HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0239 Staff AnalysisI,&
June 15, 1982
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No . 3
File No. 243
NAME:
LOCATION:
DEVELOPER:
Maury Mitchell
Fausett and Company
P.O. Box 5730AR 72215
Little Rock,
Phone: 224-7500
Maury Mitchell Site Plan Review
East side of Geyer Springs at
Forbing Road
ENGINEER:
Brooks and Curry
P.O. Box 897
North Little Rock, AR
Phone: 758-3001
AREA: 33,600 Square Feet NO. OF LOTS:
ZONING: "C-3"
PROPOSED USES: Commercial
1 FEET OF NEW STREET: 0
REQ�T :
For site plan review of a multiple building site.
PROPOSAL:
1 Pro osed Construction:
(a) 5,000 square feet building (40' x 125') for use as a
retail bakery store.
(b) Five parking spaces.
2. Future Construc�:
( a)
5,600 square feet (40' x 1401) building.
in Requirements as indicated by
3. Conformance to Landscap g Ordinance.
Ordinances as indicated byordinance.
Districts)
S ecia1 Requirements ( C 3 Commercial Zoning
( 1)
This plan
Front yard setback with depth of 25'.
complies.
ck of not less than 25'. This plan
( 2 ) Rear Yard setba
complies.
Minimum lot area of 14,000 square feet a
of not less than 100'. nd a lot width
(3) This plan complies.
a
June 15, 1982
4 ' SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 3 - Continued
5. Engineering Considerations: None
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Staff has no major objections to the proposal, since it is
basically in conformance with Ordinance requirements. The
applicant does need to indicate plans for parking and drives to
serve the existing buildings.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval, subject to comments made.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE ACTION:
The applicant was present. Staff pointed out that the parking
shown was not sufficient to meet Ordinance requirements. A
motion was made for approval, subject to an update on parking
before the Public Hearing. The motion passed by: 3 ayes, 0 noes
and 2 absent.
_0
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
Mr. Maury Mitchell, the applicant, was present. There were no
objectors. A revised plan meeting staff's approval was
submitted. A motion was made for approval, subject to the
parking specifications for future building being tied to the
building permit. The vote was: 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.