HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0938 Staff Analysis1. Meeting Date: February 18, 1992
2. Case No.: S-938
3. Request: Street Improvements Deferral
4. Location: Lot 3R, Hoggar's Subdivision
5. Owner/Applicant: Robert Brown - DCI, Inc.
6. Existing Status: Single Family residential
7. Proposed Use: Single Family residential
8. Staff Recommendation: Approval of the replat with the
recommendation of street improvement deferral.
9. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval as recommended
by staff.
10. Conditions or Issues Remaining to be Resolved: None
11. Right -of -Way Issues: None
12. Recommendation Forwarded With: A vote of 9 ayes, 1 nay and
1 absent
13. Objectors: Joseph Brown and Virginia Miles
14. Neighborhood Plan: River Mountain - 1
ORDINANCE
AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR A DEFERRAL
OF CONSTRUCTION OF STREET AND SIDEWALK
IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED BY CHAPTER 31 OF
THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF
LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS, AS APPLIED TO
THE REPLAT OF LOT 3R OF THE HOGGAR'S
SUBDIVISION.
WHEREAS, the current owner of Lot 3R and Hoggar's Subdivision
has made application for the replat of said lot for the purpose of
accommodating/expansion of a branch bank building and parking lot;
and
WHEREAS, the City does not deem it necessary at the present
time for the owner to provide additional street and sidewalk
improvements to the replatted area along Lot 3R frontage on Jerry
Drive; and
WHEREAS, future development of the replatted lot or change to
other than residential use will require the imposition of
additional street and sidewalk improvements on the owner.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS:
SECTION 1. That the construction of street improvements under
LRC § 31-397 and sidewalk improvements under LRC § 31-402 are
hereby deferred as applied to Lot 3R of the replat of Hoggar's
Subdivision.
SECTION 2. That the owner shall be required to construct
street and sidewalk improvements in the replatted area pursuant to
ordinance standards at such time in the future when the replatted
lot is redeveloped.
SECTION 3. This ordinance shall be filed in the deed records
of the Pulaski County Circuit Clerk.
SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days
from and after its passage.
PASSED:
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
APPROVED:
January 14, 1992
ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: Z-5350-A
NAME: Worthen Bank - Short -form Amended PCD
LOCATION: SE Corner of Jerry Drive and Highway 10
DEVELOPER:
ENGINEER•
WORTHEN BANK AND TRUST DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS, INC.
200 West Capitol Avenue 2024 Arkansas Valley Dr., #306
Little Rock, AR 72201 Little Rock, AR 72212-4142
378-1000 221-7880
AREA: ± 1.0 Ac. NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
ZONING: PCD and R-2 PROPOSED USES: Branch Bank
PLANNING DISTRICT: 1
CENSUS TRACT: 42.05
VARIANCES REQUESTED: None
STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL
The developer for the branch of Worthen Bank wishes to revise the
Planned Commercial Development on this project. The proposed
changes consist of an increase in land area, revisions to drives
and parking arrangements. There will be no changes to the
building or Highway 10 frontage landscaping design.
The purpose of this revision is to create additional parking on
the site and provide more spaces near the building entry.
Additional land area will be purchased from the adjoining
residential lot.
A. PROPOSAWREQUEST:
This application involves a request to modify the existing
Worthen Bank's PCD site plan. The proposal is that the
existing parking arrangements and drives be modified to a
plan which will include additional land purchases from the
adjoining residential lot. Also, there will be no changes
to buildings and Highway 10 frontage landscaping design.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
This site is currently under construction for the future
Worthen Bank branch. The lot immediately south, also partly
involved in this PUD, is occupied by a single family
residence. The roadways are in place which will provide the
principal means of access to the bank and the house.
1
January 14, 1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Continued) FILE NO.: Z-5350-A
C. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
There were no engineering comments.
D. ISSUES LEGAL TECHNICAL DESIGN:
The only issue determined by the staff in this area that
requires resolution, is the street improvement along Jerry
Drive in front of the residential lot which is involved in
the revision of this PCD.
E. ANALYSIS•
The staff feels that the proposed land expansion on the bank
site will not have an adverse impact on the surrounding area.
The bank operation is quiet and has limited hours for the
establishment which will be an asset to the neighborhood.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval subject to the comments made above.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:
(DECEMBER 19, 1991)
Mr. R. Brown was present representing Worthen Bank. Staff
explained to the applicant the issue of street improvements for
the abutting residential lot. The applicant agreed to file the
replat as a part of the PCD, dedicate the right-of-way on Jerry
Drive, but asked for waiver of the street improvements along
Lot 3 frontage on Jerry Drive. The Planning staff suggested
deferral of the street improvements along Lot 3 frontage until
Lot 3 develops for more than residential use. The matter was
forwarded to the full Commission for final recommendation.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
(JANUARY 14, 1992)
The applicant was represented by Mr. Robert Brown from DCI, Inc.
The Planning staff offered a lengthy history and an explanation of
this case. Tad Borkowski of the Planning staff pointed out
changes that had been made on the site plan, and also he presented
the replat which is a part of the revised PCD.
Staff also indicated that the applicant asked for the street
improvement deferral along Lot 3R frontage on Jerry Drive until
the lot develops to a higher use other than residential.
A lengthy discussion of the revised PCD followed with several
Commissioners asking questions concerning the screening, street
improvements and the parking layout. The staff explained that the
2
January 14, 1992
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 [Continued] FILE NO.: Z-5350-A
screening would meet the requirements of the Landscape Ordinance,
and it had been approved by Bob Brown, Plans Specialist.
Mr. Robert Brown, the architect for the project, made a
presentation. He discussed the project and offered to revise the
plan. He also stated that the revision would cover all of the
issues pointed out by staff in this review as well as the original
PCD requirements.
The Chairman then asked for comments from the neighborhood. There
were two people in opposition of the project, Mr. Joseph Brown and
Mrs. Virginia Miles. Mr. Brown, a builder, from Westbury Drive
was concerned about the commercial expansion along Jerry Drive.
Mrs. Miles, a resident of Westbury Subdivision, who owns property
directly abutting the PCD on the west and was concerned about the
landscaping, buffering and fencing.
Robert Brown, the architect for this project, stated that the
landscape and fence will meet the ordinance requirements. Then,
Mrs. Miles suggested to placing the larger trees rather than two
inch caliper. Mr. Brown agreed to place the trees which are
larger than three inch caliper in southeast corner of the site.
The Chairman then asked for other questions. Commissioner
Nicholson called the question. A motion was made to approve the
PCD as filed. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 1 nay and
1 absent.
3