Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0238-G Staff AnalysisJanuary 26, 1988 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 5 NAME: Prospect Terrace Replat, Lot 119 and 120 LOCATION: 5420 Edgewood Road DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: David Scruggs Melburger Tanner Renshaw 5506 Edgewood Little Rock, AR Little Rock, AR 72207 Phone: 375-3331 Phone: 664-1635 AREA: 3 acres NO. OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: "R-2" PROPOSED USES: Single Family A. Proposal/Request: 1. To replat two lots; Lot 119 will have 6,300 sq. ft. and Lot 120 will have 7,798 sq. ft. B. Existing Conditions: The site is located in an older, fully developed single family area. C. Issues/Discussions/Le al/Technical/Desi n: 1. Inadequate lot size of Lot 119. 2. Zero side yard provide by existing carport. D. ^Engineering Comments: 1. None at this time. E. Staff Recommendation: Denial due to Subdivision Ordinance requirement prohibiting the creation of substandard lots. A previous illegal sale has created a zero setback around the area of the existing carport. January 26, 1988 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 5 - Continued R. Subdivision Committee Review: The item was discussed by the Committee. The Applicant was requested to examine the Bill of Assurance for any prohibitions to this request and to notify abutting neighbors by petition. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: David and Ginger Scruggs, owners of the property, spoke in favor of the application. Staff recommended denial. The Assistant City Attorney, Stephen Giles, stated that the Commission did not have the authority to waive lot sizes and that this could not be approved because it violated the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Scruggs explained that his present homQ is 34' wide and 7' from the property line. His new home would be 33' wide and 6' from the property line; therefore, there would not be a significant difference in the two. He stated a love for the neighborhood and a commitment not to build anything out of character with the existing homes. A petition with the signatures of 14 residents in favor of the proposal was submitted. It was determined that the only legal means of approving this item was through the PUD process since the Commission was prohibited from waiving any of the Zoning Ordinance. A motion for deferral to the April 19 meeting was made and passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes, and 1 absent.