Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5019 Staff AnalysisMay 31;` -1988 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 11 NAME: Smith Conditional Use Permit (Z-5019) LOCATION: The south side of West 65th Street approximately 200 feet east of Duff Lane (6823 1/2 West 65th Street) OWNER/APPLICANT: Edward D. Smith/Carroll Smith PROPOSAL: To locate a multisectional manufactured home (1,076 square feet) on 1.93 + acres of land that is zoned "R-2." ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS 1. Site Location This property abuts West 65th Street which is currently shown as a minor arterial but is in the process of being reduced to a collector standard (6-7-88 projected Board of Directors action). 2. Compatibility with Neighborhood The proposed structure is to be placed approximately 300 feet from West 65th Street on a parcel that is 636.5 feet in depth. The proposed site is surrounded on three sides by vacant land (woods) and by single family located to the north. The use is compatible with the surrounding area. 3. On -Site Drives and Parkin Access is to be taken from a 20 feet (width) drive located on West 65th Street. May 31, 1988 -SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 11 - Continued 4. Screeninq and Buffers The site is surrounded on three sides by vacant land and woods (single family located to the north). 5. Analysis The proposed site of the manufactured home is compatible with the surrounding area (see Note No. 2). The unit is a 1988 model with masonite siding and pitched roof. The applicant has agreed to remove all transport elements and to construct a permanent foundation. The applicant does need, however, to specify the type of foundation proposed. The applicant will also need to file a three -lot combined preliminary/final plat (including parcel located to the west) which would allow 65 feet frontage on Lot No. 1, 20 feet stem for Lot No. 2, and 65 feet frontage for Lot No. 3. (minimum 60 feet lot frontage required.) Dedication of right-of-way on West 65th Street will also be required. (Collector street standard after 6-7-88/see Note No. 1). Construction of West 65th Street is required unless eliminated by Planning Commission. 6. Citv Engineer Comments None. 7. Staff Recommendation Approval, provided the applicant agrees to: (1) specify type of permanent foundation to be used; and (2) file a three -lot combined preliminary/final plat as outlined in the analysis section above. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW: The applicant was present and stated that the foundation would be brick or concrete blocks. A lengthy discussion ensued over the required plat. The applicant was informed that he needed to get 5' from the east property line of the out parcel located in the northwest corner of the proposed plat (out parcel was taken prior to Little Rock subdivision regulations and is not owned any longer by family members) to ensure that all lots would meet ordinance requirements. May 31, 1988 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. ll - Continued PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. The applicant stated that he would be able to obtain the additional five feet from the property owner to the west and that he would replat the property. The staff stated, that according to the City Attorney's opinion, the applicant would be required to construct West 65th Street along the entire 150 feet frontage to the street standard in effect at the time of the replat. The City- Engineer stated that an in -lieu contribution would be required rather than the construction of the street. The staff also stated that they had received two letters of opposition. The letters of opposition were from Ms. Dapha Bickerstaff and Mrs. Laphelia Moreland, owners of Tracts 32 and 31, Graceland Acres respectively. The primary concern was the location of manufactured housing in the area, access, and possible violation of City ordinances. A lengthy discussion ensued over the requirement of street construction due to the recent City Attorney's opinion. The Commission informed the applicant that he might consider appealing the street construction requirement to the Board of Directors. The Commission voted 9 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent to approve the application as recommended by the staff, reviewed by the Subdivision Committee and agreed to by the applicant. NAME: T.OrATMN OWNER/APPLICANT: PROPOSAL: Smith Conditional Ilse Permit (Z-5019) The south side of West 65th Street approximately 200 feet east of Duff Lane (6823 1/2 West 65th Street) Edward D. Smith/Carroll Smith To locate a multisectional manufactured home (1,076 square feet) on 1.93 + acres of land that is zoned "R-2." ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS 1. Site Location This property abuts West 65th Street which is currently shown as a minor arterial but is in the process of being reduced to a collector standard (6-7-88 projected Board of Directors action). 2. Compatibility with Neighborhood The proposed structure is to be placed approximately 300 feet from West 65th Street on a parcel that is 636.5 feet in depth. The proposed site is surrounded on three sides by vacant land (woods) and by single family located to the north. The use is compatible with the surrounding area. 3. On -Site Drives and Parkinq Access is to be taken from a 20 feet (width) drive located on West 65th Street. Z-5019--. Continued 4. Screeninq and Buffers The site is surrounded on three sides by vacant land and woods (single family located to the north). 5. Analysis The proposed site of the manufactured home is compatible with the surrounding area (see Note No. 2). The unit is a 1988 model with masonite siccing and pitched roof. The applicant has agreed to remove all transport elements and to construct a permanent foundation. The applicant does need, however, to specify the type of foundation proposed. The applicant will also need to file a three -lot combined preliminary/final plat (including parcel located to the west) which would allow 65 feet frontage on Lot No. 1, 20 feet stem for Lot No. 2, and 65 feet frontage for Lot No. 3. (minimum 60 feet lot frontage required.) Dedication of right-of-way on West 65th Street will also be required. (Collector street standard after 6-7-88/see Note No. 1). Construction of West 65th Street is required unless eliminated by Planning Commission. 6. City_Engineer Comments None. 7. Staff Recommendation Approval, provided the applicant agrees to: (1) specify type of permanent foundation to be used; and (2) file a three -lot combined preliminary/final plat as outlined in the analysis section above. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW: The applicant was present and stated that the foundation would be brick or concrete blocks. A lengthy discussion ensued over the required plat. The applicant was informed that he needed to get 5' from the east property line of the out parcel located in the northwest corner of the proposed plat (out parcel was taken prior to Little Rock subdivision regulations and is not owned any longer by family members) to ensure that all lots would meet ordinance requirements. 1 0 T Z-5019 - Continued PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. The applicant stated that he would be able to obtain the additional five feet from the property owner to the west and that he would replat the property. The staff_ stated, that according to the City Attorney's opinion, the applicant would be required to construct West 65th Street along the entire 150 feet frontage to the street standard in effect at the time of the replat. The City Engineer stated that an in -lieu contribution would be required rather than the construction of the street. The staff also stated that they had received two letters of opposition. The letters of opposition were from Ms. Dapha Bickerstaff and Mrs. Laphelia Moreland, owners of Tracts 32 and 31, Graceland Acres respectively. The primary concern was the location of manufactured housing in the area, access, and possible violation of City ordinances. A lengthy discussion ensued over the requirement of street construction due to the recent City Attorney's opinion. The Commission informed the applicant that he might consider appealing the street construction requirement to the Board of Directors. The Commission voted 9 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent to approve the application as recommended by the staff, reviewed by the Subdivision Committee and agreed to by the applicant.