HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-1081 Staff AnalysisJanuary 30, 1996
ITEM NO.: B FILE NO.: S-1081
NAME; KAUFMAN ADDITION -- PRELIMINARY PLAT
LOCATION: At the southeast corner of W. 7th. St. and S. Jones St.
DEVELOPER: ENGINEER:
Joe White
KAUFMAN LUMBER CO. WHITE-DATERS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
5100 Asher Ave. 401 S. Victory St.
Little Rock; AR 72204 Little Rock, AR 72201
568-3182 374-1666
AREA: 5.5 ACRES
ZONING• I-2
PLANNING DISTRICT: 9
CENSUS TRACT: 14
NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0
PROPOSED USES: Lumber Yard
VARIANCES REQUESTED:
1) Approval of a waiver of right-of-way dedication on W. 7th. St.
and for the Mid -Town Expressway.
2) Approval of a waiver of street improvements on Jones St.
3) Approval of a waiver of sidewalk requirements on W. 7th. St.
and on Jones St.
4) Approval of a waiver of the requirement to provide on -site
stormwater detention.
5) Approval of a variance from the building setback
requirements for front, rear, and rear yard regulations.
6) Approval of an access easement across Lot 2 for access to
Lot 1.
STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL:
Proposed is the subdivision of the 5.5 acre site which, in the
past, was a building materials sales business, with outside
storage, and a millwork fabrication shop. The division is sought
in order to create a two -lot subdivision, so that the rear,
southern -most, lot can be divided from the remainder of the
property for sale to and use by another lumber yard operation.
The existing lumber sheds are to be used for lumber storage.
January 30, 1996
SUBDIVISION
ITEM N B (Cont.) FILE NQ 9-1Q81
Access to the southern -most lot is to be by way of an access
easement across the northern -most lot. The location of this
easement coinsides with the existing access drive which currently
serves the single site and which provides access to the interior
of the site. Off -site improvements to streets are not planned,
and waivers are requested from the requirement to: a) dedicate
additional right-of-way along the W. 7th. St. frontage of the
property and to dedicate right-of-way for the Mid -Town Express-
way; b) make half -street improvements along the Jones St.
boundary of the site; c) provide sidewalks along W. 7th. St.
and Jones St.; and d) provide on -site stormwater detention. A
variance from the front, rear, and side building setback
regulations is requested to permit the existing buildings to
remain in their present location. Approval of an access easement
is requested to provide access to Lot 1 across Lot 2.
A. PROPOSALIRE UEST:
Review and approval of a preliminary plat by the Planning
Commission is requested.
Review and a recommendation of approval to the Board of
Directors is requested for waivers from the requirement to:
a) dedicate additional right-of-way along the W. 7th. St.
frontage of the property and for the Mid -Town Expressway;
b) make half -street improvements along the Jones St.
boundary of the subdivision; c) provide sidewalks along W.
7th. St. and Jones St.; and d) provide on -site stormwater
detention.
Review and approval by the Planning Commission is requested
for variances from the building setback requirements for the
front, rear, and side building line regulations in order for
the existing buildings to remain in their current location.
Review and approval by the Planning Commission is requested
for access to Lot 1 to be by way of an access easement
across Lot 2.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a developed property, but it is not, for the
most part, being used at this time. It was the Monarch
Mills site, which is no longer in operation at the location.
The existing zoning of the tract is I-2. The I-2 district
extends eastward and southward to the abutting railroad and
I-630 properties. To the north is an I-2 corner to the
northwest and R-2 property to the northeast. Across Jones
St. to the west is C-31 R-3, R-4, and R-5 property.
2
January 30, 1996
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (ont ) FILE NO.: 5-1081
C. ENGINEERING/UTILITY COMMENTS:
Public Works Staff comments:
The site is in the floodplain, and is adjacent to the
floodway; a SFHA development permit is required. The
base flood elevations should be identified on the plat.
All proposed structures, and those where significant
improvements are proposed, must meet minimum finish
floor elevation or requirements for flood proofing.
All permits and a grading permit should be completed
before work begins.
The Mid -Town Expressway, as provided for in the Master
Street Plan, has a 200 foot right-of-way requirement.
Dedicate the required right-of-way, or seek a wavier.
Seventh St. is a collector. Dedicate 5 feet of
additional right-of-way, with a 20 foot radial
dedication at the corner, or seek a waiver.
Jones St. is substandard and street improvements will
be required. Provide half street improvements, or seek
a waiver.
Sidewalks, with ramps according to Ordinance, are
required on both streets.
Expansion of facilities on the new lots will require
the stormwater detention analysis.
Water Works comments that the Fire Department needs to
evaluate the site to determine whether additional fire
protection will be required. If there are any modifications
to the fire protection system, installation of a back flow
preventer will be required.
Wastewater comments that a sewer main extension, with an
easement, will be required for service to Lot 2.
Arkansas Power and Light Co. will require a 15 foot easement
around the entire perimeter of the subdivision, and a 15
foot easement from the east property line to and along the
north face of the southern -most warehouse building.
Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. approved the submittal.
Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. approved the submittal.
The Fire Department approved the submittal.
3
January 30, 1996
SUBDIVISIN
ITEM NO,: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1081
D. I UE LE AL TECHNI AL DE I N:
Sec. 31-87 requires that, in addition to the information
furnished: a) the proposed type of subdivision is to be
indicated; b) the address, as well as the name, of the
owner of record, and the source of title, are to be
provided; c) the lot sizes are to be shown; and, d) the
source of water supply and the means of wastewater disposal
are to be indicated.
Sec. 31-89 requires that: a) the names of all recorded
subdivisions abutting the proposed subdivision, with plat
book and page number or instrument number, and the names of
owners of all land abutting the proposed plat area, are to
be shown; b) all bearings and distances for all boundary
lines, with ties to all corners of record are to be shown;
c) sufficient curve data is to be provided to adequately
describe curves, with the minimum information being the
radius, arc distance, delta angle, and chord bearing and
distance; d) where boundary lines are common with
previously platted properties, record bearings and distances
shall be shown; e) accurate and adequate description of all
monuments are to be noted, showing the size and type of
material of the monuments; f) the zoning classifications of
the tract of and of all abutting land is to be shown; and,
g) proposed PAGIS monuments are to be shown.
Sec. 31-91 requires that the Certificate of Preliminary
Engineering Accuracy be executed.
Sec. 36-320 requires, for I-2 zoning districts, a front
building setback of 50 feet; a rear yard of 25 feet; and, a
side yard of 15 feet. The existing buildings are already
closer to W. 7th. St. than 50 feet, and, when the property
is divided, an existing warehouse building will have a lot
line bisecting the building. Rear and side yard line
requirements will not be met once the new lot line is
platted. The Planning Commission needs to approval
variances to the setback regulations, so that the existing
buildings will not be non -conforming structures.
An access easement needs to be platted to extend along the
Lot 1-Lot 2 line so that landscaping requirements will not
be imposed along the lot line.
The Building Codes staff needs to review the proposed
subdivision and approve the means to be taken to meet the
Fire Prevention Code where the warehouse building straddles
the lot line.
4
January 30, 1996
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-103
E. ANALYSIS•
There are several deficiencies in the submittal, as cited
above, which need to be addressed. Approval of the
preliminary plat should be -conditioned upon these
deficiencies being remedied.
Each of the two lots has required frontage on a public
street. Because of the desire to use the existing drive
entrance to the property off W. 7th. St., an access easement
across Lot 2 is requested. No access to Lot 1 from its
boundary street, Jones St., is proposed.
Because no construction is proposed at this time, and
because the buildings and access are already established, it
is requested that no off -site improvements be imposed with
this subdivision.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat,
conditioned on approval of the requested waivers and
variance, or meeting the ordinance requirements in these
areas.
Staff recommends approval of waiver request for dedication
of right-of-way on W. 7th. St. and for the Mid -Town
Expressway.
Staff recommends denial of the waiver request for half
street improvements on Jones St.
Staff recommends denial of the waiver request for sidewalks
on W. 7th. St. and on Jones St.
Staff recommends denial of the waiver request for on -site
stormwater detention, noting that this requirement would
only be imposed if new building or parking lot construction
is instituted.
Staff recommends approval of a variance from the building
setback requirements for front, rear, and rear yard
regulations, in order for the existing buildings to remain
in their current locations.
Staff recommends approval of an access easement across Lot 2
for access to Lot 1.
5
January 30, 1996
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1081
5DBDIVISION COMMITTEE QOMMENT: (OCTOBER 12, 1995)
Mr. Joe White, with White-Daters & Associates, Inc., was present.
Staff reviewed with the Committee the applicant's proposal.
Staff and the Committee members reviewed with Mr. White the
comments contained in the discussion outline. Mr. White
confirmed that all needed information would be furnished and all
deficiencies would be remedied. The various waivers and the
variances were discussed, and Mr. White responded that he would
be conferring with Traffic Engineering on the various concerns.
The Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission for the
public hearing.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 31, 1995)
Staff reported that the applicant had submitted a letter
requesting that the hearing of this item be deferred until the
December 12, 1995 Commission meeting. Staff reported, however,
that the Commission Bylaws require requests for deferral be
submitted at least five (5) working days prior to the Commission
hearing, and that the request for deferral had been made on
Monday, October 30th., one (1) working day prior to the hearing.
A waiver of the Bylaws provision, staff explained, would need to
be approved by the Commission.
A motion was made and seconded to waive the Bylaws provision
requiring submission of deferral requests at least five (5)
working days prior the Commission hearing, and the waiver was
approved with the vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent, and
0 abstentions.
The deferral was included on the Consent Agenda, and the deferral
was approved in the approval of the Consent Agenda with the vote
of 9 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent, and 0 abstentions.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 12, 1995)
Staff reported that the applicant had submitted a letter, dated
November 17, 1995, asking that the hearing of this item be
deferred until the Commission meeting of January 30, 1996. Staff
recommended approval of the deferral. The requested deferral was
included on the Consent Agenda for approval of the deferral, and
was approved with the vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstentions, and
1 absent.
0
January 30, 1996
SQBDTVISIO�
ITEM B FILE O.: -1081
PLANNING COMMISSIgN ACTTO (JANUARY 30, 1996)
Staff presented the item, but indicated that there were issues
which had not been addressed by the applicant. Mr. Joe white,
with White-Daters & Associates, Inc., representing the applicant,
indicated that he had not been able to get confirmation from his
client on how to proceed with the issues to be resolved. He said
that, since the item had already been deferred twice, and that no
further deferrals could be granted to accommodate the applicant,
he would ask that the item be withdrawn. A motion was made and
seconded to withdraw the item, and the motion carried with the
vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent, and 0 abstentions.
7