Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0227 Staff AnalysisJuly 13, 1982 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 2 NAME• Foxglen Subdivision, Lot 1 LOCATION• Highway 10, west of Foxcroft Road DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: First Service Corp. Mehlburger, Tanner, Renshaw Agent - John Flake P.O. Box 3837 Capitol and Broadway Little Rock, AR P.O. Box 1580 Phone: 375-5331 Little Rock, AR 72203 AREA: 87 acres NO. OF_LOTS: 1 FT. OF-NEW-ST: 0 ZONING: "C-3" PROPOSED USES: Commercial VARIANCES REQUESTED: None. STAFF ANALYSIS: This lot was previously included on a preliminary plat, by the same name, which was approved by the Planning Commission on April 13, 1982. After preliminary review, it was determined that there was an 18' x 18' land -locked parcel within the plat boundary, which was owned by another party. The purpose of this preliminary plat is simply to guarantee access to the out -parcel. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval as filed. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: After a brief discussion and explanation by the applicant, the Committee determined that it would recommend the revised preliminary. It was noted by the applicant that if the out -parcel owner will not sign the plat, it cannot be shown as a lot and will be indicated as an out -parcel. The Committee accepted this as this only option. The vote on motion to recommend approval was 4 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent. July 13, 1982 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 2 - Continued PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Mr. Don Chambers represented the applicant. A motion in agreement with the Subdivision Committee's recommendation of approval was made and passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. t April 13, 1982 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 3 - File No. 227 -- Fox Glen Preliminar Site Plan Review LOCATION: Highway 10 west of Foxcroft Rd. DEVELOPER ENGINEER: -� - First Service Corporation Mehlburger, Tanner, Renshaw Agent - John Flake P.O. Box 3837 Capitol and Broadway Little Rock, AR P.O. Box 1580 Phone: 375-5331 Little Rock, AR 72203 AREA: 6.31 Acres NO. OF LOTS: 2 FT. OF NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: "- PROPOSED USES: Multifamily PLANNING DISTRICT: CENSUS TRACT: VARIANCES REQUESTED: Y 1. Buffer along the north boundary of the property. pRnDncnr. 1. The construction of 96-units in 12 two-story, eight -unit buildings on 5.51 acres. 2. Development according to the following: No. of Units T e of Units Floor Area 20 One Bedroom 740 Sq. Ft. 76 Two Bedroom 943 Sq. Ft. 3. The provision of the total building coverage of 52,604 square feet. 0 4. The provision of 170 parking spaces. 5. The provision of 2.97 acres in open space. April 13, 1982 V SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 3 - Continued '6. Amenities include a pool and laundry. USE PRPOSED: Apartments SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS- 1. Proposals considered under "MF-18" districts must have a minimum site area of one acre. This plan complies. 2. All detached buildings in such districts shall be separated by a distance of not less than 101. This plan complies. 3. Parking requirements for multifamily dwellings are 1.5 parking spaces per unit. This plan complies. 4. "MF-18" districts are characterized by a minimum of a 25' setback, side and rear yards equal to height of the adjacent buildings. 5. Site plan submission requires that the applicant submit a registered land survey. This plan complies. 6. Site plan submission requires the applicant to submit quantitative data that includes proposed building coverage of principle and accessory buildings, parcel size, proposed floor area and proposed number of parking spaces. This plan complies. 7. Landscaping and screening of vehicular use areas shall be in accordance with the City's Landscaping Ordinance. The applicant has stated an intent to comply. 8. ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS: (1) Developer should be cautious not to damage Racket Club property at the point of drainage discharge in the northeast portion of the project. STAFF ANALYSIS: This application involves the platting of a parcel of 6.31 acres into two lots, a 0.8 acre commercial tract and a 5.51 acre multifamily tract. Involved also, is the site plan l April 13, 1982 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 3 - Continued review of the residential tract, since it involves a multiple building site. An application for down -zoning to "MP-18' has been initiated. Since this will be accomplished by conversion adjustment, no notification to property owners is necessary. The applicant has requested that he be allowed to vary from the requirement of a 6' fence along the northern boundary of the property. The justification submitted included a statement indicating that the existing tennis courts and a 12' chain link fence/wind screen make the required 6' fence unnecessary. It also states that the existing vegetation in the 25' buffer strip would be preserved and supplemented where necessary, so that it will provide "a better screen without the redundancy of back-to-back fences." Staff is not opposed to the development, and the applicant has attempted to provide all the necessary data for submission. However, the staff does not feel that the request for a waiver can be granted, based on the justifications given, simply because the wind screen on the Racket Club property is not there year-round. Since an Arkla gas line is in the area, the applicant has the option to locate the fence at the perimeter of the parking lot or work out the location of the plantings and fence with both the Racket Club and Arkla Gas Company, STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, subject to comments made. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE ACTION: Don Chambers was present in support of the application. Mr. Joe White represented the interests of the Racquet Club. Biro Chambers reported that he and Mr. White were in the process of working out an agreement for the screening of the Property. The discussions included the possibility of a landscaping alternative, since the provision of a fence would create a "no man's land" of weeds and underbrush between the two Properties. Mr. White also stated that they had worked out drainage problems which resolved Engineering's concerns. The Committee voted to approve this item, subject to: (1) Submission of specifics of agreement to Planning Commission at Public Hearing. April 13, 1982 / SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 3 - Continued (2) Provision of access to Lot 1 in the Bill of Assurance. The vote: 5 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Mr. Don Chambers represented the applicant. There were no objectors. A question arose regarding the provision of access to Lot 1, since the Bill of Assurance indicated that the purchaser of Lot 1 would have to contribute 50 percent of the cost of gaining access from the easement proposed. Due to the fact that First Service Corporation, Lot 1°s purchaser will have to sign the final plat, the Commission was reluctant to approve this proposal without the assurance that this provision was understood. The Planning Commission felt that the direct access to Lot 1 should revolve around two points instead of optional access as provided in the Bill of Assurance, so as to eliminate the possibility of future problems in the development of the lot. Mr. Willis Smith, purchaser of the lot, stated that he was unaware that he did not have access from the drive, so as to eliminate the possibility of future problems of developing the lot. The developer was instructed to reach an understanding with the purchaser, and then get with staff to see if the objectives of the ordinance are met. A motion for deferral of two weeks was made and passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent.