HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0710-D Staff AnalysisOctober 14, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 1
NAME:
-T
LOCATION:
DEVELOPER:
West Markham Land Company
c/o Brad Walker
2228 Cottondale Lane
Little Rock, AR 72202
Telephone: 666-4242
West Markham Land Addition
South side of Markham Street,
1600 Feet West of Shackleford
Road
RWnTNRRR
Edward G. Smith and Associates
401 Victory Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
Telephone: 374-1666
AREA: 6.36 Acres NO. OF LOTS: 5 FT. NEW STREET: 0
ZONING: "C-3"
PROPOSED USE: Commercial
VARIANCES REQUESTED: None
A. Proposal/Request
1. Modification of an existing subdivision.
2. Modify lot line locations eliminating a lot or
lots with staff review.
3. To allow encroachment of the south property line
on drainage ditch, which will be corrected later
to be at north line of ditch.
4. Maintenance of agreement between the developer and
the City eliminating building setback requirements
along the drainage ditch.
October 14, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 1 - Continu
B. Existing Conditions
1. Flat and located south of a major arterial.
2. Bounded by Rock Creek and single family to the
south.
3. Currently subdivided into five commercial lots.
C. Issues Discussion
Previous land use decisions by consent decree.
D. Engineering Comments
None.
E. Analysis
Staff feels that variances and agreements received
previously should not be honored since the plat did not
include the total amount of land area in this proposal.
The City Attorney also needs to advise the Commission
of court -determined land use issues that may affect
this plat. The applicant is asked to show curb cuts
and clarify the request to encroach on the north
property line. Staff approves of the request for
modification.
F. Staff Recommendation
Reserved until further info received.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The applicant explained that the court order allowed for no
rear setbacks on the site. He agreed to provide drives no
closer than every 300 feet and have a minimum buildable area
with 400 feet minimum width on lots.
October 14, 1986
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 1 - Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
A motion was made and passed for approval, subject to
comments made. The vote was 7 ayes, 0 noes, and 4 absent.