Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0707 Staff AnalysisJune 6, 1990 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: NAME: Replat Lots 22, 23, 25, & 26, Archview Acres Subdivision LOCATION: Off Arch Street on Archwood Dr. DEVELOPER: Jerry Victory P.O. Box 164720 Little Rock, AR 72216 (501) 888-2457 ENGINEER• Ben Kittler, Jr. 28 Dena Drive Little Rock, AR 72206 AREA: 1.41 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 ZONING• "R-2" PROPOSED USES: Residential (Single Family) PLANNING DISTRICT: Land Mark -30 CENSUS TRACT: 40.03 FT. NEW STREET 0 VARIANCES_ _REQUE_STED : 1. Road improvements, curb & gutter, sidewalks. 2. Pipe stem configuration lot. A. PROPOSALIREOUEST: This developer proposes the creation of the pipe -stem lot to allow access to the City 8" water main on Archwood Drive. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: This site is currently undeveloped and covered with the natural foliage of the area. There is one mobile home on Lot 22-R. Streets are developed to County standards. C. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: None Reported. 1 June 5, 1990 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO. : 1 (Continued) D. ISSUES LEGAL TECHNICAL DESIGN: The replat is basically in good form with resolution of the following items required: 1. 20' wide frontage on Archview shall not be a principal access - include in Bill of Assurance. 2. Change variance request from pipe -stem lot to double frontage lot. E. ANALYSIS• The Planning -Staff finds no serious fault with the replat subject, however, to resolving the two items pointed out in Item D above. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Staff recommends approval subject to resolution of above -issues pointed out by the Planning Staff. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS: (May 24, 1990) Mr. Ben Kittler was present representing this application. A brief general discussion was held dealing with issues pointed out in Staff's analysis. Mr. Kittler agreed to include provisions in the Bill of Assurance that 20' wide road frontage will not be a principal access. He also agreed to change variance request from pipe -stem to double frontage lot. There being no further discussion, the matter was forwarded to the full Commission for resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (June 5, 1990) The applicant was in attendance. The Planning Staff reported that this item should be placed on the consent agenda for approval in as much as there were no remaining issues to be resolved. After a brief discussion, the Commission determined it appropriate to place this item on the consent agenda for approval. A motion was made and passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent. (It was 2 June 5, 1990 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 Continued noted for the record that this item will be submitted to the Board of Directors for variance approval.) 3