Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0579 Staff Analysis' 1/ 13, 1983 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 15 NAME: LOCATION: Yarberry Lane Site Plan Review (Z-4079A) (R7-A) North side of Yarberry Lane, approximately 4/10 mile east of Chicot Road APPLICANT: Robert J. Richardson 1717 Rebsamen Park Road Little Rock, AR 72202 Phone: 664-0003 PROPOSAL: To construct a manufactured housing subdivision on 20.1 acres of land. The proposed subdivision contains 101 lots and approximately 1600 feet of new street. ANALYSIS: This proposal has a net density of 5.94 units per acre. Staff feels that this density is reasonable and that the design is residential in character. The staff does, however, feel that a recreational open space would enhance the project. The major planning issue concerning this proposal is the location of a collector standard road (Master Street ev_entually___connect Warren Road to Yarberry Lance.__ The alignment would basically follow -the-entrance street alignment to the north property line. In addition, Yarberry Lane needs to be built to a collector standard on the west and transitioned to a residential standard on the east. The applicant has proposed a 25-foot front yard setback which staff feels is acceptable. The staff feels that a six-foot board screening should be built to buffer the single family uses adjacent to the southeast and southwest property lines. In addition, the applicant needs to submit a topographic survey. The possibility exists that the northern part of this property lies within the floodplain. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval subject to: the applicant agreeing to dedicate and build the Warren Road collector and Yarberry Lane; a meeting with the City Engineers prior to the September 13th Planning Commission meeting; the applicant agreeing to screen the south portion of the property; and the applicant submitting a topographical survey to ascertain the floodplain and the submission of a landscape plan. September 13, 1983 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 15 - Continued SU5DIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW: The applicant was present. The applicant agreed to build the proposed collector and to meet with City engineers to discuss the proper alignment. The Committee felt that screening of the adjacent single family uses was not necessary if the neighborhood didn't express concern. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (9-13-83) The applicant was present. No objectors were present. The City Engineer stated that the applicant had agreed to build a north/south Master Street Plan designated collector street. There was some discussion concerning the necessity of a collector street standard. The Planning staff felt that a collector standard was necessary due to its designation on the Master Street Plan. The Commission voted 11 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent to approve this application subject to the staff agreeing on the location of the proposed collector and the applicant submitting a revised site plan illustrating the aforementioned collector street.