HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0907 Staff AnalysisFebruary 12, 1991
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: S-907
NAME: Lot 1, Saxton's Second Addition
LOCATION: 2923 West 60th Street
DEVELOPER:
LARRY E. & RHONDA R. KUCA
5000 Ridgefield Lane
Little Rock, AR 72211
821-3338
ENGINEER:
ALLAN CURRY
1611 North Main
North Little Rock, AR 72114
372-2131
AREA: 3.4299 Ac. NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
ZONING: I-2 PROPOSED USES: Industrial Building (1)
PLANNING DISTRICT: 65th Street East
CENSUS TRACT: 20.02
VARIANCES REQUESTED:
1. Exemption from street, curb and gutter and drainage
requirement
2. Sidewalks
3. Single lots
PLAT DEFICIENCIES:
1. Source of contours (Ordinance No. 15,929)
2. Adequate physical descriptions of all monuments,
indicating size, type of material and construction
thereof
3. Place a new certificate of preliminary surveying
accuracy as shown in Ordinance No. 15,929
A. PROPOSALIREOUEST:
This proposal consists of platting one large lot,
approximately 3.4 acres to comply with subdivision
ordinances, so any future purchaser may obtain a
building permit.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
This site is currently covered with shrub brush and
several small trees. The adjacent streets are
developed to the county standards.
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO 1 (Continued)
C. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Excavation and detention ordinances apply. Engineering
does not object to the improvement waivers requested.
D. ISSUES LEGAL TECHNICAL DESIGN:
There are no issues associated with this plat.
E. ANALYSIS•
The Planning Staff finds little issue with the plat.
It is well drafted and has few deficiencies.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the plat, subject to the
minor modifications.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE MEETING
(January 31, 1991)
The applicant was present. This matter was discussed
briefly. Mr. Curry indicated that the staff recommendation
presented no problem. He agreed to revise the preliminary
plat and submit it before the Planning Commission meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
(February 12, 1991)
There were no objectors in attendance. The application was
represented. After a brief discussion, the Commission
determined it appropriate to place this item on the consent
agenda for approval. A motion was made to that effect and
passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays, and 1 absei.t.
1