Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0549 Staff AnalysisZ-4229 NAME: Plantation House PRD Short Form LOCATION: Markham at Plantation House Apartments DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: Donald Kirk Richardson Engineers 1717 Rebsamen Park Rd. 1717 Rebsamen Park Road Little Rock, AR Little Rock, AR 72202 Phone: 664-0-003 AREA: 2.3 acres NO. OF LOTS: 1 FT. OF NEW ST.: 0 ZONING: "R-2" PROPOSED USES: PRD A. Site History This site was previously reviewed by the Planning Commission for multifamily development. The neighborhood .raised significant objections. B. Proposal (1) The construction of 40 rental units on a 2.3 acre site at a density of 17.4 units per acre. (2) Unit size will be approximately 1,000 square feet in living area. (3) Parking will 63 parking spaces. (4) Unit Breakdown: Unit Type Unit No. Unit Size A 10 31' x 160' B 12 31' x 192' C 8 31' x 125' D 10 31' x 160' C. Engineering Considerations Submit plans for ditch design; turns will need to be protected. i t Z-4229 - Continued, D. Analysis Staff is not opposed to this development. Our comments relate to the proposed density and provision of alternate access if desired. We request that the applicant revise the plan by eliminating Building C; and if an issue, provide an alternate access point at the southwest corner of the site. This would entail further revision of the plan. E. Staff Recommendation Approval, subject to comments made. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW: Staff explained its position as: (1) Support of a reduction to 31 units obtained by eliminating Building C. (2) Revisions to the plat - shifting of the principal drive 75 feet to the west, provision of an alternate access point on the south and the reduction of the southern building by one unit. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Mr. Bob Richardson represented the developer. Approximately 20 persons from the surrounding neighborhoods were present in opposition. They were represented by Attorney Susan Martin. Major opposing points included: (1) Lack of 40' buffer between the two areas. (2) Possible aggravation of existing drainage, sewer and traffic problems. (3) Density in excess of "MF-12", which was previously rejected by the court. (4) Lack of notice to one property owner. Attorney Martin requested that the eastern drive be removed and left as open space and that the neighborhood be allowed time to meet with the developer. Mr_. Richardson presented an alternate plan, shifting the northern portion of the drive away from the eastern boundary and eliminating Building C. He was instructed by the Commission to examine the possibility of taking principal access from another 'Z-4229 -- Continued point on the west, and shifting not only Building C, but Building B to the east so that the adverse effects of northern lights from the drive would be minimized. A motion for a 30-day deferral was made and passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW: (5-31-84) Mr. Bob Richardson represented the developer. Ms. Susan Martin, attorney for the surrounding property owners were also present. Mr. Richardson presented two alternative plans relating to the Commission's request for another access point on the west. Engineering reported that the City's Traffic Department preferred two drives instead of one. The applicant was instructed to get together with the City Engineer and work out sewer and drive problems. Water Works reported that easements were required. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The applicant was represented by Mr. Bob Richardson. He presented a revised plan to the Commission, which reduced the units from 40 to 28, and that reflected the conditions of the signed statement which was agreed upon by both the developer and the neighboring property owners. A motion for approval was made and passed by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 noes and 4 absent. June 12, 1984 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. C - Z-4229 NAME: r fl /l T m T nXI . DEVELOPER: Plantation House PRD Short Form Markham at Plantation House Apartments WW7f4-_TK7WWD. Donald Kirk Richardson Engineers 1717 Rebsamen Park Rd. 1717 Rebsamen Park Road Little Rock, AR Little Rock, AR 72202 AREA: 2.3 acres ZONING: "R-2" PROPOSED USES: PRD Phone: 664-0003 NO. OF LOTS: 1 FT. OF NEW ST.: 0 A. Site Histoj�y This site was previously reviewed by the Planning Commission for multifamily development. The neighborhood raised significant objections. B. Proposal (1) The construction of 40 rental units on a 2.3 acre site at a density of 17.4 units per acre. (2) Unit size will be approximately 1,000 square feet in living area. (3) Parking will 63 parking spaces. (4) Unit Breakdown: Unit Type Unit No. Unit Size A 10 31' x 160' B 12 31' x 192' C 8 31' x 125' D 10 31' x 160' C. Engineering Considerations Submit plans for ditch design; turns will need to be protected. June 12, 1964 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. C - Continued D. Analysis Staff is not opposed to this development. Our comments relate to the proposed density and provision of alternate access if desired. We request that the applicant revise the plan by eliminating Building C; and if an issue, provide an alternate access point at the southwest corner of the site. This would entail further revision of the plan. E. Staff Recommendation Approval, subject to comments made. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW: Staff explained its position as: (1) Support of a reduction to 31 units obtained by eliminating Building C. (2) Revisions to the plat - shifting of the principal drive 75 feet to the west, provision of an alternate access point on 'the south and the reduction of the southern building by one unit. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Mr. Bob Richardson represented the developer. Approximately 20 persons from the surrounding neighborhoods were present in opposition. They were represented by Attorney Susan Martin. Major opposing points included: (1) Lack of 40' buffer between the two areas. (2) Possible aggravation of existing drainage, sewer and traffic problems. (3) Density in excess of '°MF-12", which was previously rejected by the court. (4) Lack of notice to one property owner. Attorney Martin requested that the eastern drive be removed and left as open space and that the neighborhood be allowed time to meet with the developer. Mr. Richardson presented an alternate plan, shifting the northern portion of the drive away from the eastern boundary and eliminating Building C. He was instructed by the Commission to examine the possibility of taking principal access from another June 12, 1984 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. C - Continued point on the west, and shifting not only Building C, but Building B to the east so that the adverse effects of northern lights from the drive would be minimized. A motion for a 30-day deferral was made and passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW: (5-31-84) Mr. Bob Richardson represented the developer. Ms. Susan Martin, attorney for the surrounding property owners were also present. Mr. Richardson presented two alternative plans relating to the Commission's request for another access point on the west. Engineering reported that the City's Traffic Department preferred two drives instead of one. The applicant was instructed to get together with the City Engineer and work out sewer and drive problems. Water Works reported that easements were required. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The applicant was represented by Mr. Bob Richardson. He presented a revised plan to the Commission, which reduced the units from 40 to 28, and that reflected the conditions of the signed statement which was agreed upon by both the developer and the neighboring property owners. A motion for approval was made and passed by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 noes and 4 absent. June 12, 1984 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. C - Z-4229 l"lh MP. . T_r%rhMTMl. r%V'tTWT n10 D. Plantation House PRD Short Form Markham at Plantation House Apartments ENGINEER: Donald Kirk Richardson Engineers 1717 Rebsamen Park Rd. 1717 Rebsamen Park Road Little Rock, AR Little Rock, AR 72202 Phone: 664-0003 AREA: 2.3 acres NO. OF LOTS: 1 FT. OF NEW ST.: 0 ZONING: "R-2" PROPOSED USES: PRD A. Site History This site was previously reviewed by the Planning Commission for multifamily development. The neighborhood raised significant objections. B. Proposal (1) The construction of 40 rental units on a 2.3 acre site at a density of 17.4 units per acre. (2) Unit size will be approximately 1,000 square feet in living area. (3) Parking will 63 parking spaces. (4) Unit Breakdown: Unit Type Unit No. Unit Size A 10 31' x 160' B 12 31' x 192' C 8 31' x 125' D 10 31' x 160' C. Engineering Considerations Submit plans for ditch design; turns will need to be protected. June 12, 1984 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. C - Continued D. Analysis Staff is not opposed to this development. Our comments relate to the proposed density and provision of alternate access if desired. We request that the applicant revise the plan by eliminating Building C; and if an issue, provide an alternate access point at the southwest corner of the site. This would entail further revision of the plan. E. Staff Recommendation Approval, subject to comments made. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW: Staff explained its position as: (1) Support of a reduction to 31 units obtained by eliminating Building C. (2) Revisions to the plat - shifting of the principal drive 75 feet to the west, provision of an alternate access point on the south and the reduction of the southern building by one unit. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Mr. Bob Richardson represented the developer. Approximately 20 persons from the surrounding neighborhoods were present in opposition. They were represented by Attorney Susan Martin. Major opposing points included: (1) Lack of 40' buffer between the two areas. (2) Possible aggravation of existing drainage, sewer and traffic problems. (3) Density in excess of "MF-12", which was previously rejected by the court. (4) Lack of notice to one property owner. Attorney Martin requested that the eastern drive be removed and left as open space and that the neighborhood be allowed time to meet with the developer. Mr. Richardson presented an alternate plan, shifting the northern portion of the drive away from the eastern boundary and eliminating Building C. He was instructed by the Commission to examine the possibility of taking principal access from another June 12, 1984 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. C - Continued point on the west, and shifting Building B to the east so that northern lights from the drive for a 30-day deferral was made 9 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW: not only Building C, but the adverse effects of would be minimized. A motion and passed by a vote of (5-31-84) Mr. Bob Richardson represented the developer. Ms. Susan Martin, attorney for the surrounding property owners were also present. fir. Richardson presented two alternative plans relating to the Commission's request for another access point on the west. Engineering reported that the City's Traffic Department preferred two drives instead of one. The applicant was instructed to get together with the City Engineer and work out sewer and drive problems. Water Works reported that easements were required. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The applicant was represented by Mr. Bob Richardson. He presented a revised plan to the Commission, which reduced the units from 40 to 28, and that reflected the conditions of the signed statement which was agreed upon by both the developer and the neighboring property owners. A motion for approval was made and passed by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 noes and 4 absent.