Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0623-B Staff AnalysisAugust 11, 1987 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. A NAME: r AA T mr^%T - r%"T7"r ATTTl" Wayne Cotsell, ATF 2910 Millbrook Little Rock, AR AREA: .3693 acres ZONING: "R-2" PROPOSED USES: "R-2" Echo Valley, Lots 121A and 121B Between Millbrook Road and Breckenridge Drive ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates, Inc. 401 Victory Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Telephone No. 374-1666 NO. OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 A. Existing Conditions Established single family area. B. Proposal To replat .3693 acres into two lots of single family use. C. Issues/Legal/Technical/Design (1) Notification to adjacent property owners. (2) Amendment of the Bill of Assurance will be required. (3) Possible platted vehicle prohibition zone on original plat. (4) Fifteen (15) foot building line. (5) See staff for technical plat requirements. August 11, 1987 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. A - Continued D. Engineering Comments None. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Reserved until further information is available. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW: The Applicant agreed to provide notice to adjacent property owners. The Traffic Engineer agreed to determine whether there is a traffic problem associated with the driveway. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (6-30-87) The applicant, Mr. Joe White, was present. The staff offered its comments and responded to questions concerning compatibility with the area as to lot size, Bill of Assurance, and other items. Mr. White addressed these issues by responding that some he could not answer at this occasion, but that the access prohibition and planning easement along the upper street was of record. A Mr. Michael Gareollio, an adjacent property owner, offered concerns about traffic safety and Bill of Assurance conformity. After a brief discussion, the Commission determined that a deferral was in order to permit this owner and neighbors sufficient time to review the Bill of Assurance. A motion was made to defer the application to August 11, the next scheduled Subdivision Hearing. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes, and 1 absent. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE ACTION: (7-23-87) Mr. Joe White of White-Daters Engineers was present and reported to the Committee that the Bill of Assurance on this plat has expired. It was developed without benefit of an automatic extension clause. Discussion .was held by -the Committee relative to the Traffic Engineer's comments August 11, 1987 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. A - Continued wherein he objected to access on the uphill side of the lots. There is currently a platted access prohibition along this street. Mr. White indicated he would work with the Bill of Assurance on the access easement with the hope that it could be resolved by the meeting on August 11. At that time, he would report on their progress. Mr. White also indicated that it might be possible to gain involvement of the additional three lots that lie in the same relationship as this one. The potential of all four lots involved would increase the possibility of doing a better access relationship on the uphill side. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (August 11, 1987) Mr. Joe White was present and offered a response to the questions posed at the Subdivision Committee meeting. He said that he had met with Henk Koornstra of the Traffic Engineer's Office on the site and had agreed to a driveway design that was workable. A design was filed for record indicating an eight percent grade within the street right-of-way and 15 percent on the driveway. The design for this drive includes a turnaround to provide head -in reentry to the street. Henk Koornstra stated his agreement with the report of Mr. White. Mr. White continued his report by stating that the BiJJ__AD-f Assurance on this subdivision was determined to be valid and that it does not have an access prohibition from either end of the lot but does include a of lantin easement along one end. Mr. White also stated that any architec era review committee provided for within the Bill of Assurance is not now an issue as its provisions have expired. In addition, he reported that an adjacent lot has already made this split and a third potential lot split exists. A discussion of multiple lot access by an internal driveway followed with Henk Koornstra stating that he preferred that solution. Mr. White stated that his client cannot commit the other lot owners with respect to a common access. After a brief discussion of the issues presented, a motion was made to a rove the of s with ,he driveway _as aA reed upon by Henk Koorn and the rescinding of the planting as ement . It was_Roted that an amen men of the ' 11stf ss'ura-nce wi probably be required. The motion passed by a vo e a ayes, , sent. 1 open position.