 10' separation between driveways to te;as)
c:)nc rete; ( 4 ) show utility and access e cement;bmit ( 5
�5
work out street with Engineering►-
plan.