HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0268 Staff Analysis0
,a
J
Dupe 15, 1982
S OgDI VIS IONS
Item No. 2 - File No. 240
NAME:
LOCATION:
DEVELOPER.
Carson Harris
AREA: 101.2 x 140
High Street Site Plan Review
1300 Block of High Street
."�T /TTITTTIT _
Dillinger, Inc.
Box 9425
Little Rock, AR 72219
Phone: 562-1998
NO. OF LOTS: 1 FEET OF NEW ST: 0
ZONING:
REQUEST: For site plan review of a multiple building site.
T. — --T n a r _
1. The construction of a two-story apartment complex
according to the following:
(a) No. of Units Type of Units
6 2 bedrooms
2 1 bedroom
Total - 8 units
(b) Total Area - 32' x 90'
(c) Parking Spaces - 15
(d) Access - 20' entrance at the rear
2. The replatting of Lots 10 and 11, Block 12, High Street,
into a single lot.
W
3. Conformance to all landscaping requirements.
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS ("R-5" Urban Residence District)
1. Multifamily structures not to exceed 36 units per gross
acre. This plan complies.
June 15, 1982
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 2 -- Continued
2. Front yard setback of 25'. This plan complies (* See
Analysis).
3. Rear yard setback of not less than 25' to rear line of
building. This plan complies.
4. Separation of detached buildings by 10'. This plan
complies.
5. Minimum site area of 10,000 square feet. This plan
complies.
6. Minimum lot area per family of 1,200 square feet by new
construction. This land complies.
ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Improve alley to 13th Street with standard alley
pavement and a width of 18'.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has worked very closely with the staff to
develop the plan as presented. Although most of the
Ordinance requirements have been met, there are still a few
concerns. First of all, the staff is in agreement with
Engineering's request for improvement of the alley since it
is the sole means of access to the lot, and in its existing
condition, it only provides for about 12' - 15' driveable
space because of a growth of underbrush and weeds, even
though it is platted as 20'. An inconsistency between the
survey and what was actually visual was noted. The
applicant should explain why the survey shows the existing
structure to be 21' from the back of the sidewalk, and in
actuality, it is approximately 10'. Staff is also
requesting that the new structure be designed so as to
exhibit similar architectural features as the existing
one-story duplex.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval, subject to comments made.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE ACTION:
The applicant was present. A motion was made and passed for
approval, subject to the submission of a corrected survey to
the staff and some agreement as to improvement of the alley
before the Public Hearing. The vote: 3 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
June 15, 1982
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 2 - Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
Mr. Carson Harris, the applicant, was present. There were
no objectors. A motion was made for approval, subject to
improvements beyond the property line. The vote was:
10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
r