HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0362 Staff AnalysisFebruary 12, 1985
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 5 - File No. 362
NAME: Capital Properties Preliminary
LOCATION: West side of Thibault Road,
approximately 1,600 feet south
of Frazier Pike
DEVELOPER: ENGINEER:
Capital Savings & Loan Garver & Garver
Association P.O. Box C-50
Little Rock, AR 72203-0050
376-3633
AREA: 35.0 acres NO. OF LOTS: 10 FT. NEW STREET: 1,450
ZONING: "I-2"
PROPOSED USES: Industrial
A. Site History
None.
B. Existing Conditions
This property is located in the Little Rock Industrial
Port Area. The land involved is flat and grass
covered.
C. Develo ment Pro osal
This is a proposal to plat 35 acres into 10 lots for
industrial use and 1,050' of new street. No waivers
have been requested.
D. En(
lineering Comments
1. Dedicate right-of-way and improve Thibault Road to
industrial standards.
2. Submit internal drainage and detention plan;
discuss plan with Mike Batie at 371-4861.
3. Make cul-de-sac bulbs with a 130' right-of-way and
100, pavement.
February 12, 1985
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 5 - File No. 362
E. Analysis
The submitted industrial plat does not indicate the
required 50' front building lines. Lots 3, 9 and 10
have a minimal amount of frontage on a public street.
This is acceptable since culs-de-sac are involved. Lot
widths are usually measured at the building line,
except in the case of culs-de-sac, where the average
width of the lot shall be used. The applicant should
submit a revised plan.
F. Staff Recommendation
Approval, subject to comments made.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The applicant agreed to submit the revised plat reflecting
building lines.
Water Works - A 15' easement will be required, 7.5' either
side of the lot line between Lots 4 and 5. An acreage
charge of $150 per acre will apply.'
4P
CANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objectors.
Mr. Doug Toney, property owner to the west, requested
access through this development to his property. Mr. Ronnie
Hall of Garver and Garver proposed a 60' strip for access
that would be included in the Bill of Assurance.
Staff did point out that you could not have primary access
to one property through another development. It was decided
that the applicant should indicate it as a separate tract
labeled, "Tract A."
A motion for approval, based on the above comments, was made
and passed by a vote of: 7 ayes, 0 noes and 4 absent.