Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0959-1 Staff AnalysisDecember 15, 1992 ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: S-959 NAME: Belcher Mobile Home Park/Plat LOCATION: North side of Grant Lane, approximately 250 feet east of Sandstone Drive (East off of Arch Street Pike) DEVELOPER• ENGINEER• ROBERT BELCHER LAHA ENGINEERS 9310 Hilaro Springs Road P. O. Box 9251 Little Rock, AR 72209 Little Rock, AR 72219 562-4765 565-7384 AREA: 5.1 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: Outside City Limits PLANNING DISTRICT: No. 14 CENSUS TRACT: 40.03 VARIANCES REQUESTED: PROPOSED USES: A six unit mobile home park 1. To be relieved of a requirement for filing a subdivision plat. 2. To be relieved of construction requirements for Grant Lane. 3. To be relieved of a requirement for paving the service drive, interior to the development serving the several mobile homes. 4. To be permitted to develop a mobile home park with a pipe -stem access to Sandstone Drive in as much as Grant Lane is not a public street. STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: The owner proposes to place six mobile homes on the site in three phases. The first phase consists of four mobile homes and the retention of the existing residence. The second phase consists of a fifth mobile home and the third phase will be the sixth unit. The site is partially developed. Access will be by way of a private drive, now gravel over an existing gas pipeline easement. Water service will be by way of wells on -site or Little Rock Water Works if such can be arranged. The sewer system will be by septic tanks on -site, tests have been performed to provide for site location for the septic system. 1 December 151 1992 ITEM NO.: 7 Cont. FILE NO.: S-959 A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: This applicant proposes the development of a mobile home park without benefit of what are normally considered modern development standards. He proposes the introduction of a gravel driveway and gravel parking pads for each of the mobile homes. He proposes a utility system which will provide water, a septic tank, an electrical service to each of the units. Legal access to this site is over a 20 foot pipe -stem which this property owner controls running to Sandstone Drive, approximately 250 feet. The physical reality of access to this property is Grant Lane which lies approximately 20 feet south of the pipe -stem, and is owned by property owners at the east end of Grant Lane. This is a community access drive which at the current time has been proposed for dedication to the county. There is no resolution in sight. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site has been partially cleared. There are some trees remaining. The property has several grades with a central valley drainage area running to the northeast. The only physical improvements are small outbuildings and one existing mobile home. C. ENGINEERING UTILITY COMMENTS: Public Works reports that improvements will be required for Grant Lane unless these are deferred by the Board of Directors and onlv if the road is dedicated. The Little Rock Waste Water Utility reports that Little Rock Sewer System is not available in this area of the county. Little Rock Water Works reports a main extension will be required if the property is subdivided. An acreage charge of $100 per acre applies. Water Works additionally reports that this owner has signed the preannexation agreement which is a requirement in order to obtain Little Rock Water service. D. ISSUES/LEGAL/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning staffs review of this applicant's unscaled site plan, which he prepared based upon a survey by his engineer is that it does not do the job. The following are the areas which staff feels should be resolved prior to the approval of a mobile home park on this property. 1. The interior access road as proposed will be a gravel road presumably without a proper base and stabilized drainage relationship. The ordinance requires a 27 foot E December 15, 1992 ITEM NO.: 7 Cont. FILE NO.: 5-959 all-weather paved roadway servicing each of the units, with a paved parking pad for each mobile home. This interior roadway is provided over an easement which is controlled by an interstate gas transmission company. Their specific review and approval of the construction of a drive will be required and documented for our file prior to signing any final plat. 2. Grant Lane, which is the principal access to this property and lots to the east and south, is not a dedicated county road. It is the understanding of Planning staff that the owners along this street were told in July of 1992 what to expect in order to dedicate to the county and build the roadway to county road standards. As of this writing, the roadway has not been dedicated. 3. No boundary screening or fencing has been indicated on the site plan as required by ordinance. This is required for adjacent existing single family development. 4. Little Rock Ordinance requires a storage area for placement of boats, campers and other personal storage be indicated on the plan. 5. The provision of 25 feet of setback on all sides from the property line is required by ordinance. On unit No. 1 at the southwest corner of the site, it is approximately 20 feet from the right-of-way and property line. On the west this unit is approximately 20 feet from the west property boundary. The area apparently identified for parking along the entrance drive is some 15 feet from the front property line along Grant Lane. 6. The on -site utility system is not detailed; however, it is understood that water and electric will be the total utility service. Their locations should be indicated. 7. A driveway should be indicated on the plan along with a parking space for each of the dwelling units. 8_ The Subdivision Committee should make a determination as to whether notice to adjacent property owners is required of this applicant as a site plan. If the Committee determines a plat is mandated.,. then the notice requirement is mandatory bylaw. E. ANALYSIS: The Planning staff's review of this proposal is incomplete due to our inability to thoroughly review the owner's proposal. The sketch plan that has been offered is exactly that. A 3 December 15, 1992 ITEM NO.: 7 Cont. FILE NO.: S--959 sketch plan is very sparse in dimensions. The exact type of material and procedure for building the internal driveway has not been offered, and in general this appears to be a typical rural type mobile home park without standards which would normally be required to meet the urban development requirements. It appears from our observation of the neighborhood and driving through the several adjacent streets that a number of these types of mobile home parks have been developed over the years that they develop with the end result being a less than quality development standard for those persons who must occupy the mobile home site. It is the impression of the staff from the several discussions with Mr. Belcher that this is a very marginal development and even minor cost beyond some gravel and several septic tanks would cause the demise of the development. It is the view of Planning staff that this area of the county will continue to develop in the haphazard fashion which has occurred unless specific remedy is offered by the City of Little Rock as this is our jurisdictional area. However in the absence of building code, zoning regulations and other enforcement tools, many of these kinds of projects are developed without our knowledge utilizing on -site water and septic systems. The decision before the Planning Commission is to allow this type of development to continue or to maintain ordinance standards and require this owner to expend a significant number of dollars. There is perhaps some middle ground on several of the improvement issues such as the amount of pavement, the exact type of pavement and perhaps phasing of the several requirements. However, the street issue cannot be overcome by simple waivers by the Planning Commission and City Board. The street which services this property is in fact private property owned by other nearby land owners. Until the issue is resolved and a proper county road is constructed, this application is inappropriate. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of the application as presented. Staff suggest that if Mr. Belcher wants to pursue this item further, that he reassess his participation in the costs factor of developing land. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (NOVEMBER 25, 1992) Mr. Belcher was present representing his application. The Planning staff presented the 12 or so items of concern developed in their review of the proposal. A lengthy discussion then followed 4 December 15, 1992 ITEM No.: 7 (Cont.) FILENO.: S--959 involving many questions concerning the current state of Grant Road and who owns the land. The Committee offered concerns about developing this mobile home park on what is a private roadway, and a pipe -stem frontage for this lot. Mr. Belcher identified his problem with regulations being one of not having the capability or desire to spend large number of dollars building a roadway to serve this mobile home park. When in fact his driveway is at the west end of the improvements and his tenants would not have use of these improvements. Mr. Belcher indicated that he desired to proceed with his application to the Commission with the several waivers which are required. He indicated that he desired to do this project as has been filed. A lengthy discussion by members of the Subdivision Committee resulting in direction to Mr. Belcher that he should at least pay the filing fee of $102.00 and provide the certified notice to abutting property owners as required by the Bylaws. It was evident that the holiday circumstance and the time frame between Subdivision Committee and public hearing will not allow the 15 days to be accomplished for notice. However, Mr. Belcher was instructed to proceed with the idea that the Commission could perhaps waive one or two days of the 15 day notice. Mr. Belcher accepted this direction and asked that staff guide him in dealing with the notice to property owners. After_ a brief discussion concerning Committee determined to forward this for resolution. the staff's assistance, the item to the full Commission 9 V 2.5oIf 6,7AVr- LAViF(UNDEDI(:q'TED) TRS PD CT ��sc #3 c�ovc%pn+cf, Site Plan Review 'S CL I AI, G�cr.�.✓f ,Qo�n W/ Ty r�p� Belcher M.H. Park } ITEM NO. Site Plan N 7 S-959