The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutS-0274-A Staff AnalysisMarch 15, 1983 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 12 - File No. 274A NAME: Bill Darby - Revised Preliminary LOCATION: West of Kavanaugh at Darby P1. DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: William H. Darby Sam Davis 51 Saxony Circle 5301 W. 8th Street Little Rock, AR 72209 Little Rock, AR 72204 Phone: 664-0324 AREA: 2.35 acres N0._OF_LOTS: 1 FT. OF NEW ST.: 0 ZONING: "R-5" PROPOSED USES: Multifamily VARIANCES REQUESTED: None. STAFF REPORT: This report represents a revision of a plat that was reviewed by the Planning Commission on November 3, 1982. The main objection was centered around whether or not access should be allowed from the proposed 70-unit apartment complex via Darby Place. In earlier rezoning hearings, the -commission had conditioned approval upon no such access as it would adversely affect the surrounding single family neighborhood. After much neighborhood objection, and an opinion from the City Attorney, which advised against disregarding prior Commission actions, a vote was made and unanimously passed that denied the plan development. The applicant is now proposing to building 80 units of apartments on the site. Access, however, will now be taken from Cantrell Road. March*15, 1983 + ' SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 12 - Continued STAFF ANALYSIS: This proposal presents several issues for discussion. First of all, staff is concerned about the access unto Cantrell, since it is seriously deficient and may have long-term consequences which are detrimental to the area. A dangerous intersection is being created. The applicant, however, may not have another choice. A 5' setback and a 101 alley are shown on the south. This. alley should be included in -the final plat and BOA so as to add 20' that would assure a permanent structural separation between the building shown and the one south of the property line.I To protect the neighboring single family uses, the applicant should pr6ide a 40' b&ffer and 6' opaque fence along the northern and eastern boundary. The rear yard does not meet ordinance requirements of 251, however, due to elevation this is not important. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, subject to comments made. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Committee decided to approve this item, subject to the submission of a revised plan that includes a 40' buffer and 6' fence on the north and eastern boundaries. The motion passed by a vote of 2 ayes, 0 noes, 3 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The applicant was present. Eleven objectors from the neighborhood were present. Spokespersons were Mrs. Iris Henry and Mr. Don Ichembaum, proprietor of the Sports Mart Store. Objections were mainly based on the danger being created by the access to Cantrell. After much discussion, a motion was made to defer this for two weeks so that (1) a more definitive statement could be received from the Fire Department as to their approval or denial of the project; (2) a traffic study could be done to get a better view on the safety issue; (3) the City Attorney could investigate whether the previous Planning Commission action relative to the zoning of this property could be rescinded. The motion passed by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 noes, 3 absent. March 29, 1983 SUBDIVISIONS !l Item No. 3 - File No. 274A NAME: LOCATION: nRVRT.nPRR! Bill Darby -_Revised Preliminary. West of Kavanaugh at Darby Pl.," vmaTWRRR ! William H. Darby Sam Davis 51 Saxony Circle 5301 W. 8th Street Little Rock, AR 72209 Little Rock, AR 72204 Phone: 664-0324 AREA: 2.35 acres NO. OF LOTS: 1 FT. OF NEW ST.. 0 ZONING:-' "R-5" PROPOSED USES: Multifamily VARIANCES REQUESTED: None. STAFF REPORT: This report represents a revision of a plat that was reviewed by the Planning Commission on November 3, 1982. The main objection was centered around whether or not access should be allowed from the proposed 70-unit apartment complex -via Darby Place. In earlier rezoning hearings, the Commission had conditioned approval upon no such access as it would adversely affect the. surrounding single family neighborhood. After much neighborhood objection, and an opinion from the City Attorney, which advised against disregarding prior Commission actions, a vote was made and unanimously passed that denied the plan development. The applicant is now proposing to building 80 units of apartments on the site. Access, however, will now be taken from Cantrell Road. March 29, 1983 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 3 - Continued STAFF ANALYSIS: This proposal presents several issuesfor access1untosCantrellrst P term of all, staff is concerned about t have long - since it is seriously deficient and may A dangerous consequences which are detrimental to tare•however, may intersection is being created. The applicant, not have another choice. This A 5' setback and a 10' alley are shown on the south. alley should be included in the final structurallatOseoaration Y permanentro erty add 20' that would assure a between the building shown and the one south of the property the protect the neighboring single family Ue fence line. P rovide a 40' buffer and 6' opaque applicant should P The rear yard does along the northern and eastern boundary•however, due to not meet ordinance requirements of 25 . elevation this is not important. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval, subject to comments made. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: ect to the The Committee decided to approve this item, subj plan that includes a 40' buffer and submission of a revised p The motion 6' fence on the north aneSea�tnOeSbo3nabsent. passed by a vote of Y PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: resent. Eleven objectors from the The applicant was s P Spokespersons were Mrs. neighborhood were present. P Sports Mart Don Ichembaum, proprietor of the Ser being Henry and Mr. based on the Bang a Store. Objections were mainly After much discussion, created by the access to Cantrell.eeks so that ( a motion was made to defer this fobetwo ived from the Fire more definitive statement rece al of the project; Department as to their approvalor denia better view on (2) a traffic study could be done to g could investigate the safety issue; (3) the City Attorney action her the r ev ious planning CommiesreScinded. rThe tmotion ive to whet P ro erty could b the zoning of this property 0 noes, 3 absent* passed by a vote of 7 ayes, W