HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0583 Staff AnalysisSeptember 19, 1989
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: S-583
NAME: Duke's Acre Subdivision
.. . .........
LOCATION: 1514 Russenberger
DEVELOPER:
William D. Walker
3022 Dixon Road
Little Rock, AR 72206
455-1169
ENGINEER:
Jack Wilks
26 Dena Drive
Little Rock, AR
888-3960
AREA: 0.9 acre NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0
ZONING: Outside City limits
...........
PROPOSED USES.- Single Family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 23 (Arch Street)
CENSUS TRACT: 40.03
VARIANCES REQUESTED:
1. Sidewalk
2. Curb and gutter
PLAT DEFICIENCIES:
1. indicate adjacent subdivision plat, book and page.
2. Indicate adjacent property owners' names.
- - ---------- ------------ ...... . .....
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
This proposal consists of a large lot replatting into
two smaller lots. This plat as submitted is proposed
for residential use.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is currently occupied by a residence on the
west -side. There are single family houses on the east
and west sides. The south boundary is bordered by
Russenberger Road, a 20 foot wide hard -surfaced road.
September 19, 1989
SUBDIVISION
I tem No.....2 ..(_Copt i nued )
C. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Improvements should be made at one-half of 27 foot
street unless waived. Proper right-of-way snould be
dedicated.
D. ISSUES/LEGAL/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
There are a number of items missing from the
preliminary plat. Those include the source of title,
book, page and owners' names on the adjacent
subdivision. Also, owner should file with the Little
Rock Water Works a request for water meter and sign the
proper agreement.
E. ANALYSIS:
The Planning staff finds little issue with this plat.
It is a well drafted and has few deficiencies.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval as prepared with variances
for no curbs, gutters and sidewalks.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 7, 1989)
The applicant was not present but the item was briefly
discussed. The Commissioners mentioned street improvements
and sidewalks requirements. Staff explained those need to
be waived and the only improvement that needs to be done is
to bring the street to county standards.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (September 19, 1989)
There were no objectors in attendance. The application was
represented by the owner. The plat being in proper form,
and there being no objectors, the Commission determined it
appropriate to place this matter on the consent agenda for
approval. A motion was made and passed by a vote of 9 ayes,
0 nays, 2 absent.
(It was noted for the record that this item would be
forwarded to the Board of Directors for a variance to allow
for no street improvements.)
2
1 . M..e..e_.t_J.n..g, _PAJ..e: October 17, 1989
2. Case No.: S-583
3. ..R.P.g.g.p q I Waiver of all street improvements
4. Location: 1514 Russenberger
. . ....... ...... ........... .. ..... .....
5. P.W.n.e. r./.A..p.p..l i.. q.P nJ. William D. Walker
6. E..x.J.§..tj This site is currently occupied by a
residence on the west side.
7. Proposed Use: Residential
8. S.I. A. f.f.-Re q.PM m P.9 O.P. n. Approval with waiver of all
street improvements.
9. PI a..n-n. i. n. - -19-89.
-g _�Q p MM J.P-P.J - o. n-.9 e c..o Mm..e. n.d..A. t J o..n. Approval 9 .1 . ... .. . ... ... ..... .... ... ... ... ...
10. C. o n. d.J., A i ofls. o. r.. I s s..u.e.. s - R.e.M.a.i. n i. n. None
R e s o I v e d
11. j§qqes: None
12. Recommendation Forwarded With: A vote of 9 ayes,
.... ......... - ....... ... . .... ..... ..... ... . ..... ... . ......... .. . ... ....... .. ........... .. . ........ .. ..... ......
0 nayes and 2 absent.
13. Obiectors: None
.... ... . . ....... ...... ........... ... ......
14. N eJ.g"p.r.t.p_q-.d...P n. 23 - Arch Street.
September 19, 1989
SUBDIVISION
1 2 FILE NO.: G-583
NAME: Ouke'm Acre Subdivision
LOCATION: 1514 Russenbmrger
DEVELOPER: ENGINEER:
VV|||iam D. Walker Jack VYi/km
3022 Dixon Rood 26 Dena Drive
Little Roch, AR 72206 Little Rock' AR
455-1188 888-3960
`
AREA: 0'8 acre NUMBER OF 2 STREET: 8
4ONiN�� Outside
City limits
PRO USES� Single Family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 23 (Arch Street)
/CENSUS : 40'03
VARIANCESEQUESTEO/
1. Sidewalk
2, Curb and gutter
PLAT DEF |ENC:|ES:
1. Indicate adjacent subdivision plat, book and page.
2. Indicate adjacent property owners' names'
A. REQUEST:PROPOSAL
This proposal consists of a large lot rep|attin8 into
two smaller lots. This plat as submitted is proposed
for residential use.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is currently occupied by a residence on the
west -side. There are single family houses on the east
and west sides' The south boundary is bordered by
Runsenberger Rood. a 20 foot wide hard -surfaced rood'
1
R
September 19, 1989
SUBDIVISION
Item No. 2 (Continued)
C. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Improvements should be made at one-half of 27 foot
street unless waived. Proper right-of-way should be
dedicated.
D. .ISSUES/LEGA. L/TECH_N_ICAL/DESIGN:
There are a number of items missing from the
preliminary plat. Those include the source of title,
book, page and owners' names on the adjacent
subdivision. Also, owner should file with the Little
Rock Water Works a request for water meter and sign the
proper agreement.
E. ANALYSIS:
The Planning staff finds little issue with this plat.
It is a well drafted and has few deficiencies.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval as prepared with variances
for no curbs, gutters and sidewalks.
SUBDIVISION „COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 7, 1989)
The applicant was not present but the item was briefly
discussed. The Commissioners mentioned street improvements
and sidewalks requirements. Staff explained those need to
be waived and the only improvement that needs to be done is
to bring the street to county standards.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (September 19, 1989)
There were no objectors in attendance. The application was
represented by the owner. The plat being in proper form,
and there being no objectors, the Commission determined it
appropriate to place this matter on the consent agenda for
approval. A motion was made and passed by a vote of 9 ayes,
0 nays, 2 absent.
(It was noted for the record that this item would be
forwarded to the Board of Directors for a variance to allow
for no street improvements.)
2