HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0852-A Staff Analysis'e a lie L rVrP
7 6 Crtos l+W �a s +Dlr err �
laol e fs ej-
e
? A
`j-C� p :�•: a Y� �� .. -�- a '�•� `� � ST" ro � �Nr C�e � � r c
4r,,:?e4 { rrji'te
g.,4 1'* ti- 4 [ Ce- v --A ee Ssar -�
' tlp�a iQ�{ r�l�iri? �� �a ❑ P -0 oi- , p p
I�-� 5ai�� J 6 r• 1 FJr,S f Y ?j'rYt�' .0�ra�a:
r r r •'�-i -,11f A
r`arKP- JW� LPL Z)
F Lip
+I' to a- M1 C Y' Coy � l��r:l W j' 4
..
il LA 11] n ..i a� A .n th 1 - /n 1 A ,.6�-
r, b r-
f -9 "rre C! ed "c, -Ho„ `-'6 P ra►nii b- a `�G ` tn] d ' o4• u C. S C--e Wt LI
I '
ii? hY� P n`�" CJsn
G!cc e-.5 T> g
�9
:14- A e
f 4--a _ i
� fro , -I-V; 1 PrP r
-rr 4CL4- -
4�v • t f r
• r
JAM<b' i P s-Ia 4 fif fj\je it
f r
o ? - as �1� n r� r M G a v ? �r� 'r
,ti P t 1 S r1 d [rf I
2 � 'i' L % �, t�1' eli ro 5 r f
r �� I'! I 1 Q s5 i� �
' vIj n �1 VPf' . D .�` f P[,�• ly�.f�! �
... I d/ I �• f r � I] f 1 Y � t � 4 ' I �f � � � I � r' C-�•GE �f' f
!'3,. � r ` - f, f ` f �[ t' . 7 r 1 �- 1 �
rH:
flk
pndr 4,r-
dflO 't)y
)VP �� fS.J_�� f�frrr
• QJ S I � f � ! •
`� ! J - � �• f
.�
4ye S +t
�1 � � 61 e �j fed
w
� �
^
F -
1
rA
ops
L eye f d.' � •� Z -• � r : u : }. ;...
r
' � , �� d � � �
r
�1 � � � r Gl ■� , I t='
1. Meet.ing Date: December 20, 1988
2. Case No.: S-852
......_.......I ......................
3. Request: Encroachment upon a buffer zone by a drive
area and waiver of the six foot opaque fence
requirement.
4. Location: On the south side of Hinson Road immediately
east of the new City Library at Napa Valley Drive.
5. Owner Southern Southern Key Investments by the
Hathaway Group.
6. Existing.Status: Vacant land
7. Proposed Use: To construct a nursing home.
8. Staff Recommendat-i_on: Approval of waiver requests.
9. Planning -_Commission Recommendation: Approval of
waivers.
10. Recommendation Forwarded With: A vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes.
11. Objectors: None of record.
.I
NAME:
LOCATION:
DEVELOPER/.OWNER:
Southern Key Investments
c/o The Hathaway Group
1500 Worthen Bank
Little Rock, AR 72201
Attn: Steven Bond
Phone: 372-1700
A. Pros_os,a l /Request
Pleasant Valley Living Center
Located on the south side of
Hinson Road west of Hinson Loop
ENGINEER:
White-Daters & Associates
401 Victory
Little Rock, AR 72201
Phone: 374-1666
1. To plat 5.0216 acres into two lots for a nursing
home use.
2. Wai vers___r_equested :
(a) Street _improvements _to H..i.ns,o_n .Road - due to
the street widening currently underway.
(b) Public street requirements for access drive -
necessary for development of property.
B. Ex ist i ngCondi Conditions
ons __ _
Land uses bordering this site include residential to
the south and office to the west. The land is
generally flat and covered with mature vegetation,
except for the presence of an existing one-story rock
and frame structure on lot 1.
C. End i neer_i ng_ Co.mmen.t..s
Engineering is opposed to any waivers of street
improvements. All interior driveways should be a
minimum of 20 feet wide. Frontage on Hinson Road will
require dedication to provide one-half of a 90 foot
right-of-way and one-half of a 60 foot pavement. This
site -will also require conformance to the Storm Water
Detention Plan Ordinance.
D. IssuesJ Legaj_L'�echnical/Design
1. The fifty (50) foot access easement is the only
access to Lot 2.
A.Conti_need)__—_----------------_____________----
E . Ana I _y§ i _s_
A PUD proposal for an elderly retirement center was
previously approved on this site. The current proposal
involves the use of Lot 2 only as a nursing home.
Since the property is zoned 110-2," a related issue
involving site plan review has also been submitted as
Item No. 15. The site plan will give the specifics of
the proposal as they relate to the location of the
building, the drives and the parking.
The Applicant has requested waivers of street
improvements to Hinson Road and the public requirement
for the access drive. Justification for each request
has been given; however, Engineering has refused to
lend its support to any waiver.
The main issue for resolution involves the sole 50 foot
access to Lot 2. Since it is the only access to Lot 2,
it must be constructed to public street standards. The
pavement should be 27 feet in width to the south end of
Lot 1, and have a 50 foot turning radius. The
intersection with the street should also be designed as
a public street.
For fire safety reasons, the access easement should
extend around the north and western boundaries of
Lot 2. Notices are required.
F. Staff Recommendation
Approval, subject.to comments made.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The main discussion regarded existing access and utility
easement on the eastern side of the site. The owner of
Lot 1 felt that the easement was for his benefit, the
attorney for the Applicant felt otherwise. It was
determined that the City only wanted the dedication of a
public service and access easement, with all other concerns
considered a private matter.
Staff requested that the plat reflect the signature of the
property owner of Lot 1 as required by preliminary plat
submission requirements. Mr. Steven Bonds, the Applicant,
requested a waiver of Hinson Road improvements and
construction of the drive to public standards, due to
ti
Continued
economic reasons. He explained that the 50 foot turn -around
or loop would eliminate the project. He was asked to meet
with the Engineering Staff regarding this request.
The Committee identified the issues to be addressed as:
(1) construction of public standards on the drive; (2)
waivers of pipe -stem length and lot frontage on a dedicated
street; (3) dumpster location; (4) utility easement
location; (5) meeting of requirements on -site for Lot 2.
The Sewer Department representative stated that sewer was
available, but there was currently none available to the
site.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (November 15, 1988)
Mr. Steven Bonds, Agent, and Mr. Mark Spradley, Attorney,
represented the Developer. Mr. Spradley felt that all of
the issues regarding parking, easements and signature of the
owner of Lot 2 had been addressed. He submitted a plat with
that signature.
Mr. Bonds stated that they are revising their application to
eliminate request for waivers to Hinson Road improvements
and the construction of the access drive. Several other
waivers were requested. They included: (1) the waiver of
the requirement that each lot abut a public street, since
Lot 2 does not meet that requirement; (2) six foot
screening; and (3) intrusion within the 15 foot undisturbed
buffer area by a drive. Staff was not opposed to the
granting of these waivers.
A motion for approval of the plat and waivers was made and
passed by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.