HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0253 Staff Analysisr�
August 10, 1982
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 1
NAME: Bristol Commons Townhomes
LOCATION: 504 Green Mountain Drive,
North of Mara Lynn Road
OWNER: APPLICANT:
Mr. Carl Jones Charles Basham,
504 Green Mountain Drive Vanguard, Inc.
Little Rock, AR P.O. Box 5713
Little Rock, AR
Phone: 224-6006
REQUEST: For encroachment
addition into an
established by a
setback.
A. EXISTING CONDITIONS
President
72215
of a proposed
area
40' building
The site is in a residential area mainly comprised of
multifamily and single family uses. Bordering
collector streets are Green Mountain Drive on the west
and Mara Lynn Road on the south. Sparsely scattered
plants exist in the 40' area intended for the buffering
of single family residences on the east.
B. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
This application was submitted by Vanguard Commercial
and Residential Construction Company. One of the
property owners of the Bristol Common Condominiums has
contacted them about possibly constructing a full
enclosure around the patio area of his unit. The
addition will encroach approximately 9' into an area
established by a 40' rear building setback. The
applicant is not only requesting the encroachment of
one unit, but a modification of the entire line to 31.
C. CONFORMANCE TO ORDINANCE
The proposal varies in the manner stated above.
Justification based on the increased potential that
other owners will desire similar additions, since the
idea of a sun -room is very appealing in developments of
this type and the design layout downstairs makes the
additions convenient and relatively inexpensive.
August— Jr), 1982
SLlBDT.VIOWS
Item No. 1. - Continued
The additional space also allows for expansion without
the necessity of moving to a larger living unit.
D. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
If approved, a final replat indicating the modified
building line will be required.
E. ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS
None.
F. ANALYSIS
The staff is reluctant to endorse this request.
This request constitutes more than just a waiver of a
minor encroachment of a building line because of an
individual hardship case. The applicant is asking us
to provide a means whereby other additions are possible
and probable. Staff feels that if the owner wanted
larger units, they should have been designed
initially.
G. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Denial as filed.
Ii. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
The applicant was represented. A brief discussion was
held with the result that the Committee voted to
support Staff position of denial. The vote: 4 ayes,
0 noes, 1 absent.
I. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (7-13-82)
A letter was submitted in behalf of the applicant,
which requested deferral for thirty days. A motion to
defer the item until the August loth public hearing was
made and passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
17. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
No one was present in regards to this item. A motion
in agreement with the Subdivision Committee's
recommendation of denial was made and passed by a vote
of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.