HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0548-E Staff AnalysisNovember 30, 1993
ITEM NO.: 7 S-548-E.(Cont-)
C. ENGINEERING/UTILITY COMMENTS:
The City Engineering office reports that 800 feet of a 27
foot wide residential street was built in 1989 by plans
approved by the City. The project file does not indicate
that inspections were made during the construction, but the
engineering staff recalls possibly making some inspections.
A final inspection, however, was made and, after completion
of "punch list" repairs and modifications, the street
construction was approved. Earlier this year, as the
developer prepared to seek approval of the re -plat and
dedication to the City of the right-of-way and improvements,
the Engineering staff inspected the work in place. The
developer was sent a "punch list" of work to be performed
and clean-up to be done. When this work is completed and
approved by the City, and after the developer submits a
maintenance bond, Engineering recommends approval of the
request to re -plat the subdivision with a public street.
water Works reports that access will have to be provided to
the area to maintain and/or replace facilities and to read
meters.
Arkansas Power & Light, ARKLA Gas, and Southwestern Hell
approved the submittal without comment.
D. ISSUES/LEGAL/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
The original final plat was prepared by Robert D. Holloway,
Inc. This engineering firm is no longer engaged by the
developer, and the engineer of record is Crist Engineering,
Inc. Crist Engineering will need to survey the property and
prepare the revised final plat. All surveying and
engineering certifications must be completed. The re -plat
must show the 50 foot right-of-way dedication.
E. ANALYSIS•
with minor repairs or modifications required by the City
Engineering office and submitting the required maintenance
bond, the existing street is approved for dedication to and
maintenance by the City. When the current engineer of
record completes the new survey and preparation of the plat,
all requirements will have been met. There are no other
outstanding issues.
F . STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the re -plat, subject to meeting
City Engineering requirements noted above.
K
November 30, 1993
7 FILE NO.: S--548--E
NAME: CANDLEWOOD III - RE -PLAT
LOCATION: North and West off Rivercrest Drive at the end of
Marina Drive
DEVELOPER:
CHAR-BEC TRUST
c/o Johnny Mitchum
P. O. Box 2317
Batesville, AR 72503
371-0642
ENGINEER•
CRIST ENGINEERS, INC.
Woodlands Plaza 1, Suite 202
5905 Forest Place
Little Rock, AR 72207
664-1552
AREA: 36.385 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 5 FT. NEW STREET: 0
ZONING: R-2 PROPOSED USES: Single-family residential
PLANNING DISTRICT: 1
CENSUS TRACT: 42.05
VARIANCES REQUESTED: None
STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to re -plat an existing subdivision in
order to dedicate the street right-of-way to the City and gain
acceptance by the City of the street construction.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant requests review and approval by the Planning
Commission of a re -plat of Candlewood III. The original
preliminary plat of the subdivision was approved by the
Planning Commission on January 3, 1989. The final plat was
approved on December 20, 1989. The originally approved plat
showed an access easement and a private street on the
property. The current request is to re -plat the subdivision
in order to dedicate the street right-of-way and seek
acceptance of the already -constructed street as a public
street for public maintenance.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The current zoning is R-2. Marina Drive is constructed from
the subdivision boundary on the east to a termination at the
western most lot. There has been no development activity to
construct homes in the development, and the land is
overgrown and wooded.
November 30, 1993
ITEM NO.: 7 S-548-E Cont.
SUBDIVI ION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 10, 1993)
Representatives of the applicant, Mr. Wingfield Martin and the
engineer, Mr. Less Price, were present. Staff outlined the
request to the Committee and reviewed the comments from the
discussion outline. It was explained to the applicant that the
previously approved and filed plat cannot simply be noted and
amended, but must be a new document, properly prepared and
executed. With that explanation, the Committee forwarded the
item to the Commission for final resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 30, 1993)
Staff reported that there were no issues remaining to be
resolved. The item was included on the Consent Agenda for
approval, and was approved with the vote of 9 ayes, no nays,
1 absent, no abstentions, and 1 open position.
01