HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6181 Staff AnalysisOctober 10, 1996,
ITEM NO.• K FILE NO.• Z-6181
NAME•
LOCATION•
OWNER/APPLICANT:
PROPOSAL•
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1. Site Location:
Hodges - Conditional Use
Permit
Woodland Drive (East end)
Thomas L. Hodges
A conditional use permit is
requested to.allow for the
placement of 19 multisectional
manufactured homes on 19 lots
within the Rolling Pines
Subdivision, Phase II (Lots
18-21, 23-29, 52-54, 61-63,
98-99). The property is zoned
R-2.
The Rolling Pines Subdivision, Phase II is located at
the easterly end of Woodland Drive. Woodland Drive
runs east off of Sardis Road, approximately 3/4 mile
south of Alexander Road.
2. comnatibility with Nei hborhood:
The Rolling Pines Subdivision, Phase II is surrounded
by single family residential uses and zoning. The
property north, south and east of this site is vacant
and wooded. There are a number of single family
residences located to the west (along Woodland Drive)
between this subdivision and Sardis Road. There is
also a single family residence on what is shown as Lot
22 on the attached site plan.
With compliance with the ordinance established minimum
siting standards, the placement of these manufactured
homes should not have an adverse effect on the
surrounding properties.
3. On -Site Drives and Parkins:
The applicant proposes a single access point to each of
the 19 lots.
October 10, 1996,
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: K Cont. FILE NO.: Z-6181
The applicant will also provide at least one (1) off-
street parking space for each of the 19 proposed
manufactured homes.
4. Screening and Buffers_:
No comments
5. Public Works Comments:
If developer intends to clear all sites at one time, a
grading plan with soil loss calculations is required
prior to construction.
6. utility Comments:
Little Rock Fire Department - A fire hydrant is
required within 800 feet of any of the proposed
buildings.
7. Staff Analysis:
The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to
allow for the placement of 19 multisectional
manufactured homes on the 19 lots within the Rolling
Pines Subdivision, Phase II (Lots 18-21, 23-29, 52-54,
61-63, 98-99). The property is zoned R-2.
The applicant is proposing a building envelope
(buildable area) for each lot which will allow for a
multisectional manufactured home. It appears that all
of the building envelopes meet minimum ordinance
requirements regarding building setbacks and no
variances are required.
There will be a single access point to each of the lots
and the applicant will provide at least one (1) off-
street parking space for each of the proposed
dwellings.
The majority of the land surrounding this subdivision
is vacant and heavily wooded with approximately two
dozen existing single family homes west of this
subdivision along Woodland Drive. With compliance with
the ordinance established minimum siting standards, the
placement of these 19 manufactured homes should not
have an adverse effect on the surrounding properties.
PA
October 10, 1996
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: K(Cont.)FILE NO.: Z-6181
8. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit
subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the Public Works Comments
2. Compliance with the Little Rock Fire Department
Comments
3. Compliance with the following minimum siting
standards as required by the Little Rock Zoning
Ordinance, Section 36-254(d)(5):
a. A pitched roof of three (3) in twelve (12) or
fourteen (14) degrees or greater.
b. Removal of all transport elements.
C. Permanent foundation.
d. Exterior wall finished so as to be compatible
with the neighborhood.
e. Orientation compatible with placement of
adjacent structures.
f. Underpinning with permanent materials.
g. All homes shall be multisectional.
h. Off-street parking per single-family dwelling
standard.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (AUGUST 8, 1996)
Tommy Hodges was present, representing the application.
Staff gave a brief description of the proposal.
There was a brief discussion pertaining to this general area
and the type of manufactured home proposed.
Staff informed Mr. Hodges that side yard setback variances
would be required for Lots 54, 61, 63 and 98. Mr. Hodges
responded that these lots would be revised to meet the
required setbacks.
After a brief discussion, the Committee accepted the
presentation and forwarded the issue to the full Commission
for final action.
W
October 10, 1996
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: R Cont. FILE NO.: Z-6181
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 29, 1996)
The applicant was present. There were several persons
present opposing the item. The applicant requested that the
item be deferred to the October 10, 1996 agenda, as offered
by Chairman Woods, due to only eight commissioners being
present.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral until the
October 10, 1996 agenda. A motion to that effect was made.
The motion was passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent,
and 1 open position.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 10, 1996)
Tommy Hodges was present, representing the application.
There were several persons present opposing the conditional
use permit. Staff presented the item with a recommendation
of approval.
Tommy Hodges addressed the Commission. Mr. Hodges gave a
brief description of the proposal. Mr. Hodges stated that
he has been unable to sell the lots to the public or to
builders for the past couple of years. He stated this is
the reason he is pursuing the manufactured home aspect.
Mr. Hodges stated that he would comply with the ordinance
established minimum siting standards and the manufactured
homes would blend into the surrounding neighborhood. Mr.
Hodges also stated that he owns approximately 100 of the
lots within this subdivision and he felt that this proposal
would not adversely effect his lots or the lots owned by
others in this subdivision.
Susan Myers spoke in opposition to the conditional use
permit. She read a letter of opposition from her husband,
David Myers.
Commissioner Putnam asked Mr. Hodges about the Bill of
Assurance for the subdivision.
Mr. Hodges stated that the Bill of Assurance prohibits
mobile homes but not manufactured homes.
Susan Whitson spoke in opposition to the application. She
stated concerns as to the materials that these proposed
homes are made of and whether they would have garages or
carports. She stated that manufactured homes would not
4
October 10, 1996'
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: K Cont- FILE NO.: 97-6181
retain the value of a stick -built home and would devalue the
neighborhood.
Mike Whitson also spoke in opposition to the application.
He also stated concerns that the manufactured homes would
lower the property values in the neighborhood.
Roger Free also spoke in opposition to the application. Mr.
Free stated that manufactured homes depreciate in value more
than stick -built homes. He stated other property value
concerns.
Commissioner Adcock asked Roger Free if he had any evidence
as to the depreciation rate of manufactured homes.
Mr. Free stated that he did not.
Commissioner Rahman asked why Planning Commission approval
is needed for a manufactured home when it is going to be
used as a single-family dwelling in single-family zoning.
Jim Lawson, Planning Director, stated that the Planning
Commission review insured that the ordinance requirements
regarding manufactured homes were met.
There was a brief discussion regarding the difference
between a manufactured home and a multisectional
manufactured home.
Commissioner Putnam asked Mr. Hodges if he could assure the
neighbors that the manufactured homes he would place on the
sites would be of the same or greater quality than those
shown in the pictures he passed out to the Commission.
Mr. Hodges stated that they would be. He stated that the
homes would have a value of at least $50,000 to $60,000.
Commissioner Lichty asked Mr. Hodges if a manufactured home
is taxed as personal property or real estate.
Mr. Hodges responded that they are taxed as real estate.
Commissioner Lichty asked if the homes would be brought in
on a flatbed truck or if the units would have built-in
axles.
Mr. Hodges stated that it could be done either way. It
depended on the manufacturer.
Commissioner Lichty asked the neighborhood representatives
if there was anything in the Bill of Assurance which
regulates the quality of a stick -built home.
5
October 10, 1996'
SVHDIVISZON
ITEM NO.: K Cont. FILE NO.: Z-6181
The neighborhood representatives responded that there was
not.
There was a brief discussion concerning the quality of
stick -built homes as compared to manufactured homes.
A motion was made to approve the conditional use permit as
recommended by staff. The motion failed by a vote of
5 ayes, 4 nays and 2 absent.
6
FILE NO.• z-6181
NAME•
Hodges - Conditional Use
Permit
LOCATION• Woodland Drive (East end)
OWNER/APPLICANT: Thomas L. Hodges
PROPOSAL• A conditional use permit is
requested to allow for the
placement of 19 multisectional
manufactured homes on 19 lots
within the Rolling Pines
Subdivision, Phase II (Lots
18-21, 23-29, 52-54, 61-63,
98-99). The property is zoned
R-2.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1. Site Location•
The Rolling Pines Subdivision, Phase II is located at
the easterly end of Woodland Drive. Woodland Drive
runs east off of Sardis Road, approximately 3/4 mile
south of Alexander Road.
2. C2g!patibility with Neighborhood:
The Rolling Pines Subdivision, Phase II is surrounded
by single family residential uses and zoning. The
property north, south and east of this site is vacant
and wooded. There are a number of single family
residences located to the west (along Woodland Drive)
between this subdivision and Sardis Road. There is
also a single family residence on what is shown as Lot
22 on the attached site plan.
With compliance with the ordinance established minimum
siting standards, the placement of these manufactured
homes should not have an adverse effect on the
surrounding properties.
3. On -Site Drives and Parking:
The applicant proposes a single access point to each of
the 19 lots.
The applicant will also provide at least one (1) off-
street parking space for each of the 19 proposed
manufactured homes.
FILE NO.: Z-6181 Cont.
4. screening and Suffers:
No comments
5. Public Works Comments:
If developer intends to clear all sites at one time, a
grading plan with soil loss calculations is required
prior to construction.
6. ut�i—1 ty Comments:
Little Rock Fire Department - A fire hydrant is
required within 800 feet of any of the proposed
buildings.
7. Staff Analysis:
The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to
allow for the placement of 19 multisectional
manufactured homes on the 19 lots within the Rolling
Pines Subdivision, Phase II (Lots 18-21, 23-29, 52-54,
61-63, 98-99). The property is zoned R-2.
The applicant is proposing a building envelope
(buildable area) for each lot which will allow for a
multisectional manufactured home. It appears that all
of the building envelopes meet minimum ordinance
requirements regarding building setbacks and no
variances are required.
There will be a single access point to each of the lots
and the applicant will provide at least one (1) off-
street parking space for each of the proposed
dwellings.
The majority of the land surrounding this subdivision
is vacant and heavily wooded with approximately two
dozen existing single family homes west of this
subdivision along Woodland Drive. With compliance with
the ordinance established minimum siting standards, the
placement of these 19 manufactured homes should not
have an adverse effect on the surrounding properties.
8. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit
subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the Public Works Comments
2. Compliance with the Little Rock Fire Department
Comments
2
FILE NO.: Z-6181 Cont.
3. Compliance with the following minimum siting
standards as required by the Little Rock Zoning
Ordinance, Section 36-254(d)(5):
a. A pitched roof of three (3) in twelve (12) or
fourteen (14) degrees or greater.
b. Removal of all transport elements.
C. Permanent foundation.
d. Exterior wall finished so as to be compatible
with the neighborhood.
e. Orientation compatible with placement of
adjacent structures.
f. Underpinning with permanent materials.
g. All homes shall be multisectional.
h. Off-street parking per single-family dwelling
standard.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (AUGUST 8, 1996)
Tommy Hodges was present, representing the application.
Staff gave a brief description of the proposal.
There was a brief discussion pertaining to this general area
and the type of manufactured home proposed.
Staff informed Mr. Hodges that side yard setback variances
would be required for Lots 54, 61, 63 and 98. Mr. Hodges
responded that these lots would be revised to meet the
required setbacks.
After a brief discussion, the Committee accepted the
presentation and forwarded the issue to the full Commission
for final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 29, 1996)
The applicant was present. There were several persons
present opposing the item. The applicant requested that the
item be deferred to the October 10, 1996 agenda, as offered
by Chairman Woods, due to only eight commissioners being
present.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral until the
October 10, 1996 agenda. A motion to that effect was made.
3
FILE NO.: Z-6181 Cont.
The motion was passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent,
and 1 open position.
PLANNING COMMISSTDN ACTT ON: (OCTOBER 10, 1996)
Tommy Hodges was present, representing the application.
There were several persons present opposing the conditional
use permit. Staff presented the item with a recommendation
of approval.
Tommy Hodges addressed the Commission. Mr. Hodges gave a
brief description of the proposal. Mr. Hodges stated that
he has been unable to sell the lots to the public or to
builders for the past couple of years. He stated this is
the reason he is pursuing the manufactured home aspect.
Mr. Hodges stated that he would comply with the ordinance
established minimum siting standards and the manufactured
homes would blend into the surrounding neighborhood. Mr.
Hodges also stated that he owns approximately 100 of the
lots within this subdivision and he felt that this proposal
would not adversely effect his lots or the lots owned by
others in this subdivision.
Susan Myers spoke in opposition to the conditional use
permit. She read a letter of opposition from her husband,
David Myers.
Commissioner Putnam asked Mr. Hodges about the Bill of
Assurance for the subdivision.
Mr. Hodges stated that the Bill of Assurance prohibits
mobile homes but not manufactured homes.
Susan Whitson spoke in opposition to the application. She
stated concerns as to the materials that these proposed
homes are made of and whether they would have garages or
carports. She stated that manufactured homes would not
retain the value of a stick -built home and would devalue the
neighborhood.
Mike Whitson also spoke in opposition to the application.
He also stated concerns that the manufactured homes would
lower the property values in the neighborhood.
Roger Free also spoke in opposition to the application. Mr.
Free stated that manufactured homes depreciate in value more
than stick -built homes. He stated other property value
concerns.
Commissioner Adcock asked Roger Free if he had any evidence
as to the depreciation rate of manufactured homes.
Mr. Free stated that he did not.
4
FILE NO.: Z-6181 Cont.
Commissioner Rahman asked why Planning Commission approval
is needed for a manufactured home when it is going to be
used as a single-family dwelling in single-family zoning.
Jim Lawson, Planning Director, stated that the Planning
Commission review insured that the ordinance requirements
regarding manufactured homes were met.
There was a brief discussion regarding the difference
between a manufactured home and a multisectional
manufactured home.
Commissioner Putnam asked Mr. Hodges if he could assure the
neighbors that the manufactured homes he would place on the
sites would be of the same or greater quality than those
shown in the pictures'he passed out to the Commission.
Mr. Hodges stated that they would be. He stated that the
homes would have a value of at least $50,000 to $60,000.
Commissioner Lichty asked Mr. Hodges if a manufactured home
is taxed as personal property or real estate.
Mr. Hodges responded that they are taxed as real estate.
Commissioner Lichty asked if the homes would be brought in
on a flatbed truck or if the units would have built-in
axles.
Mr. Hodges stated that it could be done either way. It
depended on the manufacturer.
Commissioner Lichty asked the neighborhood representatives
if there was anything in the Bill of Assurance which
regulates the quality of a stick -built home.
The neighborhood representatives responded that there was
not.
There was a brief discussion concerning the quality of
stick -built homes as compared to manufactured homes.
A motion was made to approve the conditional use permit as
recommended by staff. The motion failed by a vote of
5 ayes, 4 nays and 2 absent.
5