Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0616-B Staff AnalysisJanuary 26, 1988 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 2 NAME: LOCATION: APPLICANT: DFVFT.nPFR Edgerstoune Lane Joint Venture #1 City Center 7th and Spring Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 5.56 acres ZONING: "R-2" Edgerstoune Lane Addition North Martin and "I" Streets David McCreery RNGTNFFR! Manes, Castin, Massie & McGetrick P.O. Box 22408 Little Rock, AR 72221 Phone: 223-9900 NO. OF LOTS: 14 FT. NEW STREET: 900 PROPOSED USES: Single Family A. Proposal/Request: 1. To plat 5.56 acres and to plat 14 lots and 900 feet of new street for a single family development. 2. The construction of a private street system and no sidewalks in an 80-foot easement owned by the Little Rock Municipal Water Works. The street will be built to City standards. 3. Waiver on cul-de-sac length due to terrain and ownership of all the land to the south by Little Rock Municipal Water Works which does not allow for any other feasible design for access into this subdivision. 4. Reduction of building setback to 15 feet from the 'pack of the curb as is necessitated by the steep terrain and the location of the road within an excess easement. 5. To provide a separate off-street parking area, since sufficient -guest parking will not be available due to the construction of the houses as close to the street as possible. January 26, 1988 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 2 - Continued 6. Variance of width -to -depth ratio is requested due to the fact that the north 1/2 is comprised of a very steep embankment which is totally useless for construction or for development of a yard. The Developer prefers to keep this area in individual lots instead of platting it as a separate tract to be maintain by an association. 7. Variance of the hillside is requested, because the lots do not contain the square footage required .for the actual slope, even though these lots are approximately 65 sq. ft. in width; they are larger than the existing ones in the area, which are 50 to 60 sq. ft. in area. B. Existinq Conditions: The site is located in an area consisting of single family homes. The site is affected by a 34-foot AP & L easement on the west, 80-foot AP & L easement on the south and a 25-foot water line easement on the east. The nortliern portion of the Lroperty consists of an - exposed cut with a 70 percent slope and some existing vegetation. C. Issues/Discussions/Legal/Technical/Design: 1. Notify neighborhood. 2. Redesign parking area; provide one parallel space per lot. 3. Reduce by two lots; eliminate Lot 14 and provide 70-foot lot width; provide detention area in area of Lot 14. 4. Discuss whether or not Property Owners Association needs to maintain the buttons on the streets, the parking and the slope. 5. Instrument needed so that plat can reference how the access easement functions. 6. Indicate plans for landscaping be cut on the north. 7. Usual private street restrictions apply, no gate; agreement to maintain fire hydrants and provide a service and access easement. January 26, 1988 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 2 - Continued D. Engineering Comments: 1. Detention facilities and calculations required. 2. Excavation, erosion and sediment control plan required. 3. Does top of cut slope need diversion ditch to present existing slope erosion? E. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to comments made. Staff recommends that the developers, AP & L and Water Works, all sign the plat and that a reference be made to the easement in the Bill of Assurance. The reduction of lots by two should eliminate the need for hillside regulation variances and should provide needed detention area on Lot 14 and provide lot widths of at least 70 feet. This will help to reduce the amount of variances needed..- Notification to the neighborhood is recommended due to their intense interest in a previous proposal on this site for approximately 28 condominium units. Staff is very concerned about the treatment of the slope on the north side of this property. F. Subdivision Committee Review: The comments were discussed with the Applicant. He agreed to explore the possibility of providing parallel parking even though there are problems with locating the parking due to the AP & L power line and poles; work with Engineering regarding detention; provide a property -owners' association for maintenance of landscaping in the easement, but not for the slope; and to notify a Mr. Jim McKenzie, a representative of the surrounding property. January 26, 1988 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 2 - Continued PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Staff recommended approval to the reduction of the proposal by two lots. The applicant, Mr. David McCreer_v, agreed to comply with the remainder of staff.'s comments. Mr. McCreery represented the proposal. He felt that reducing the proposal by two lots would adversely effect affordability of lots in the area, and that the last two of the subdivision were the best lots. A motion for approval as requested by the applicant was made and passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent, and 1 abstention.