HomeMy WebLinkAboutpc_05 11 2000subLITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION HEARING
SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD
MAY 11,2000
4:00 P.M.
I.Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being eight in number.
II.Approval of the Minutes of the March 30,2000 and
April 13,2000 Meetings.The minutes were approved
as mailed.
III.Members Present:Hugh EarnestBillRector
Bob Lowry
Craig Berry
Pam Adcock
Rohn Muse
Judith Faust
Richard Downing
Open Position
Members Absent:Mizan Rahman
Obray Nunnley
City Attorney:Stephen Giles
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION AGENDA
MAY 11,2000
I.DEFERRED ITEMS:
A.Claremore Court —Preliminary Plat (S-1272)
B.Hastings Industrial Park —Preliminary Plat (S-1076-A)
C.Hughey's Replat —Preliminary Plat (S-1275)
D.Trammell —Short-Form PD-0 (Z-6831)
E.Oak Place Court —Short-Form PRD (Z-6832)
F.Land Alteration and Landscape Ordinance Review
Task Force
II.PRELIMINARY PLATS:
1.Point West Addition (Tracts B and C)—Preliminary
Plat (S-54-Z)—Time Extension
2.Cere's Addition (Lots 13 and 14)—Waiver of
Subdivision Requirements (S-1282)
3.Little Rock Port Industrial Park —Revised Preliminary
Plat (S-957-D)
4.Autumn Subdivision —Preliminary Plat (S-1096-B)
5.Ranch Highlands Addition —Preliminary Plat (S-1278)
6.Oaks Bluff Addition —Preliminary Plat (S-1279)
7.Valley Falls Estates —Preliminary Plat (S-1280)
III .PLZLSNED ZONING DEVELOPMENTS:
8.Yarnell —Short-Form POD (Z-3500-C)
8.1.LUOO-03-01 —A Land Use Plan Amendment in
West Little Rock Planning District from Single
Family to Suburban Office
Agenda,Page Two
III.PLANNED ZONING DEVELOPMENTS:(Cont.)
9.Bryant —Revised PCD (Z-5505-I)
10.Commercial Development Associates —Short-Form PCD
(Z-6629-A)
11.Mini-Storages at Chenal —Short-Form PD-C (Z-6829)
11.1.LUOO-19-01 —A Land Use Plan Amendment in the
Chenal Planning District from Office to
Commercial
12.THERE IS NO ITEM 12.
13.Parents and Friends of Children,Inc.—Short-Form PRD
(Z-6847)
14.Pleasantree 4 Addition —Short-Form PRD (Z-6848)
15.Mother's Center —Short-Form POD (Z-6850)
15.1.LUOO-08-01 —A Land Use Plan Amendment in the
Central City Planning District from Single
Family to Office
16.Pleasant Ridge North Office Building —Short-Form POD
(Z-1716-E)
IV.SITE PLAN REVIEW:
17.The Cottages (Otter Creek)—Subdivision Site Plan
Review (S-1281)
18.Arkansas Systems (Lot 1)—Zoning Site Plan Review
(Z-6051-F)
19.Harris/Hathaway Office Building —Zoning Site Plan
Review (Z-6849)
V.CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS:
20 't.Theresa'Catholic Church —Revised Conditional
Use Permit (Z-4586-A)
20.1.Z-4586-B 6219 Baseline Road C-4 to R-2
Agenda,Page Three
V.CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS:(Cont.)
21.Walnut Valley Christian Academy -Revised Conditional
Use Permit (Z-6079-C)
22.Lutheran High School —Revised Conditional Use Permit
(Z-6425-A)
23.Lovelace Day Care —Conditional Use Permit (Z-6426-A)
24.Cleo's Furniture —Conditional Use Permit (Z-6841)
25.Larry Freeman —Conditional Use Permit (Z-6846)
26.Earlena Sheppard —Conditional Use Permit (Z-6851)
27.Hall Day Care —Revised Conditional Use Permit
(Z-6175-A)
28.Gary Tidball —Conditional Use Permit (Z-6845)
VZ.OTHER MATTERS:
29.Nextel Partners —Tower Use Permit (Z-6275-C)
30.Alley Right-of-Way Abandonment —Block 330,Original
City of Little Rock (G-23-302)
P
T
J
O
»
K
C
U
,
/
g
g
Q
a
I
Y
L
R
N
T
S
C
u
l
S
T
E
W
A
R
T
(
D
S
U
L
L
I
V
A
N
C
D
d
0
2
p
V
i
M
g
)
P
l
+
4
h
J
P
g
C
O
O
V
8
W
M
Y
R
I
D
G
E
Q
T
Y
U
N
I
T
S
c
~
1
g
'
R
O
O
N
E
Y
P
A
R
H
A
M
Q
Q
T
R
o
l
Z
o
S
S
S
$
S
H
A
C
K
L
E
P
O
R
O
S
A
l
l
9
5
O
l
H
I
N
K
E
R
E
S
E
R
V
Q
R
P
g
)
J
L
A
I
N
B
A
R
R
O
W
C
O
C
D
C
H
I
C
O
T
O
M
S
S
I
P
P
I
H
U
G
H
E
J
'
E
Y
E
R
N
G
S
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
9
U
I
A
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
o
P
A
R
K
M
&
o
»
(
A
o
E
»
l
S
S
C
O
T
T
A
N
I
L
T
O
N
4
4
U
1
t
O
P
I
N
E
-
a
C
I
C
T
)
S
O
T
S
T
P
I
K
E
h
J
W
O
O
O
R
O
W
K
y
p
L
E
O
P
u
l
M
L
K
I
N
G
9
F
c
E
I
C
H
E
S
R
O
R
E
H
E
R
l
g
O
A
O
W
A
Y
M
A
I
N
o
g
G
T
x
A
l
h
J
U
3
G
E
R
M
A
N
Q
'
C
T
R
A
Z
I
E
R
P
I
K
E
i
l
l
0
C
A
R
3
O
O
O
May 11,20
ITEM NO.:A FILE NO.:S-1272
NAME:Claremore Court —Preliminary Plat
LOCATION:West end of Claremore Court,at Beasley Drive
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Norman Holcomb McGetrick &McGetrick
2311 Biscayne Dr.319 E.Markham St.,Ste.202
Little Rock,AR 72227 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:1.23 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:7 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:MF-6
PLANNING DISTRICT:2
CENSUS TRACT:22.04
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
A.PROPOSAL
The applicant proposes to subdivide 1.23 acres into seven
(7)lots to allow for the development of single familyresidences.The applicant proposes to access the lots byutilizinganexistingpavedaccesseasementfromClaremoreDrive.All of the lots will be final platted at the sametime.
The property is zoned MF-6,which does not allow single-
family residential development.The applicant will need torezonethepropertytoR-2.
May 11,2G
SUBDZVZSZON
ZTEM NO.:A (Cont.)FZLE NO.:S-1272-
B.EXZSTZNG CONDZTZONS:
The property is undeveloped and mostly wooded.The
property generally slopes downward from Claremore Drive to
the north.There are single family residences to the
south,west and northwest,with a multifamily development
to the northeast.
C.NEZGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received no comment from the
neighborhood.The Echo Valley,Sturbridge and Robinwood
Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public
hearing.
D.ENGZNEERZNG COMMENTS:
PUBLZC WORKS CONDZTZONS:
1.Developer will be responsible for all adjacent street
improvements,which includes Claremore Drive frontage.
2.Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
these streets including 4-foot sidewalks with planned
development.
3.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
4.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
E.UTZLZTZES AND FZRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNZNG:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
APRL:No Comment received.
Arkla:No Comment.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:A water main extension and private fire hydrant
will be required.
Fire Department:Place fire hydrant per city code.
Provide 50 foot turning radius for cul-de-sac with no
parking.Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752 for details.
Count Plannin :No Comment.
CATA:Site is served by Route ¹22.Approved for transit
purposes.
2
May 11,2L
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1272-
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
No Comment.
Landsca e Issues:
No Comment.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff
on December 14,1999.The revised plan shows many of the
additional notations as recpxired.The following items need
to be shown on a revised preliminary plat drawing:
1.Source of title.
2.Sources of title for abutting recorded subdivisions.
3.Move building lines to provide 60 foot lot width (chord
distance)for Lots 14 and 15.
As noted at the Subdivision Committee meeting,the
remainder of the property that this 1.23 acres came from
must be part of this plat,or the applicant must provide
deed information (history)showing that this parcel has
been separately owned for at least ten (10)years.The
applicant must also provide access easement deed
documentation for the access to the condo development to
the north.These issues must be resolved prior to the
Commission taking action on this application.
As noted in paragraph A.of this report,this property is
zoned MF-6,which does not allow single-family residential
development.The applicant will need to rezone the
property to R-2 as a condition of the plat approval.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat subjecttothefollowingconditions:
1.Compliance with the recpxirements as noted in paragraph D
and E of this report.2.The property must be rezoned to R-2 prior to a final platbeingsignedbystaff.
3
May 11,2(
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1272-
3.A revised preliminary plat with the additional notations,
as requested in paragraph G.of this report,must be
submitted to staff.
4.The issues relating to property ownership and access
easement to the condo development must be resolved prior
to the Commission acting on this application.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(DECEMBER 9,1999)
Pat McGetrick and Norman Holcomb were present,representing the
application.Staff described the proposed preliminary plat,
noting several items which needed to be shown on a revised plat
drawing.Staff also noted that easement deed and ownership
documentation needed to be provided by the applicant.Staff
noted that the property was zoned MF-6,which did not allow
single family residential development.Staff informed the
Committee that the preliminary plat application needed to be
deferred so that the applicant could file a rezoning application
(R-2)for this property.It was determined that the rezoning
could be made a condition of the plat approval.
In response to a question from staff,Mr.McGetrick noted that
all of the lots would be final platted at the same time.
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.The
primary focus of the discussion related to the proposed access
to the lots.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the issue to the
full Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 6,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that this item needed to be
deferred due to the fact that there was an outstanding issue
relating to the property's ownership which needed to be
resolved.Staff recommended that this item be deferred to the
February 17,2000 agenda.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion
within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the February 17,2000
agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by
a vote of ll ayes and 0 nays.
4
May 11,2..0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1272-
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(FEBRUARY 17,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had submitted a
letter requesting that this item be deferred to the March 30,
2000 agenda.Staff supported the deferral request.With a vote
of 9 ayes,0 nays,and 2 absent,the Commission voted to waive
their bylaws and accept the deferral request being made less than
five (5)working days prior to the public hearing.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion
within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the March 30,2000
agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by
a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a
letter on March 22,2000 requesting that this application be
deferred to the May 11,2000 agenda.Staff noted that the
applicant,requesting a third deferral,would be required to
renotify abutting property owners.Staff supported the deferral
request.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the
May 11,2000 agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The
motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a
letter on May 11,2000 requesting that this application be
deferred to the June 22,2000 agenda.Staff supported the
deferral request.
With a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent and 1 open position,the
Commission voted to waive the bylaws and accept the request for
deferral,which was made less than five (5)working days prior
to the public hearing.
5
May 11,2L
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1272-
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the
June 22,2000 agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The
motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent and 1 open
position.
6
May 11,20
ITEM NO.:B FILE NO.:S-1076-A
NAME:Hastings Industrial Park —Preliminary Plat
LOCATION:Southeast corner of Interstate 30 and Roosevelt Road
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Moon Realty Company The Mehlburger Firm
2800 S.Vance Street 201 S.Izard Street
Little Rock,AR 72206 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:71.586 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:20 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:I-2/C-3/R-3
PLANNING DISTRICT:7
CENSUS TRACT:5
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None regues ted.
A.PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to subdivide 71.586 acres into 19
lots for future development.Lot 1 of the Hastings
Industrial Park was final platted a number of years ago for
construction of an auto parts store.The current proposed
preliminary plat includes Lots 2-20.The following final
plat phasing plan is proposed:
Phase I —Lots 12-14
Phase II —Lots 15-20
Phase III —Lots 6-11
Phase IV —Lots 2-5
May 11,20
(l.'UBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1076-A-
The applicant has noted that the interior streets within
this subdivision will be held as private and will be gated
at some future time.There is approximately 1,700 linear
feet of internal streets.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
As noted earlier,there is an auto parts store on Lot 1 of
the Hastings Industrial Park Subdivision,with an existing
office/warehouse on Lot 17.There is an existing
industrial use on Lots 18-20 at the northwest corner of the
property.The remainder of the property is undeveloped and
grass covered.
There is railroad right-of-way immediately south of the
site,with I-30 to the west.There is a mixture of
commercial uses along Roosevelt Road to the north,with a
school across Roosevelt Road.There are residential
structures to the east.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received one (1)phone call
from a person requesting information on this application.
The Community Outreach and East of Broadway Neighborhood
Associations were notified of the public hearing.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Roosevelt Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as a
minor arterial.A dedication of right-of-way to 45 feet
from centerline is required.
2.Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
these streets including 5-foot sidewalks both sides with
planned development.Existing improvements must be
repaired to meet City Ordinance.
3.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.Close driveways,which do not meet standard.
4.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.
5.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that
is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to
occupancy.
6.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
2
May 11,20~.
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1076-A-
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a
letter on March 24,2000 requesting that this application be
deferred to the May 11,2000 agenda.The required notices were
not mailed.Staff supported the deferral request.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the
May 11,2000 agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The
motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
Frank Riggins was present,representing the application.There
was one (1)person present with concerns.Staff briefly
described the preliminary plat,with a recommendation of
approval with conditions.
Judy Martin addressed the Commission in opposition to the
proposed preliminary plat.She noted concern with a gas
pipeline in the area.
Jim Lawson,Director of Planning and Development,suggested that
Ms.Martin meet with the City Manager'Office regarding the gas
pipeline issue.
A motion was made to approve the preliminary plat as recommended
by staff.The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays and
2 absent and 1 open position.
5
May 11,2C
ITEM NO.:C FILE NO.:S-1275
NAME:Hughey's Replat —Preliminary Plat
LOCATION:4808 Baseline Road
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Margaret Hughey The Mehlburger Firm
4808 Baseline Road 201 S.Izard Street
Little Rock,AR 72209 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:2.493 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:2 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:R-2/C-1
PLANNING DISTRICT:14
CENSUS TRACT:41.07
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
BACKGROUND:
The 2.493 acre property was recently illegally subdivided by
Richdale Development Co.,with the south portion of the property
being sold to Margaret Hughey.A 25 foot access and utility
easement along the west side of Lot 1 was also recorded to
provide access to Lot 2.
A.PROPOSAL:
The property owners are proposing a preliminary plat for
the property in order to resolve the illegal subdivision
issue.The south 273 feet of the property along with
Margaret Hughey's additional property (immediately east)is
proposed as Lot 1.The remaining north 347 feet is
proposed as Lot 2.
May 11,2.
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1275
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There is an existing structure on Lot 1 which contains a
beauty salon.The remainder of the property is undeveloped
and partially wooded.
There are existing commercial buildings east and west of
the site along the north side of Baseline Road.There are
single family residences to the south across Baseline Road,
with R-2 zoned property to the north.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received one (1)phone call
from a person requesting information on this application.
The Windamere and Upper Baseline Neighborhood Associations
were notified of the public hearing.
D .ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Baseline is listed on the Master Street Plan as a
principal arterial,dedication of right-of-way to 45 feet
from centerline will be required.
2.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.
3.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is
damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
4.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.Close unused driveways.
5.Baseline Road has an average daily traffic counts of
13,000.
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
APSL:No Comment.
Arkla:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment.
Water:This plat creates a landlocked parcel.This will
cause problems in providing water service and fire
protection in the future for any use of Lot 2.
Consideration should be given to providing for each lot
have frontage on a water main and adequate access for
2
May 11,2(i
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1275-
fire protection.Combining Lot 2 with the property to
the west and creating a single parcel would also provide
a possible solution to these problems.
Fire Department:No Comment.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Comment received.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:No Comment.
Landsca e Issues:No Comment.
G.ANALYSIS:
On March 15,2000,the applicant submitted a letter to
staff requesting that this item be deferred to the May 11,
2000 Planning Commission meeting.Staff supports the
deferral as requested.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends deferral of this item to the May 11,2000
Planning Commission meeting.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(MARCH 9,2000)
Larry Lester,Jeremy Ventress and Frank Riggins were present,
representing the application.Staff briefly described the
preliminary plat and noted several items which needed to be
shown on a revised plat drawing.
In response to a question from staff,Mr.Ventress noted that
both lots would be final platted at the same time.
Staff noted that an access drive to Lot 2 must be constructed
when Lot 2 is developed.This issue was briefly discussed.Mr.
Lester noted that he would meet with the other property owner
regarding this issue.
3
May 11,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1275
Tad Borkowski,of Public Works,noted that the westernmost curb
cut needed to be closed,with the only access being the existing
driveway to Lot 1 and the access easement.This issue was
discussed.Mr.Borkowski noted that he would meet with Mr.
Lester on the site and review the driveway locations.
Staff noted that Lot 2 had no street frontage and providing
water service to this lot would be a problem.Staff suggested
creating a pipe stem for Lot 2 (Baseline frontage)or combining
Lot 2 with the property to the west,which had the same
ownership.This issue was discussed.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the preliminary
plat to the full Commission for final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a
letter on March 15,2000 requesting that this application be
deferred to the May 11,2000 agenda.Staff supported the
deferral request.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the
May 11,2000 agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The
motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a
letter on May 5,2000 requesting that this application be
deferred to the June 22,2000 agenda.Staff supported the
deferral request.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the
June 22,2000 agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The
motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent and 1 open
position.
4
May 11,2G
ITEM NO.:D FILE NO.:Z-6831-
NAME:Trammell —Short-Form PD-0
LOCATION:13608 Kanis Road
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Robert Trammell Hope Engineers
22021 Denny Road 406 West South Street
Little Rock,AR 72223 Benton,AR 72015
AREA:2.50 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:R-2 ALLOWED USES:Single Family Residential
PROPOSED USE:Office
VARIANCE S/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1.A deferral is requested for the removal of one (1)of the two
(2)existing driveways from Kanis Road.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone the property at 13608
Kanis Road from R-2 to PD-O.The applicant proposes to
convert the existing single family residence to an office
for a law firm.The applicant,Robert Trammell,notes the
following:
"It is requested that the designation of the
referenced property be modified so as to allow
the structure thereon to be occupied by my law
firm.Including myself,we have three lawyers,
and three staff persons,doing mostly
litigation.The particular sort of litigation,
insurance defense trial work,involves
insignificant traffic and visitors.Our
engagements are more often than not via mail.
Most dealings with parties,witnesses and
May 11,2i
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6831-
opposing attorneys are downtown,and in other
counties."
"The use would seem to be compatible with the
existing commercial and office activity on
Kanis,and this area's transition makes our
move even more suitable."
"The exterior modifications will be limited to
supplemental parking hard surface,the removal
of all of the functionally obsolescent fencing
and outbuildings,paint,and landscaping
restoration."
The applicant notes that the hours of operation will be as
follows:
7:30 a.m.to 5:00 p.m.,Monday through Thursday
8:00 a.m.to 3:00 p.m.,Friday
The applicant is proposing one (1)ground-mounted sign near
the center of the property,to be located at least five (5)
feet back from the front property line (after right-of-way
dedication).It is noted that the sign will be monument-
type,with a maximum height of six (6)feet and a maximum
area of 24 square feet.
The only construction that the applicant is proposing on
the site is the addition of a small parking area on the
west side of the existing business.The parking area will
consist of six (6)spaces,which will accommodate the three
(3)lawyers and three (3)staff persons who will report to
this site.The existing carport will also provide two (2)
parking spaces.The proposed parking area will be screened
from the property to the west with dense evergreen
plantings.
The property currently contains two (2)access drives to
Kanis Road.The Public Works Department is requiring that
one (1)of these drives be eliminated in order to comply
with the ordinance requirements for driveway spacing.The
applicant is requesting a deferral of the requirement to
remove one (1)driveway until Kanis Road is reconstructed.
The existing building,existing drives,proposed parking
area and sign location are noted on the attached site plan.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There is an existing single family structure and accessory
structures on the property.The are two (2)access points
to Kanis Road,connecting via a circular drive.
2
May 11,20~
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6831-
The property to the north contains single family
residences,as does the property to the west.There is an
auto repair shop and single family residences on large lots
to the south across Kanis Road.There is undeveloped
wooded property immediately east,with the Independent Case
Management office building under construction just further
east.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received no comment from the
neighborhood.The Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber
Ridge and Parkway Place Neighborhood Associations were
notified of the public hearing.
D .ENGINEERING COMMENTS
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Kanis Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as a
minor arterial.A dedication of right-of-way to 45 feet
from centerline is required.
2.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.Show parking for employees and customers.
3.Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
this street including 5-foot sidewalk with planned
development.
4.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
5.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
6.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the
Little Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to
Traffic Engineering.
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer not available to this property.Sewer
main extension required with easements if service is
needed from Little Rock Wastewater Utility.
APRL:No Comment.
Arkla:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
3
May 11,2L J
SUBD IVI S ION
ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6831-
Water:No objection.Contact the Water Works if
additional water service is needed.
Fire Department:No Comment.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Comment received.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning
District.The Land Use Plan shows Suburban Office for this
location.The applicant's property is located in an R-2
Single Family zoning district and the zoning request is for
a Planned Development Office for the conversion of a single
family residence into a small office building.The request
is consistent with Suburban Office land use.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plans contained the
commercial development goal objective of promoting
commercial and office development that enhances the
primarily residential nature of the community.
Landsca e Issues:
A 6 foot high opaque screen,either a wooden fence with its
face side directed outward or dense evergreen plantings,is
required to help screen this site from adjacent residential
properties to the east,west and north.Credit toward
fulfilling this requirement can be given for existing
vegetation preserved.
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many
existing trees as feasible on this tree covered property.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan and additional
information to staff on March 16,2000.The revised plan
addresses all of the issues as raised by staff and the
4
May 11,2L J
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6831-
Subdivision Committee.The revised site plan notes the
following:
1.Sign location and details
2.Proposed parking area
3.Dense evergreen screening between the parking area and
the residential property to the west
As noted in paragraph A.,the applicant is requesting a
deferral of the requirement to remove one (1)of the two
(2)existing driveways from Kanis Road,until Kanis Road is
reconstructed.Public Works has indicated support of the
deferral for five (5)years or until Kanis Road is
reconstructed,whichever occurs first.At the end of the
five (5)year period,if the Kanis Road reconstruction is
not imminent,the applicant can request an extension for
the deferral.
The applicant has noted that the required right-of-way for
Kanis Road will be dedicated.Public Works recommends that
the applicant do a 15 percent in-lieu contribution for the
future construction of the required Kanis Road half street
improvements.The in-lieu contribution can be tied to the
proposed parking lot construction.
Otherwise,to staff's knowledge,there are no outstanding
issues associated with this application.Staff feels that
the proposed PD-0 is an appropriate development within this
area of Suburban Office along the north side of Kanis Road.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the PD-0 rezoning subject to
the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D,E and F of this report.
2.Staff recommends approval of the deferral of the
requirement to eliminate one (1)of the two (2)
existing driveways,for five (5)years or until Kanis
Road is reconstructed,whichever occurs first.
3.The proposed sign will be monument-type,with a maximum
height of six (6)feet and a maximum area of 24 square
feet.4.Any site lighting must be low-level and directed away
from adjacent property.5.Staff supports a 15 percent in-lieu contribution for
the future improvements to Kanis Road.
5
May 11,2C
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6831-
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(MARCH 9,2000)
Robert Trammell,was present,representing the application.
Staff briefly described the proposed PD-O.Staff noted that
hours of operation and sign details needed to be provided.
Staff noted that parking to accommodate the six (6)employees
which would work at the site needed to be provided.The parking
design was briefly discussed.Mr.Trammell noted that he was
considering a small parking area on the west side of the
existing building.
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.Tad
Borkowski,of Public Works,noted that one of the two existing
drives from Kanis Road needed to be closed.This issue was
discussed.Mr.Trammell indicated that a deferral of this
requirement would be requested.
Bob Brown,of the Planning Staff,noted that the business
activity (parking)would have to be screened from the adjacent
residential property.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the PD-0 to the
full Commission for resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a
letter on March 21,2000 requesting that this application be
deferred to the May 11,2000 agenda.The required notices were
not mailed.Staff supported the deferral request.
~The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the
May 11,2000 agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The
motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
The staff presented a positive recommendation on this
application,as there were no further issues for resolution.
There were no objectors to this matter.
6
May 11,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6831-
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended
by staff.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed
by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent and 1 open position.
7
May 11,2i
ITEM NO.:E FILE NO.:Z-6832
NAME:Oak Place Court —Short-Form PRD
LOCATION:13123 Baseline Road
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Marcus Fitts/Robert McFarlane McGetrick and McGetrick
16 Perdido Cr.319 E.Markham St.,Ste.202
Little Rock,AR 72211 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:4.53 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:12
FT.NEW STREET:538 linear feet
ZONING:R-2 ALLOWED USES:Single Family Residential
PROPOSED USE:Single Family Residential
and Condominiums
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone the property at 13123
Baseline Road from R-2 to PRD.The applicant proposes to
create 11 single family residential lots within the west 4
of the property,with patio homes and/or zero lot line
homes to he constructed.The applicant proposes to
construct condominiums within the eastern portion of the
property.The applicant notes that the maximum height for
any of the buildings will he 32 feet.
The condominium component of this development consists of
four (4)buildings and-14 units with garages.The
applicant proposes a horizontal property regime,where the
individual condo units are sold and the surrounding
property is held under a common ownership.
May 11,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:E (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6832-
The applicant proposes to construct a cul-de-sac from
Baseline Road to access this proposed project.There will
be two (2)access points from the cul-de-sac which will
access rear garages for the three northernmost condo
buildings.The southernmost condo building will have
access from the end of the cul-de-sac.The individual
single family lots along the western portion of the
property will have direct access to the cul-de-sac.
The proposed site plan also notes that a six (6)foot
opaque fence will be constructed along all property
boundaries.The proposed single family lots,condominiums,
cul-de-sac,access drives and fencing are noted on the
attached site plan.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There is an existing single family residence and accessory
buildings on the property.The south portion of the
property is partially wooded.
The Eagle Hill Apartment Complex and golf course is located
across Baseline Road to the north,with a church to the
northeast.There is a new single family residential
development to the west and single family residences on
large lots to the east along the south side of Baseline
Road.The golf driving range property (PCD proposed to be
revoked)is located immediately south.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received no comment from the
neighborhood.The Otter Creek Homeowners Association and
Crystal Valley Property Owners Associations were notified
of the public hearing.
D .ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1 ~Baseline Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as a
principal arterial,dedication of right-of-way to 55
feet from centerline will be required.
2.Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned
development.Shift improvements to connect to the
existing improvements on Baseline Road.
2
May 11,2G
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:E (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6832-
3.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
4.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
16,577.
5.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
6.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities
are required.
7.Baseline Road has an average daily traffic count 5,400.
8.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the
Little Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to
Traffic Engineering.
9.A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per 29-186(e)will be
required with building permit.
10.A Grading Permit per Secs.29-186(c)and (d)will be
required with building permit.
11.Contact the ADEQ for approval prior to start work.
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements
to serve property.
APEL:No Comment.
Arkla:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:An 8"water main extension will be required.
Placement of fire hydrants should be reviewed by the
Little Rock Fire Department and will probably be
different than those locations shown on the plans.A
development fee may apply based on the size of the
connection to the water main on the north side of
Baseline Road.A legal description of the property is
needed to determine the location and charges due.
Fire Department:Place fire hydrants per city code.
Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752 for details.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Comment received.
3
May 11,2L r
SUBDZVZSZON
ZTEM NO.:E (Cont.)FZLE NO.:Z-6832-
F.ZSSUES/TECHNZCAL/DESZGN:
Plannin Division:
This recgxest is located in the Otter Creek Planning
District.The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this
location.The applicant's property is zoned R-2 Single
Family and the zoning request is for Planned Residential
Development.The applicant wishes to develop a tract of
land for single family homes and condominiums.The request
is consistent with Single-Family land use.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The pending Otter Creek/Crystal Valley Neighborhood Action
Plan is scheduled to be heard by the Board of Directors on
April 4,2000.The pending neighborhood action plan
encourages the development of owner occupied properties for
the area.The pending plan also calls for the construction
of sidewalks and the installation of streetlights in all
new developments.
Landsca e Zssues:
A six foot high opaque screen,either a wooden fence with
its face side directed outward or dense evergreen
plantings,is required east of the proposed condominiums.
G.ANALYSZS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
March 15,2000.The revised plan addresses all of the
concerns as raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee.
The revised plan moves the condominium units toward Oak
Place Court with a 20 foot setback and the garages have
been moved to the rear.Two (2)alley access points have
been shown from Oak Place Court to serve the garages for
the condo units.
The revised plan also notes all of the proposed typical
building setbacks for the single family lots and shows
typical patio home and zero lot line home placement.The
plan notes that the maximum building height for the site
will be 32 feet.Thirty-five feet is the typical maximum
building height in single family zones.
4
May 11,2(,
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:E (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6832-
The revised plan also shows a six (6)foot opacpxe fence
along all of the property boundaries and a dumpster
location for the condominiums.Two (2)ground-mounted
signs have been shown on the revised plan,one (1)on each
side of the entrance to the project.The dimension for
each sign has been noted as 4 feet by 6 inches.Staff
suggests that these signs be monument-type with a maximum
height of six (6)feet.
Otherwise,to staff's knowledge,there are no outstanding
issues associated with this application.The applicant has
done an adecpxate job in addressing the issues as raised by
staff and the Subdivision Committee and in revising the
site plan accordingly.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends approval of the PRD subject to the
following conditions:
1.Compliance with the recpxirements as noted in paragraphs
D,E and F of this report.
2.The two (2)ground-mounted signs proposed (4 feet by 6
inches each)must be monument type with a maximum height
of six (6)feet.3.The dumpster area must be enclosed on three (3)sides
with a 8 foot fence or wall.
4.The maximum building height for this project shall be 32
feet.5.The structures constructed on Lots 1-11 must comply with
the typical setbacks as noted on the submitted site plan.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(MARCH 9,2000)
Robert McFarlane was present,representing the application.
Staff briefly described the revised proposed PRD,noting that
the following information needed to be shown on the site plan:
1.Building heights
2.Type of fence to be constructed
3.Dumpster location,if applicable
4.Platted front building lines (Lots 1-11)
5.Typical rear yard dimension (Lots 1-11)
6.Typical building placement for sero lot line residences
(Lots 1-11)
5
May 11,2i
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:E (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6832-
Staff noted that the proposed condo buildings needed to be moved
toward Oak Place Court (15-20 foot setback),with rear loaded
garages accessed by an alley(s).This was in-lieu of the
detached,front loading garages as shown on the original site
plan submitted.This issue was briefly discussed.
The Public Morks requirements were briefly discussed,including
the required street improvements to Baseline Road.Mr.
McFarlane indicated that he understood the requirements.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the PRD to the
full Commission for resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a
letter on March 24,2000 requesting that this application be
deferred to the May 11,2000 agenda.The required notices were
not mailed.Staff supported the deferral request.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the
May 11,2000 agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The
motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
The staff presented a positive recommendation on this
application,as there were no further issues for resolution.
There were no objectors to this matter.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
~inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended
by staff.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed
by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent and 1 open position.
6
May 11,F000
ITEM NO.:F
NAME:Proposed changes to the Landscape and Tree
Protection Ordinance,Land Alteration Ordinance
and the Buffer Requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance (submitted by the Land Alteration and
Landscape Review Task Force).
STAFF REPORT
The Land Alteration and Landscape Review Task Force was
created in July,1998,to review the City of Little Rock's
Land Alteration and Landscape Ordinances and make
recommendations for possible changes.The Task Force
represented a good cross-section of the community and
included the following:
~Representatives of the Planning and City
Beautiful Commissions
~Landscape Architects
~Developers
~Neighborhood Groups
~Representatives of the League of Women Voters
and Tree Streets
Early on in the process,the Task Force agreed on work
program and to focus first on landscaping,tree protection
and land alteration or excavation.The Task Force members
reviewed the relevant Little Rock ordinances,as well as
ordinances from a number of cities from across the country.
The Task Force also heard from various individuals with
expertise in tree preservation and development standards.
The background work undertaken by the Task Force was very
thorough and was valuable to the members in their decision-
making process.Understanding what other communities had
adopted and implemented proved to be very beneficial in
helping the Task Force develop changes that were reasonable
and considerate of diverse interests.
The changes being proposed are intended to promote strong
development standards that will enhance the desirability of
Little Rock as a place to live and do business.The
recommendations being presented relate to landscaping,tree
protection,excavation and soning buffer requirements.
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:F (Cont.)
Following are the m~a o'r changes for the three ordinances or
sections.
~Calls for use of registered landscape architect for
commercial developments over two (2)acres.
~Increases interior landscaping area requirements for
certain vehicular use areas.
~Increases tree planting requirements within new parking
lots.
~Adds irrigation and soil preparation requirements to
enhance preservation of landscaping.
~Increases perimeter landscaping width requirements for
vehicular use areas.
Tree Protection
~Calls for a permit prior to the removal of trees on all
properties except single family residences of less than
two acres and area zoned agriculture and forestry (AF)
and mining (M).
~Calls for a landscaping and tree preservation plan prior
to issuing a permit.
~Calls for preservation and/or an increase planting of
trees in buffers and parking lots.
~Provides for increased number of trees in large,barren
parking lots.
Land Alteration
~Calls for permits prior to land alteration or tree
clearing.e
~Revises grading standards.
~Requires landscaping of slopes and cuts.
~Provides for penalties and corrective measures for
unlawful excavation.
Buffer Re irements
~Increases street and land use buffers.
~Street classifications would no longer be used to
determine maximum buffer width adjacent to the street.
2
May 11,SOO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:F (Cont.)
The Task Force met on a regular basis for approximately
eighteen months and held two public input meetings.In
addition to the community sessions,the Task Force also met
with developers and other interested parties on two
additional occasions.The Task Force took the full 18
months to finalize and agree on the changes because the
members felt it was necessary to try to address the issues
or concerns that had been raised during the process.
Because of the diverse input and comments,every effort was
made to reach an acceptable compromise on a number of the
proposed changes.The Task Force members feel that they
listened and the recommended ordinance amendments are the
result of a comprehensive and open process.
The Task Force members voted unanimously to accept the
proposed changes at their December 29,1999 meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 20,2000)
Tony Bozynski,Department of Planning and Development
staff,introduced the item and then reviewed several
changes that were omitted from the written drafts included
in the agendas.The changes were found in the Landscape
Ordinance and the tree protection section drafts.
John Baker,a member of the Land Alteration and Landscape
Review Task Force,then made a presentation about the
proposed ordinances.Mr.Baker referred to slides during
his presentation and provided the Commission with some
background and history.He also reviewed the charge of the
Task Force and then reviewed some of the major changes
proposed for the Landscape and Tree Protection Ordinance,
the Land Alteration Ordinance and zoning buffer
requirements.Mr.Baker then introduced task force members
that were present:Dottie Funk,Bob Callans,Troy Laha,
Mark Johnson,Ramsey Ball,Mary Underwood and Herb Hawn.
Ethel Ambrose,a member of the Coalition of Little Rock
Neighborhoods and Central High Neighborhood Association,
spoke in support of the proposed changes.Ms.Ambrose said
it was a good beginning and indicated the need for more
changes in the future.Ms.Ambrose also gave a brief
description of the Central High Urban Forestry Project.
3
May 11,40
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:F (Cont.)
Sonja McCauley said she supported the changes and thanked
the Task Force members for their time and effort.
Ruth Bell,representing the League of Women Voters,said
the League strongly supported the proposed changes and
described various sections.Ms.Bell read from a written
statement and said the modifications strengthened the
current requirements and standards.
Pam Adcock,Planning Commission Chair,read a statement
from Margaret Leigh supporting the changes.
David Jones,a commercial realtor,said that additional
time was needed to review the changes and made reference to
a letter from Dickson Flake.Mr.Jones asked that the item
be deferred.
Hank Kelley,Flake and Kelley,addressed the Commission and
described several existing projects and how the proposed
changes could impact them.Mr.Kelley said that retailers
drive developers and the development.Mr.Kelley also said
that there would be a reduction in floor space on a site
because of the proposed changes.Mr.Kelley also requested
that the issue be deferred.
Jim Irwin suggested using existing developments to review
the proposed changes and said a deferral was needed.
Johnny Kincaid said the task force needed to quantify the
changes and analyze the potential impacts.Mr.Kincaid
said the proposed changes could cause a 20%reduction in
buildable area.Mr.Kincaid indicated that he agreed with
50 to 60 percent of the proposed changes and said a
reasonable solution should be reached on the remaining
portions.
John Flake spoke and a suggested a deferral for further
study.
Peggy Wilhem,representing the Sierra Club,spoke in
support of the proposed changes.
Nick Holmes said the proposed changes could require 20-25
percent additional land for increased buffers,etc.and
asked for more time.
4
May 11,00
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:F (Cont.)
Greg Mueller asked that the item be deferred and then
described the potential impact on some existing projects.
Mr.Mueller indicated that a 140,000 square foot
development would be reduced to approximately 82,000 square
feet and a 79,500 square foot building would lose about
20,000 square feet.Mr.Mueller said that the task force's
work needed more analysis.
Jim Lawson,Director of Planning and Development,expressed
concerns with the possibility of needing additional staff
because of the changes and not having the necessary
resources to fund one or more positions.
Comments were then offered by several commissioners.Hugh
Earnest said it was a reasonable request to develop numbers
based on the changes and mentioned the idea of raising
public funds for open space.Richard Downing questioned
whether the city could require existing parking lots to
conform to the new standards and said the city should
consider acquiring land to preserve open space.Bill
Rector discussed older areas and the potential impacts.
John Baker responded to some of the comments and said the
changes included some incentives for the central city.Mr.
Baker discussed existing parking lots and described some of
the changes.
Commissioner Judith Faust made some comments and said the
bigger issue was preserving green space and there were some
major questions that needed to be addressed.Commissioner
Faust also expressed some concerns with defining mature
area and staff's apparent lack of support.
Hank Kelley addressed the Commission and offered the use of
an engineer to assist with reviewing the changes.
There was a long discussion and comments were offered by
various commissioners.Several commissioners said a
deferral was the right course.
Additional comments were made and the Commission said that
answers were needed on costs and potential impacts.It was
agreed that the following needed to be addressed before the
next meeting.
5
May 11,JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:F (Cont.)
1.Define mature area.
2 ~Apply proposed standards to several existing sites.
3.Review one or two undeveloped sites using proposed
standards.
4.Develop a budget for enforcing new standards.
5.Whether it is legal to require existing parking lots to
be brought up to the new standards.
A motion was made to defer the item to the March 2,2000
Planning Commission hearing.The motion was approved by a
vote of 8 ayes,0 nays and 3 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 2,2000)
John Baker,a member of the Land Alteration and Landscape
Review Task Force,made a brief presentation and updated
the Planning Commission on the task force efforts to
address the various issues that were raised at the January
20,2000 hearing.Mr.Baker said that the task force had
selected Frank Riggins,with the Mehlburger Firm,to
provide the comparisons for several sites,developed and
undeveloped.Mr.Baker also said that the task force is
working with the staff on defining mature areas and the
task force,by vote,had clarified their position on
existing parking lots.
Mr.Baker indicated that the task force should have the
requested information ready for review at the April 13
Planning Commission meeting.
Commissioner Richard Downing asked several questions about
amortization of existing parking lots.John Baker said
that staff had forwarded a request for an opinion to the
City Attorney's Office,but he did not know the status of
the request.Stephen Giles,Deputy City Attorney,said
that issue was being researched.Commissioner Downing
asked that the opinion be part of the information presented
to the Commission on April 13.
The item was deferred to the April 13,2000 meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(APRIL 13,2000)
Tony Bozynski,Department of Planning and Development,made
some brief comments about the task force report analyzing
6
May 11,00
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:F (Cont.)
several sites and prepared by the Mehlburger Firm.Mr.
Bozynski then introduced Frank Riggins,of the Mehlburger
Firm,and said Mr.Riggins would review the report
developed for the Land Alteration and Landscape Review Task
Force.
Frank Riggins addressed the Planning Commission and said
the report studied five sites and compared current
requirements against the ordinance changes being proposed
by the task force.Mr.Riggins said that every site was
unique.
Mrs Riggins indicated that some assumptions were made in
the study and some basic cost information was found in the
report,but it was difficult to quantify all costs because
the sites were different.Mr.Riggins then proceeded to
review each of the five sites.The first site was the
credit union development at Chester and West Capitol.
Mr.Riggins said the proposed standards would require some
modifications to the site plan.Next site was the Bristol
Park Apartments on Mara Lynn and Mr.Riggins said the
development meets or exceeds the proposed requirements,
except along Mara Lynn.The third site was the Arkansas
Heart Hospital on Shackleford Road,a 12 acre development,
and Mr.Riggins said the impacts from the proposed changes
would be minimal.The next site to be reviewed by Mr.
Riggins was Chenal Place,a 4 lot retail development on
Chenal Parkway.Mr.Riggins said the project would lose
some parking and the site plan would require some minor
modifications.Mr.Riggins indicated that Chenal Place
would experience more impacts from the proposed ordinance
changes.The final project was the proposed Immanuel
Baptist Church site on Shackleford and Mr.Riggins said the
plan meets all the new recpxirement's.
Mr.Riggins continued his presentation by discussing costs
and said the development costs for the five sites would
increase from 2.4%to 16%.He said each site was going to
differ and that was why the cost increases vary so much.
At this point,questions were asked by the Planning
Commission.Mr.Riggins responded and said saving existing
trees could be a significant cost and additional cost
increases would come from fees,survey work,etc.He also
indicated the review process would probably take more time.
Mr.Riggins felt that professional fees could increase 30%
to 40%because of the proposed changes.
7
May 11,'00
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:F (Cont.)
John Baker,a member of the task force,addressed the
commission and responded to the study and comments made by
Frank Riggins.Mr.Baker then said the task force had
answered specific questions that were raised by the
commission at the January hearing.Mr.Baker discussed
tree preservation and funding for enforcement and said it
could be done.Mr.Baker then asked the supporters of the
proposed changes to stand and a large number in attendance
did.Mr.Baker continued by commenting on the
developers'roposal
and said the task force had four meetings with
developers.He also said the task force held two public
meetings.Mr.Baker concluded by saying he was against a
deferral and asked the commission to recommend approval to
the Board of Directors.
Matt Bradley spoke in support of the proposed ordinances
and presented a slide show.Mr.Bradley discussed the
Highway 10 and Sam Peck Road site and made some general
comments about trees.Mr.Bradley said that Little Rock
needs development with lasting value and the existing
ordinances need to be improved.
Ann Nicholson said the proposed ordinances address all that
was needed and asked the Commission to approve the
ordinances in their entirety.
Eulalia Araoz,member of the group supporting the
ordinances,spoke and expressed concerns with future costs
if the ordinances were not adopted.Ms.Araoz said
lawsuits would be filed and the clear cutting would
continue.Ms.Araoz said the ordinances impact the quality
of life and asked the Commission to make a positive
recommendation to the Board of Directors.
Vivian Davis,Little Rock Garden Club,said the Garden Club
voted to endorse the ordinances.
Alice Andrews spoke in support of the proposed changes.
Hank Kelley,acknowledged the task force's work and said
that the task force,in his opinion,was not balanced.Mr.
Kelley commented on the Mehlburger report and discussed
other sites'r.Kelley said the parking for office
development by Pavilion in the Park would be reduced by 23%
because of the new requirements and a 24%reduction in
8
May 11,.000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:F (Cont.)
building mass for the Bowman Curve development would occur.
He mentioned some changes being suggested by the developers
and said the development community met with the task force
several times and they still had concerns with several
aspects of the proposed ordinances.Mr.Kelley went on to
say that some of the provisions come close to being a
taking.
Jack McCray addressed the Commission and said the work of
the task force has a lot of merit,but moves the bar too
far.Mr.McCray asked the Commission to consider the
amendments being suggested by the development community.
Jim Irwin spoke and said that some developments would
experience a decrease in available land because of the new
requirements.Mr.Irwin asked the Commission to consider
incorporating the amendments suggested by the developers.
Ramsay Ball,a task force member,spoke and said the task
force developed a basis for a good ordinance.Mr.Ball
suggested that more time would benefit both sides and the
task force could continue their work.
Jim Whitmore,a small property owner downtown,requested a
deferral.Mr.Whitmore said there was no real opportunity
for input and more time was needed.Mr.Whitmore went on
to say that the task force and developers were very close
and refer the ordinances back to the task force for 90
days.Mr.Whitmore made some additional comments and asked
that Dottie Funk resign from the task force.
Bob Shults voiced concerns with some of the proposed
changes and said that Children's Hospital could lose
between 100 and 160 parking spaces because of the new
standards.
Gene Pfeifer indicated that the developers now agree with
80%of the changes being suggested by the task force and he
felt the two sides were close enough to have a joint
agreement.Mrs Pfeifer then expressed some concerns with
the drip line and critical root xone provisions.
At this point,the Planning Commission took a break.
(During the break,the League of Women Voters submitted a
written statement to the staff.)
9
May 11,JOO
SUBDZVZSZON
ZTEM NO.:F (Cont.)
The meeting was called to order.
A motion was made to defer the item to the May 11 meeting
and for the task force to meet with the developers to
discuss the list of suggested changes submitted by the
developers.The motion was seconded.An amendment to the
motion was made and seconded to hire a facilitator in five
calendar days to meet with both sides to attempt to reach
agreement on the ordinances.(The amendment dies if the
individual is not hired during the five day period.)
There was lengthy discussion before a vote on the motion.
Commissioner Craig Berry voiced concerns with the proposed
ordinances including some of the items that did not meet
good urban design standards;the 25%reduction for the
mature areas was not enough;the buffer requirements should
be variable buffers and the task force's proposal was
flawed;and suggested that the in lieu provision should be
50%private and 50%public.
Commissioner Bob Lowry asked the two sides to work together
and come back with an ordinance that could be approved.
Commissioner Bill Rector said he had some problems with the
appeal procedure and the joint and several liability
provision.Commissioner Rector also voiced some concerns
with enforcement of the ordinances.
Jane Dickey,president of the Downtown Partnership,
requested more time to allow the Partnership to study the
ordinances and make a report.
Gene Pfeifer spoke again and commented on Matt Bradley's
slides.Mr.Pfeifer said he would prefer to plant trees
and not be subject to having to save the trees.Mr.
Pfeifer made some comments about enforcement and an
adequate budget.
Commissioner Judith Faust said that she supported the
deferral so the ordinance that goes to the Board of
Directors was not divided.
10
May 11,~00
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:F (Cont.)
The Commission voted on the motion to defer the item to May
11 and to hire a facilitator in five calendar days.The
motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays.
Chair Pam Adcock announced a special Planning Commission
meeting on April 27,2000.(The meeting will be held in
the Board of Directors Chambers,2"floor,City Hall,and
begin at 3:30 p.m.).
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
John Baker,a member of the Land Alteration and Landscape
Review Task Force,spoke and said that the task force met
with members of the development community using the
mediation process as suggested by the Planning Commission.
Mr.Baker said the two sides met with Nancy Mathews,the
mediator;and four sessions were held.He went on to say
that the two sides had reached an agreement,but the final
language was not in written form and both sides compromised
on issues.Mr.Baker indicated that the proposed changes
should benefit the city because the new ordinance requires
6%buffers and 1 tree per 750 square feet on the street
side;1 tree per 12 parking spaces;and increase the size
of the trees and the size of the land use buffers.
Mr.Bakers said that the new provisions did not include a
mandate to save trees and then discussed the in-lieu
account.Mr.Baker concluded by saying the city should see
an improvement in development because of the proposed
changes and the agreement.
Hank Kelley,a member of the development community
mediation group,said the developers were happy to go
through the process and substantial compromises were made.
Mr.Kelley said the development community would continue to
work with the task force and that they support the
negotiated settlement.
Jim Lawson,Director of Planning and Development,offered
some comments about the mediation process.
Kate Althoff,representing a citizens group supporting the
Landscape and Land Alteration ordinances,read a letter
into the record.
11
May 11,.80
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:F (Cont.)
Ruth Bell,with the League of Women Voters,spoke and said
both sides took a big step by agreeing to use the mediation
process.Ms.Bell then voiced some questions and concerns
about several issues including the mature area,
implementation of certain provisions and measures to
protect trees.
Nancy Mathews then addressed the Commission.Ms.Mathews
described the mediation process and said the mediator had
no power to make a decision.She said the mediator can ask
questions and the role of the mediator was to manage the
process.Ms.Mathews then read from the agreement and said
it met a number of the concerns identified early in the
process.
Commissioner Bob Lowry thanked Commissioner Hugh Earnest
for suggesting the mediation process.
Commissioner Craig Berry asked several questions of John
Baker and Hank Kelley.Commissioner Berry said that he
still had issues with some of the proposed changes and good
urban design standards and was concerned with the 6%buffer
requirement for all sites.
John Baker responded and said the task force understood the
issue with mature areas and they were also interested in
the concepts of new urbanism.Mr.Baker said that he
understood Commissioner Berry's concern with the buffers
and one side fits all.
Hank Kelley also responded and made some comments about the
new requirement to use a registered landscape architect for
sites over two acres.
Commissioner Berry made additional comments about variable
buffers and the proposed in-lieu account.
There was a lengthy discussion about a number of issues and
comments were offered by John Baker and Hank Kelley.
Commissioner Rohn Muse spoke about budget and enforcement.
Commissioner Muse questioned the need for additional staff
to approve plans because of the requirement for a
registered landscape architect to do the plans.
12
May 11,.00
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:F (Cont.)
Commissioner Hugh Earnest addressed the issue of
acquisi.tion of open space.
Commissioner Judith Faust made some additional comments
about several issues including enforcement.
There was some discussion about the Downtown Partnership's
position on the mature areas and the proposed 25%staff
flexibility.Hank Kelley said that he would meet with the
Partnership to confirm their position.
Other comments were made by John Baker and Kate Althoff.
Jim Lawson said staff was in the process of drafting the
ordinances and there were still some issues that staff
needed to review.
The item was deferred to the May 25,2000 meeting.
13
May 11,2G
ITEM NO.:1 FILE NO.:S-54-Z
NAME:Point West Addition (Tracts B and C)-Preliminary Plat—
Time Extension
LOCATION:Northeast and northwest corners of Kanis Road and
Point West Drive
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Ramsay Ball McGetrick and McGetrick
400 West Capitol 319 East Markham St.,Ste.202
Little Rock,AR 72201 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:5.56 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:7 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:0-1
PLANNING DISTRICT:18
CENSUS TRACT:42.07
A.BACKGROUND:
On December 3,1998,the Planning Commission approved a
preliminary plat for the subdivision of 5.56 acres into
seven (7)lots.The lots on the west side of Point West
Dr.were to be final platted at the same time,as were the
lots on the east side of this street.The approval was
subject to conditions noted by staff,which included no
variances ~
According to Chapter 31 of the Little Rock Code of
Ordinances,Section 31-94(e):
"A preliminary plat approved by the Planning
Commission shall be effective and binding
upon the Commission for one (1)year from
the date of approval or as long as work is
May 11,2(.
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-54-Z-
actively progressing,at the end of which
time the final plat application for the
subdivision must have been submitted to the
Planning Staff."
"The Planning Commission may extend the
original preliminary approval,for a period
not to exceed one (1)year from the date of
approval,when it can be demonstrated that
there are no changes in the plat design or
neighborhood that warrant a complete
review."As of this date,the final plat
application for the subdivision has not been
submitted to the Planning Staff.
B.PROPOSAL:
On April 3,2000,the applicant submitted a letter to staff
requesting a time extension for the submittal of a final
plat application.The applicant has noted that the City'
Moratorium on construction along Kanis Road delayed design
and construction of the project.There have been no
changes to the original design as previously approved by
the Planning Commission.
C.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of a one (1)year time extension
from the expiration date of the previous approval.The
preliminary plat will be extended and the applicant will
have until December 3,2000 to begin work on the
subdivision.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
The staff presented a positive recommendation on this
application,as there were no further issues for resolution.
There were no objectors to this matter.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended
by staff.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed
by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent and 1 open position.
2
May 11,2(
ITEM NO.:2 FILE NO.:S-1282-
NAME:Cere's Addition (Lots 13 and 14)—Waiver of Subdivision
Requirements
LOCATION:East and west sides of Smith Lane,north of Bailey
Road and east of Arch Street Pike
DEVELOPER:SURVEYOR:
Jimmy Patton Donald W.Brooks
11900 Arch Street Pike 20820 Arch Street Pike
Little Rock,AR 72206 Hensley,AR 72065
AREA:Approx.9.52 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:2
FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:Not zoned
PLANNING DISTRICT:28
CENSUS TRACT:40.03
A.BACKGROUND:
Lots 13 and 14,Cere'Addition are outside the Little Rock
city limits,but within the City'Extraterritorial
Subdivision jurisdiction.The property is not zoned.
The property owner,Jimmy Patton,has recently moved five
(5)residential structures onto Lot 13,two (2)on the west
side of Smith Lane and three (3)on the east side.The
structures (4 duplexes and 1 single family residence)were
moved from the UAMS Campus.
The applicant notes that a septic system has been installed
to each of the units and has been approved by the Arkansas
May 11,2G
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1282-
Department of Health.A request for water service has also
been filed with the City and is awaiting disposition of
this waiver issue.
B.PROPOSAL:
The applicant submitted a letter to staff on March 27,2000
requesting a waiver of the requirement to subdivide this
property.The applicant notes that he plans to rent the
individual residential units and has no.intent to sell any
of the units or any portion of the property.
The applicant has also expressed to staff a desire not to
submit a multiple building site plan for this property.
This is based on the fact that the buildings are already in
place.
The applicant has also submitted letters (see attached)
from the three (3)abutting property owners,expressing no
objection to the requested waiver.
C.ANALYSIS:
The applicant is requesting a waiver of the requirement to
subdivide the property due to the fact that he does not
wish to sell any portion of the property,as well as the
fact that a subdivision to place each structure on a
separate lot would potentially have several variances
attached to it.The potential variances which would be
involved in a subdivision of this property would be as
follows:
1.Minimum lot width
2.Minimum lot depth
3.Lot width to depth ratio
4.Street improvement waiver
5.Building setback variances
6.Potential variances involving Lot 14 (laud-locked
issues)
It should also be noted that Smith Lane dead-ends just
north of this property and serves only one (1)property to
the north.
In addition to the variance issues which would be
associated with a subdivision or site plan of this
property,the following question must be asked:"What
would be the public's interest in requiring a subdivision
2
May 11,2C,
SUBD ZVZ S ZON
ZTEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FZLE NO.:S-1282-
or site plan review for this property?"Staff feels that
there is no public interest.
Staff feels that Mr.Patton has made a quality improvement
to the property as compared to other properties in this
general area.He has utilized structures which otherwise
would probably have ended up in a landfill.Zn addition,
the City has no building permit or construction authority
in this area of the county.
Staff believes that based on the variance issues which
would be associated with a plat and the applicant's
intended use for the property,that waiver of the
requirement to subdivide the property is in order.Staff
also believes that based on the fact that the structures
are already in place and that the City has no building
permit authority in this area,a site plan review would
serve no purpose.
Staff's support of the waiver request is conditioned on the
fact that no additional structures be placed on the
property.This is due to the placement of the existing
structures and the configuration of the property.The
placement of additional structures on the site would create
new variance issues.
Another condition that staff would like placed on the
property is that there be only one (1)water meter on each
side of Smith Lane to serve all of the structures.This
will enforce the applicant's intent to not sell any of the
structures.
D .STAFF RECOMMENDATZONS:
Staff recommends approval of the requested waiver of theCity's requirement to subdivide property,subject to the
following conditions:
1.No additional structures should be placed on the
property.2.Only one (1)water meter will be allowed on each side of
Smith Lane to serve the residential structures.
3
May 11,20.
SUBD IVI S ION
ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1282-
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(APRIL 20,2000)
Jimmy Patton was present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the waiver issue.The requested waiver was
briefly discussed.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the issue to the
full Commission for resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
The staff presented a positive recommendation on this
application,as there were no further issues for resolution.
There were no objectors to this matter.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended
by staff.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed
by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent and 1 open position.
4
May 11,2t'.
ITEM NO.:3 FILE NO.:S-957-D
NAME:Little Rock Port Industrial Park —Revised
Preliminary Plat
LOCATION:Southeast of Interstate 440,east of Fourche Dam Pike
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Little Rock Port Authority Garver Engineers
(City of Little Rock)1010 Battery Street
7500 Lindsey Road Little Rock,AR 72202
Little Rock,AR 72206
AREA:377 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:—FT.NEW STREET:6,820 lf
ZONING:I-3
PLANNING DISTRICT:25
CENSUS TRACT:40.03
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1.Waiver of the filing fee.
2.Variance for reduced street centerline radii .
3.Variance from the maximum cul-de-sac length standards.
A.PROPOSAL:
The applicant is proposing a revised preliminary plat for
approximately 377 acres of the Little Rock Port Industrial
Park.The area is generally east of Fourche Dam Pike and
south of I-440.The primary purpose for the plat is to
dedicate 6,820 linear feet of new streets.
The applicant has noted that lots within this area will be
platted in single lot final plats as they are sold and/or
May 11,2(.
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:3 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-957-D-
developed.This has been the accepted practice within the
Port Industrial Park for the past several decades.The
specific lots will conform to the I-3 zoning standards.
The preliminary plat drawing submitted to staff also shows
several other amenities for this area of the subdivision.
These include 78,457 linear feet of new railroad
construction,railroad crossings,drainage improvements and
a cargo dock for the industrial harbor.The proposed
streets and other amenities as well as the proposed phases
are noted on the attached plat drawing.A color-coded
version has been included for Planning Commission review.
Due to the fact that the Little Rock Port Authority is an
agency of the City,a waiver of the filing fee has been
requested.This is a waiver which has been granted in the
past with other phases of the subdivision.
The applicant is also requesting a variance for minimum
centerline radius for two (2)locations on Alden Bowen
Road.The applicant is also requesting a variance from the
maximum cul-de-sac length standards for Alden Bowen Road
and South Harbor Drive.
The applicant has also noted that approximately 6 acres of
existing trees will need to be cleared in an isolated area
west of I-440 (near the northwest corner of the
subdivision).This would allow continuation of a drainage
project started last year.This issue is not a plat issue.
The applicant needs to work with Public Works in requesting
relief from the regulations on clearing recently passed by
the City Board.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS
The area proposed for the revised preliminary plat is
undeveloped and mostly grass-covered.
There are existing industrial uses along Lindsey Road,
Frazier Pike and Fourche Dam Pike within the Little Rock
Port Industrial Park.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Hermitage Property Owners Association was notified of
the public hearing.As of this writing,staff has received
three (3)phone calls from persons requesting information
on the project.
2
May 11,20.
SUBD ZVZ S ZON
ZTEM NO.:3 (Cont.)FZLE NO.:S-957-D-
D.ENGZNEERZNG COMMENTS:
PUBLZC WORKS CONDZTZONS:
1.Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Variances will be required if construction
planned as shown i.e.,curve radii,length of cul-de-sac.
2.Contact AHTD for roadway location approval under
inters tate .
3.Show drainage easements and preliminary drainage design.
4.A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec.29-186(e)
will be required with a building permit.
5.A Grading Permit for Special Flood Hazard Area per Sec.,
29-186(b)will be required with building permit.
6.A Development Permit for Special Flood Hazard Area per
Sec.8-283 will be required.
7.Contact the ADEQ for approval prior to start of work.
8.Contact the USACE-LRD for approval prior to start of
work.
E .UTZLZTZES AND FZRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNZNG:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements if
necessary to serve property.
AP&L:No Comment.
ARKLA:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:Water service is available from the Gravity system.
The proposed railroad crossing appears to conflict with an
existing water line.Relocation may be required,depending on
grade.Protection will be required (split casing).
Fire Department:No Comment.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No affect —Site is close to ¹20 Route.
3
May 11,2(,
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:3 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-957-D-
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
No Comment.
Landsca e Issues:
No Comment.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat drawing
to staff on April 26,2000.The revised plat provides all
of the additional notations as required by staff and
discussed at the Subdivision Committee meeting.A vicinity
map,PAGIS monuments and labels for all rights-of-way and
platted building lines have been provided.
As noted in paragraph A.,the applicant is requesting a
variance for a reduced centerline radius at two (2)
locations on Alden Bowen Road.The proposed radii at these
locations are 100 feet.The minimum radius required by
ordinance is 275 feet.Public Works supports the variance
request based on the low volume of traffic anticipated for
this street.
The applicant is also requesting a variance from the
maximum cul-de-sac length standards for Alden Bowen Road
and South Harbor Drive.The maximum allowed cul-de-sac
length is 1,500 feet.The length of Alden Bowen Road is
approximately 2,100 linear feet and the length of South
Harbor Drive is 2,690 linear feet.Public Works also
supports this variance based on the low traffic volume
anticipated.
Otherwise,there should be no outstanding issues associated
with the preliminary plat.The applicant has done an
adequate job in addressing the issues as raised by staff.
The proposed continuation of the Little Rock Port
Industrial Park should have no adverse effect on the
general area.
May 11,20&
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:3 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-957-D
H.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat subject
to the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs D
and E of this report.
2.Staff recommends approval of the requested variance for
reduced centerline radii for Alden Bowen Road.
3.Staff recommends approval of the requested variance from
the maximum cul-de-sac length standards for Alden Bowen
Road and South Harbor Drive.
4.Staff also recommends approval of the requested waiver of
the filing fee.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(APRIL 20,2000)
Bill Ruck and Paul Latture were present,representing the
application.Staff briefly described the revised preliminary
plat,noting several items which needed to be shown on a revised
drawing.Staff noted that filing fee waivers had been supported
in the past for the port area.
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.Bob
Turner,of Public Works,noted that the variance for reduced
centerline radii on Alden Bowen Road could be supported based on
the low traffic volume on the street.Mr.Ruck noted that his
firm is working with the Corps of Engineers regarding drainage
issues in this area.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the plat to the
full Commission for final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
Bill Ruck and Katie Gibbons were present,representing the
application.Staff briefly described the preliminary plat,with
a recommendation of approval with conditions.There were four
(4)persons present with concerns.
J.A.Swift noted that he had concerns with Old Fourche Creek.
He stated that the quality of the water had declined in this
creek over the past several years.He stated that he had
5
May ll,2L
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:3 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-957-D-
questions about the Port Authority development in the area
northwest of I-440.
Mary Swift also addressed the Commission with concerns.She
also noted concern with the quality of Old Fourche Creek.She
also noted concern with the number of snakes that she has found
in her yard and stated that there was a problem with mosquitoes
in the area.
Bill Ruck and Katie Gibbons addressed the Commission in support
of the application.Ms.Gibbons noted that when spraying begins
for mosquitoes (approximately 2 weeks),the area around Old
Fourche Creek would be included.She stated that the snake
problem could not be taken care of.
Commissioner Lowry asked if Old Fourche Creek was full of
debris.Ms.Gibbons stated that she was not sure whether or not
the creek was full of debris.
Ms.Gibbons noted that the Port Authority had a meeting with the
property owners in this area.She stated that the Port
Authority made every effort to contact and meet with the
property owners.
Commissioner Lowry asked how the issues of debris and water
quality in Old Fourche Creek would be addressed.Ms.Gibbons
stated that she would check into the issue,determine if the
Port Authority owns the property and try to resolve the issues.
She noted that the snake problem was possibly an issue that the
City could handle.Tad Borkowski,of Public Works,noted that
the Public Works Department would also look into the matter.
Bill Ruck discussed Old Fourche Creek and gave possible reasons
for the reduction in water quality.
Commissioner Lowry stated that he hoped that the Port Authority
would up keep their property.
Commissioner Downing commented on the six (6)acres where trees
would be removed and asked what effect the clearing would have
on drainage.Mr.Ruck stated that the clearing would have no
effect on drainage.He stated that there were no plans to fill
the channel of the creek.
6
May ll,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:3 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-957-D-
Mr.Ruck explained that the clearing was to be within an area of
designated wetlands,and that the Corps of Engineers had issued
a permit to eliminate the wetlands area.There was a brief
discussion of this issue.
Commissioner Downing commented on the stagnation issue regarding
Old Fourche Creek and the clearing of the acreage northwest of
I-440.Mr.Ruck made additional comments concerning Old Fourche
Creek.
There was a motion to defer the application to the June 22,2000
agenda to allow the Port Authority time to meet with the
neighborhood and try to resolve the issues relating to Old
Fourche Creek and the snake and mosquito problems.
Commissioner Muse suggested that the applicant contact a
herpetologist regarding the snake issue.
The previous motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent
and 1 open position.
7
May 11,20
ITEM NO.:4 FILE NO.:S-1096-B
NAME:Autumn Subdivision —Preliminary Plat
LOCATION:West side of Autumn Road,south of Chenal Parkway
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Central Arkansas Land Central Arkansas Engineering
Development,LLC 1012 Autumn Road,Ste.2
1012 Autumn Road,Ste.1 Little Rock,AR 72211
Little Rock,AR 72211
AREA:6.43 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:3 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:0-3/R-2
PLANNING DISTRICT:11
CENSUS TRACT:24.04
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
A.PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to subdivide 6.43 acres into three
(3)lots.Lot 1,Autumn Subdivision was a one-lot final
plat several years ago when an office building was
constructed on this lot.The owner of the area shown as
Lot 2 purchased a portion of Lot 1.Therefore the entirety
of Lot 1 must be shown on this preliminary plat (Lot 1 will
become Lot 1R).The same is true with the portion shown as
Lot 3.The owner of Lot 2 also purchased the northern
portion of this ownership,requiring that the entire
ownership be shown on the plat.
The applicant purposes to final plat Lots 1R and 2
initially and final plat Lot 3 in the future when
redevelopment of this lot is proposed.Right-of-way
May 11,2G
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1096-B-
dedication and street improvements to Kanis Road will be
done when Lot 3 is final platted.There is currently a
single family residence on Lot 3.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There is an existing office building on Lot 1,Autumn
Subdivision,along the west side of Autumn Road.There is
another office building and a single story frame structure
on the proposed Lot 2.An existing single family structureislocatedonLot3,fronting Kanis Road.
There is a mixture of office and commercial uses to the
north along Chenal Parkway and to the east across Autumn
Road.There is undeveloped property immediately south of
this property (Lot 2),with an office building further
south.There is a contractor's maintenance yard to the
west and a mini-warehouse development to the northwest.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Birchwood and Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge
Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public
hearing.As of this writing,staff has received no comment
from the neighborhood.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Kanis Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as a
minor arterial.A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet
from centerline is required.
2.Driveways shall confozm to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.
3.Provide design of streets confozming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned
development.
4.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
5 ~Stozmwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
6.Easements for proposed stozmwater detention facilities
are required.
7.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little
Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to Traffic
Engineering.
8.Show access easement to Lot 3,confozming to revised
2
May 11,2l J
SUBD IVI S ION
ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1096-B.
Subdivision Ordinance.
9.A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec.29-186(e)
will be required with a building permit.
10.A Grading Permit per Secs.29-186(c)and (d)will be
required with a building permit.
11.Kanis Road has a 1998 average daily traffic count of
6,600.
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements to
serve Lots 2 and 3.
APEL:No Comment.
ARKLA:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:On site fire protection will be required.Fire
protection may be limited due to existing 6"water line.
Hydraulic analysis will be performed as plans and
requirements are provided to Water Works.If Kanis Road
improvements are done at this time,water line
relocations will be required.If Kanis Road improvements
are not done at this time,water line easements will be
required for future relocation work.Acreage fees of
$150 per acre apply in addition to normal charges.
Fire Department:Place fire hydrants per city code.Contact
Dennis Free at 918-3752 for details.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Affect-Site is close to ¹5 Route.
F .ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
No Comment.
3
May 11,2(
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1096-B-
Landsca e Issues:
No Comment.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat drawing
to staff on April 26,2000.The revised plat provides most
of the additional notes as required by staff and discussed
at the Subdivision Committee meeting.The applicant needs
to provide a revised plat with the additional notations.
1.Source of water supply.
2.Means of wastewater disposal.
3.Names of abutting property owners (including across the
streets)
4.Zoning of abutting property (including across the
streets).
Otherwise,to staff's knowledge,there are no outstanding
issues associated with the proposed preliminary plat.The
proposed plat should have no adverse impact on the general
area.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat subject
to the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D and E of this report.2.A revised preliminary plat must be submitted to staff
with the additional items as noted in paragraph G.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(APRIL 20,2000)
Randy Alberius and Jim Hathaway were present,representing the
application.Staff gave a brief description of the preliminary
plat and noted several items which needed to be shown on a
revised drawing.
Mr.Alberius noted that Lots 1R and-2 would be final platted
initially,with Lot 3 being left on preliminary for future final
platting.
4
May 11,20~
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1096-B-
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed,focusing
on the right-of-way dedication and street improvements to Kanis
Road.It was determined that the Kanis Road right-of-way and
street improvements would not be required until Lot 3 is final
platted.
After the presentation,the Committee forwarded the preliminary
plat to the full Commission for final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
The staff presented a positive recommendation on this
application,as there were no further issues for resolution.
There were no objectors to this matter.
Staff noted that a small piece of property between lots 1 and 2
would be added to the preliminary plat and that this piece would
become part of Lot 1R.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended
by staff.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed
by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent and 1 open position.
5
May 11,2L
ITEM NO.:5 FILE NO.:S-1278
NAME:Ranch Highlands Addition —Preliminary Plat
LOCATION:North of Cantrell Road and west of Patrick
Country Road
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Ranch Properties,Inc.White-Daters and Associates
900 S.Shackleford,Suite 300 401 S.Victory Street
Little Rock,AR 72211 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:47 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:80 FT.NEW STREET:5,300 lf
ZONING:R-2
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
4.Variance to allow a 10 percent intersection grade.
5.Variance for length of a cul-de-sac street.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to subdivide 47 acres into 80 lots
for single family residential development,with
approximately 6,800 linear feet of new streets.The
property is zoned R-2 ~The following phases are proposed:
Phase I —Valley Ranch Drive
Phase II —Lots 1-15 and 54-80
Phase III —Lots 16-53
A total of 19 of the proposed lots are proposed to be
developed based on the ordinance hillside standards.These
lots have an average slope of greater than 18 percent and
are allowed to have a 15 foot platted front building line.
All of these lots meet the minimum lot area of 10,000
scpxare feet.
May 11,2G
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1278-
The applicant is requesting a variance for a 10 percent
grade at the intersection of Highlands Court and Highlands
Lane.The applicant is also requesting a variance for cul-
de-sac length for Highlands Circle.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The property is undeveloped and heavily wooded,with
varying degrees of slope.
There is a large amount of undeveloped property in this
general area.The area also contains a scattering of
single-family residences on large lots,with a mixture of
uses along Cantrell Road.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Johnson Ranch and Aberdeen Court Neighborhood
Associations were notified of the public hearing.As of
this writing,staff has received one (1)phone call from a
person requesting information on this plat.
D .ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Patrick County Lane is listed on the Master Street Plan
as a collector street.Dedicate zight-of-way to 30 feet
from centerline.
2.Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned
development.(Add sidewalk to Highland Lanes).
3.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
4.Cantrell Road frontage needs to have sidewalk and
handicap ramps.
5.Stozmwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
6.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little
Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to Traffic
Engineering.
7.Terminate North Ridge Road with cul-de-sac and dedicate
right-of-way.
8.Show drainage easements on the property.
9.A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec.29-186(e)
will be required with a building permit.
2
May 11,20,
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1278-
10.A Grading Permit per Secs.29-186(c)and (d)will be
required with a building permit.
11.Contact the ADEQ for approval prior to start of work.
12.Cantrell Road has a 1998 average daily traffic count of
5,200.
13.Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway
right-of-way from AHTD,District VI.
14.Add right turn lane from Cantrell into Valley Ranch
Drive.
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements
to serve property.
AP6L:No Comment received.
Arkla:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:Water service is available from the Intermediate
pressure system.Current maximum service elevation is
approximately elevation 430.Higher service elevation
might be achieved by looping to the proposed "Northwest
Territory"development.Hydraulic analysis will be
required for approval of water plans.Acreage fees of
$300 per acre will apply in addition to normal charges.
Fire Department:Place fire hydrants per city code.
Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752 for details.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Affect-Not on a dedicated bus route.Site is
close to ¹25 Route.
F .ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
No Comment.
Landsca e Issues:
No Comment.
3
May 11,2L J
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1278-
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat drawing
to staff on April 26,2000.The revised plat addresses
some of the staff comments as noted at the Subdivision
Committee meeting.The source of title and the names of
all abutting property owners (including across the street)
need to be shown on a revised plat.
As noted in paragraph A.,the applicant is requesting a
variance to allow a 10 percent intersection grade at the
intersection of Highlands Court and Highlands Lane.The
maximum street grade allowed by ordinance is five (5)
percent.The applicant is also requesting a variance from
the maximum length requirement for a cul-de-sac for
Highlands Circle.The maximum length of a cul-de-sac
allowed by ordinance is 1,500 feet.The proposed length of
Highland Circle is approximately 2,000 feet.As of this
writing,Public Works has not provided a recommendation on
the variances.
Public Works has noted concerns with the proposed width of
Highlands Court and the portion of Highlands Lane between
Highlands Court and Valley Ranch Drive (50 foot width
proposed).Public Works feels that because of the possible
future extension of Highlands Court to the west,the above
mentioned streets need to be constructed to collector
standards (60 feet of right-of-way).Staff will attempt to
have this issue and the variance issues resolved prior to
the public hearing.
Otherwise,there should be no outstanding issues associated
with the proposed preliminary plat.The proposed plat
should have no adverse effect on the general area.
H.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat subject
to the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D,and E of this report.
2.Public Works will present a recommendation on the
requested variances at the public hearing.
3.The issue relating to street width for Highlands Court
and a portion of Highlands Lane must be resolved.
4
May 11,20L
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1278
4.A revised preliminary plat drawing must be submitted to
staff with the additional information as noted in
paragraph G.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(APRIL 20,2000)
Tim Daters was present,representing the application.Staff
gave a brief description of the preliminary plat and noted
several items which needed to be shown on a revised plat
drawing.Staff requested additional information on the
requested variances.The variances were briefly discussed.
Mr.Daters noted that a phasing plan would be determined and
presented to staff.He also noted that the slopes for the
hillside lots would be shown on the revised plat.
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.Mr.
Daters noted that additional information on North Ridge Road
would be provided.It was noted that additional right-of-way
for Patrick Country Road would be required.Mr.Daters stated
that the Master Street Plan requirements for the road would be
shown on the revised plat drawing.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the preliminary
plat to the full Commission for final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
The staff presented a positive recommendation on this
application,as there were no further issues for resolution.
There were no objectors to this matter.
Staff noted that Public Works supported the intersection street
grade and cul-de-sac length variances as requested.Public
Works also noted that the street width issue for Highlands Court
and Highlands Lane had been resolved.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended
by staff.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed
by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays-,2 absent and 1 open position.
5
May 11,2t
ITEM NO.:6 FILE NO.:S-1279
NAME:Oaks Bluff Addition —Preliminary Plat
LOCATION:Northeast corner of Taylor Loop Road and Oaks
Bluff Drive
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
A.S.Rosen &Associates White-Daters and Associates
9101 N.Rodney Parham Road 401 S.Victory Street
Little Rock,AR 72205 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:2.1 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:8 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:R-2
PLANNING DISTRICT:1
CENSUS TRACT:42.06
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None recpxes ted.
A.PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to subdivide 2.1 acres into 8 lots
for single family residential development,along the east
side of Oak'Bluff Drive.All of the lots will be final
platted at the same time.A portion of the property,
labeled as Tract A,will be used for drainage and
utilities.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The property is undeveloped and partially wooded.-There
are single family residences -across Oaks Bluff Drive to the
west.Taylor Loop Creek is located along the property's
east and north boundaries,with single family residences
across the creek to the north.There is vacant,
May 11,2G.
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:6 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1279-
undeveloped property to the south across Taylor Loop Road,
with single family residences to the southwest.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Westchester/Heatherbrae Property Owners Association was
notified of the public hearing.As of this writing,staff
has received no comment from the neighborhood.
D .ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Taylor Loop Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as a
collector street.Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from
centerline for collector,and 45 feet centerline on minor
arterial with 20 foot radius.
2.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.
3.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
4.Construct cul-de-sac at the end of Oaks Bluff Drive and
dedicate right-of-way.
5.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
6.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little
Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to Traffic
Engineering.
7 ~A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required
at the corner of Taylor Loop,at Taylor Loop and Oaks
Bluff Drive.
8.Taylor Loop Road has a 1998 average daily traffic count
of 5,200.
9.Lot 1 shall have no access easement shown on Taylor Loop
Road.
E .UTZLZTZES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNZNQ:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements
to serve property.
APSL:No comment received.
ARKLA:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
2
May 11,2G
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:6 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1279.
Water:Water facilities already in place.An acreage fee
of $300 per acre applies in addition to normal charges.
Fire Department:Place fire hydrant per city code.
Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752 for details.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Affect-Not on a dedicated bus route.
F .ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
No Comment.
Landsca e Issues:
No Comment.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff
on April 26,2000.The revised plat appears to address the
issues raised by the Subdivision Committee,with the
exception of the turnaround at the end of Oak's Bluff
Drive.The revised plat notes the source of title and
shows a rear 25 foot floodway setback.
As discussed at the Subdivision Committee meeting,Public
Works is requiring a turnaround at the end of Oaks Bluff
Drive.It was noted that a hammerhead turnaround would be
sufficient,however none was shown on the revised plat.
Staff will attempt to resolve this issue prior to the
public hearing.
Otherwise,to staff'knowledge,there are no other
outstanding issues associated with the preliminary plat.
The proposed subdivision should have adverse impact on the
general area.
H ~STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat subject
to compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D and E of this report.
3
May 11,20&
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:6 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1279-
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(APRIL 20,2000)
Tim Daters was present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the preliminary plat.In response to a
question from staff,Mr.Daters noted that all of the lots would
be final platted at the same time.
In response to a question from the Committee,Mr.Daters noted
that the area labeled as "Tract A"would be dedicated as a
drainage easement or given to the City for drainage purposes.
The Public Works requirement for a turnaround at the end of Oaks
Bluff Drive was briefly discussed.Bob Turner,of Public Works,
noted that a hammerhead turnaround would be sufficient.Mr.
Daters noted no problem with the other Public Works issues.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the preliminary
plat to the full Commission for final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
The staff presented a positive recommendation on this
application,as there were no further issues for resolution.
There were no objectors to this matter.
Staff noted that the applicant had worked out the turnaround
issue at the end of Oaks Bluff Dr.to Public Works'atisfaction.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended
by staff.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed
by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent and 1 open position.
4
May 11 (20~a
ITEM NO.:7 FILE NO.:S-1280
NAME:Valley Falls Estates —Preliminary Plat
LOCATION:West side of S.Katillius Road,at Forest Lane
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Bert Parke White-Daters and Associates
c/o Ron Tabor 401 S.Victory Street
8315 Cantrell Road Little Rock,AR 72201
Little Rock,AR 72227
AREA:120 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:85 FT.NEW STREET:5,300 lf
ZONING:R-2
PLANNING DISTRICT:19
CENSUS TRACT:42.06
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1.Variance to allow a 10 percent intersection grade.
2.Variance to allow an increased length for four (4)minor
residential streets.
3.Deferral of street improvements to the minor arterial abutting
the property's east boundary.
A.PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to subdivide 120 acres into 85 lots
for single family residential development.A total of
8,000 linear feet of new streets is proposed.The
subdivision is proposed in the following phases:
Phase 1 —Lots 1-2,73-85
Phase 2 —Lots 3-5,28,33-38,72
Phase 3 —Lots 6-10,17,24-27
Phase 4 —Lots 11-16
May 11,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1280-
Phase 5 —Lots 18-23
Phase 6 —Lots 29-32
Phase 7 —Lots 39-43,53-58,71
Phase 8 —Lots 44-52
Phase 9 —Lots 59-70
The primary entrance to the subdivision will be from S.
Katillius Road.There will be gates and a guard house at
this entrance.There will be an auxiliary emergency
vehicle entrance from the future minor arterial along the
property's east boundary.
The applicant is proposing a variance to allow a 10 percent
street grade at the intersection of Street D and E.The
applicant is also requesting a variance to allow an
increased length for four (4)minor residential streets
(Streets B,C-north,C-south and F).The applicant is also
requesting a deferral for the minor arterial street along
the property's east boundary,for five (5)years or until
adjacent development.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The property is undeveloped and heavily wooded,with
varying degrees of slope.The general area is made up of
single family residences on large lots.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Johnson Ranch Neighborhood Association was notified of
the public hearing.As of this writing,staff has received
one (1)phone call from a person requesting information on
this plat.
D .ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Unnamed arterial is listed on the Master Street Plan as
a minor arterial.A dedication of right-of-way to 35
feet from centerline is required.Location needs to
match Master Street Plan.Construct one-half street
improvements or request deferral.
2.Provide design of South Katillius conforming to "MSP"
(Master Street Plan).Construct one-half street
improvements to these streets including 5-foot sidewalks
with planned development.
3.Lots shall not have access to minor arterial per
Ordinance 15,594,show no access easement on the plat.
2
May 11,2(.
SUBD ZVZ S ZON
ZTEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FZLE NO.:S-1280-
4.All private streets shall conform to Public Street
Standards and be submitted for Design approval.
5.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
6.Stozmwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
7,Easements for proposed stozmwater detention facilities
are required.
8.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little
Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to Traffic
Engineering.
9.Define drainage easements and show preliminary drainage
design on plat.
10.A Grading Permit per Secs.29-186(c)and (d)will be
required with a building permit.
11.Contact the ADEQ for approval prior to start of work.
12.Access easements serving tracts shall be minor
residential standards with cul-de-sacs or "T"turnaround
with 24 feet pavements in 45 feet right-of-way.
13.Name all streets,contact David Hathcock.
14.Street "B"and "C"do not meet minor residential
standards.
E.UTZLZTZES AND FZRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNZNG:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements
to serve property.
AP6L:No Comment received.
ARKLA:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:Water service is available from the Zntezmediate
pressure system.Current maximum service elevation is
approximately elevation 460.Higher service elevations
might be achieved by looping the water main,interior
and/or exterior to the development.Hydraulic analysis
will be required for approval of water plans.Acreage fees
of $300 per acre will apply in addition to normal charges.
Adequate fire protection will be almost impossible on the
large tracts with the proposed lot layout.
3
May 11,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1280-
Fire Department:Place fire hydrants per city code.
Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752 regarding a second
entrance to the subdivision.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Affect-Not on a dedicated bus route
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
No Comment.
Landsca e Issues:
No Comment.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat drawing
to staff on April 26,2000.The revised plat provides the
additional information as requested by staff and discussed
by the Subdivision Committee.
The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a 10
percent street grade (Street E)at the intersection of
streets D and E.A maximum grade of 5 percent is allowed
by ordinance.
The applicant is also requesting a variance to allow
increased lengths for four (4)minor residential streets.
The maximum length for a minor residential street is 750
feet.The variance is requested for the following streets:
rStreetB—800 linear feet
Street C (north)—900 linear feet
Street C (south)—1,300 linear feet
Street F —900 linear feet
The applicant is also requesting a deferral of street
improvements to the minor arterial along the property's
east boundary.The deferral is proposed for five (5)years
or until adjacent development.
4
May 11,2L
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1280-
As of this writing,Public Works has not made a
recommendation on the two (2)variance and deferral
requests.The applicant will meet with Public Works and
attempt to resolve these issues prior to the public
hearing.Public Works has also noted concern with the
stormwater detention areas as proposed.The applicant
needs to confirm that these areas will conform to ordinance
standards.
To staff's knowledge,these are the issues that need to be
resolved.With resolution of these issues,the proposed
plat should have no adverse impact on adjacent property.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat subjecttothefollowingconditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs D
and E of this report.2.The Public Works issues as noted in paragraph G.must be
resolved.Public Works will provide recommendations to
the variance and deferral requests at the public hearing.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(APRIL 20,2000)
Joe White and Ron Tabor were present,representing the
application.Staff briefly described the preliminary plat,
noting several items which needed to be shown on a revised plat
drawing.Mr.White indicated no problem with the Planning Staff
comments'he
Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.The minor
arterial along the property's east boundary was discussed.In
response to a question from staff,Mr.Tabor noted that he would
work with the fire department on a second entrance.into the
subdivision.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the preliminary
plat to the full Commission for final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
Ron Tabor and Joe White were present,representing the
application.Staff briefly described the preliminary plat,with
5
May 11,201
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1280
a recommendation of approval with conditions.There were no
objectors present.
Staff noted that Public Works supported the following:
1.A variance to allow a 10 percent street grade for Street E.
2.A variance to allow increased length for four (4)minor
residential streets (Street B,C-north,C-south and F).
3.A deferral of street improvements to the minor arterial
along the property'east boundary.
Commissioner Downing asked if this would be a gated community
and if the streets would be public.Mr.Tabor responded that
the neighborhood would be gated and that the streets would be
private.
Commissioner Downing asked about fire protection.Mr.White
responded that a design could be achieved which would provide
adequate water pressure for fire protection.
Commissioner Downing made additional comments regarding the
gated community issue.
Vice-Chair Berry asked about the streets in this general area.
Mr.White described the future minor arterial along the
property's east boundary.He made additional comments regarding
the gated community issue and questioned the demand of gated
communities.Mr.Tabor stated that there were market interests
in gated communities.He noted that the applicant had
prospective buyers.
Vice-Chair Berry made additional comments regarding neighborhood
connectivity and fire safety.Mr.Tabor addressed fire
department access.He noted that this issue would be worked out
with the fire department.He stated that the project would be
developed in small phases.
Commissioner Lowry asked about fire department approval of a
second entrance.Mr.Tabor noted that fire department approval
would be obtained.This issue was briefly discussed.
Commissioner Downing asked Jim Lawson about the history of gated
communities.Mr.Lawson noted that developers have worked out
access issues with the fire department in the past.There was
additional discussion regarding gated communities.Stephen
6
May 11,20~~
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1280-
Giles,City Attorney's Office,stated that there were no
regulations to prohibit gated communities.
There was a motion to approve the preliminary plat subject to
the conditions as noted by staff and the requirement that the
applicant obtain written approval from the fire department
within 10 days regarding the access and water pressure issues.
The motion passed by a vote of 7 ayes,1 nay,2 absent and
1 open position.
a
7
May 11,20&
ITEM NO.:8 FILE NO.:Z-3500-C
NAME:Yarnell —Short-Form PD-0
LOCATION:212 N.McKinley Street
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Joni Yarnell McGetrick and McGetrick
4301 W.Markham St.,Slot 518 319 East Markham,Ste.202
Little Rock,AR 72205 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:0.516 acre NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:R-2 ALLOWED USES:Single Family residential,
Day care center (existing
C.U.P.)
PROPOSED USE:Birth Center
VARIANCE S/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1.Deferral of the required sidewalk construction.
BACKGROUND
The property at 212 N.McKinley is zoned R-2 and contains a
2,950 square foot,two-story building.The building is
currently vacant,but once housed a daycare center which
operated under an approved conditional use permit.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone the property from R-2 to
PD-0 in order to utilize the existing building as a "birth
center."The following excepts from the applicants'over
letter are provided as a description of the proposed use:
"The facility will meet requirements of the
Arkansas Department of Health for Free-standing
Birth Centers.It will include a reception
area,clinic space,labor rooms,and other
May 11,2L
SUBDZVZSZON
ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-3500-C-
areas as required for licensure.The Birth
Center will have an agreement with a hospitaltoreceivewomenandnewbornswhorequire
transport for complications.
Prenatal care will be provided in the facility,
and women who medically qualify (low risk for
complications)will be admitted for labor andbirthcare.State law requires discharge of
the mother and newborn within 24 hours of
admission.
The facility is only open for scheduledclinics,classes,and when a mother notifies
the staff she is in labor.Appointments will
be scheduled during regular office hours,
primarily Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m.to 5:00 p.m.Early evening or Saturday morning
appointments may be scheduled if needed.Thefacilitywillalsoprovideclassesforparents
during early evening hours.Birth Center staffwillopenthefacilityafterhoursforlaboring
mothers as needed."
The only physical exterior change that the applicant is
proposing to make to the existing building is to add 700
square feet to the second story.The existing parking area(9 spaces)and circular driveway will be utilized.One (1)ground-mounted sign is proposed.The sign will be
monument-type and conform to the typical zoning ordinance
requirements for office signage.There will be no dumpsterareaonthesite.
The applicant is also requesting a deferral of the requiredsidewalkconstructionalongtheNorthMcKinleyStreetfrontage.The deferral is requested for five (5)years oruntiladjacentsidewalkisconstructed.A Land Use Plan
Amendment is also proposed for the property (Ztem 8.1 onthisagenda).
B.EXZSTZNG CONDZTZONS:
There is an existing two-story stucco building on the site,with a circular drive.There are small areas of existing
paved parking on the building's north and south sides.
There is an existing six foot wood screening fence alongthesouth,west and a portion of the north property lines.
There are single family residences immediately north,south
and west of the site.The Park Plaza Mall is locatedacrossMcKinleyStreettotheeast.
2
May 11,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3500-C
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Briarwood and Hillcrest Neighborhood Associations were
notified of the public hearing.As of this writing,staff
has received three (3)phone calls from persons requesting
information on this application.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.North McKinley is listed on the Master Street Plan as a
commercial street.Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet
from centerline.
2.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.Close driveway on North Side.
3.Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
this street including 5-foot sidewalk with planned
development.
4.Sidewalks shall be shown conforming to Sec.31-175 and
the "MPS".
5.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
6.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little
Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to Traffic
Engineering.
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer service for this property is unknown.
Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for details.
APSL:No Comment received.
Arkla:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment.
Water:No objection.Contact the Water Works if
additional water service is needed.
Fire Department:No Comment.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Affect-Site is close to ¹8 Route.
3
May 11,2G
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3500-C
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
This request is located in the West Little Rock Planning
District.The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this
location.The property is currently zoned R-2 Single
Family and the zoning request is for Planned Office
Development for the construction of a birthing center.
This case is the subject of a Land Use Plan amendment on
this agenda.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
This property is located in an area that is not covered by
a city recognized neighborhood action plan.
Landsca e Issues:
A twenty-five percent building expansion will require a
twenty-five percent upgrade in landscaping toward
compliance with the Landscape Ordinance.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
April 26,2000.The revised plan addresses the issues as
raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee.The revised
plan provides for five (5)feet of additional right-of-way
dedication,notes the existing circular drive as one-way in
and out,and notes the building height as 30 feet.
The revised plan also shows a ground-mounted sign location
at the center of the property near the front property line.
The applicant has noted that the sign will be monument-type
and will conform to the City's typical standards for office
signage (maximum height —6 feet,maximum area —64 square
feet).The sign needs to be relocated to provide a minimum
five (5)foot setback from any property line.The sign
could possibly be relocated to the area south of the
southernmost drive.
As noted in paragraph A.,the applicant is requesting a
deferral of the required sidewalk construction along the N.
McKinley Street frontage.Public Works supports the
4
May 11,20~
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3500-C
deferral for five (5)years,until a sidewalk is
constructed on adjacent property or until a city project,
whichever occurs first.
Also noted in paragraph A.,the applicant proposes toutilizetheexistingpavedparkingonthesite,which
consists of 9 spaces.There is no ordinance typical
minimum parking requirement for this type of proposed use.Staff feels that the existing parking should be sufficient
to serve the use.
Otherwise,there should be no outstanding issues associated
with the proposed site plan.The "birth center"as
proposed should prove to be a quiet office use and have no
adverse impact on adjacent property.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends approval of the requested PD-0 zoning,subject to the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D,E and F of this report.2.The proposed ground-mounted sign needs to be relocated toprovideaminimumfive(5)foot setback from any propertyline.3.Staff recommends approval of the deferral of sidewalkconstructionasnotedinparagraphG.4.Any site lighting should be low-level and directed awayfromadjacentproperty.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(APRIL 20 2000)
Pat McGetrick and Joni Yarnell were present,representing the
application.Staff described the PD-0 and noted that additional
information was needed.Ms.Yarnell briefly described the
"birthing center"use and noted that this would be the only use
proposed for the property (no alternate uses).Mr.McGetrick
noted that there would be no dumpster on the site.
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.It was
noted that an additional five (5)feet of right-of-way would be
required for N.McKinley Street.The driveway locations were
briefly discussed.Bob Turner,of Public Works,noted that the
two (2)existing driveways would be acceptable with a one-way in
one-way out arrangement.
5
May 11,20..
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3500-C
It was also noted that an upgrade in landscaping would be
required.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the PD-0 to the
full Commission for resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
Pat McGetrick and Joni Yarnell were present,representing the
application.Staff briefly described the proposed PD-O,with a
recommendation of approval with conditions.There was one (1)
person present with concerns.
Chairperson Adcock asked to hear from the concerned party first.
Polly Haney addressed the Commission in opposition to the
project.She presented a petition to the Commission.Her main
concern related to traffic in this general area.
Commissioner Lowry asked about the traffic count for Plaza
Drive.Tad Borkowski,of Public Works,had no information on
the traffic count.
Pat McGetrick addressed the Commission in support of the
application.He noted that the proposed use would generate a
maximum of approximately 20 vehicular trips per day and that
these would be spread out during the day.He noted that this
use would generate far less traffic than a day care center.
Commissioner Lowry asked if emergency vehicles would come to
this location.Joni-Yarnell stated that typical emergency use
would be approximately 1 to 3 percent based on statistics across
the country.She noted that there would be approximately 10
births per month at the center.
Vice-Chairman Berry commented on the petition.He noted that
the petition was against a "Suburban Commercial Use".He stated
that this was an office use and that he had no traffic concern.
There was a motion to approve the PD-O subject to the conditions
as noted by staff.The motion was passed by a vote of 8 ayes,
0 nays,2 absent and 1 open position.
6
May 11,20
ITEM NO.:8.1 FILE NO.:LUOO-03-01
Name:Land Use Plan Amendment —West Little Rock Planning
District
Location:200 Block of N.McKinley St.
Receuest:Single Family tc Suburban Office
Source:Joanie Yarnell,c/o:McGetrick &McGetrick
PROPOSAL /REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the West Little Rock Planning
District from Single Family to Suburban Office.Suburban Office
provides foz low intensity development of office oz office parks
in close proximity to lower density residential areas to assure
compatibility.A Planned Zoning District is required.The
applicant wishes to open a birthing center for mothers.
Prompted by this Land Use Amendment request,the Planning Staff
expanded the area of review to include two neighboring
properties to the north of the applicant's property that have
frontage on McKinley Street.The area shown as Single Family
covering property fronting McKinley Street would be eliminated.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The expanded area is currently zoned R-2 Single Family and is
approximately 1.14+acres in size.The expanded area of reviewissurroundedonthreesidesbyhouseslocatedinaneighborhood
zoned R-2 Single Family.The Park Plaza Mall is located to the
east of the area in a C-3 General Commercial zone.High riseofficebuildingsandapartmentslietothenortheastinanarea
zoned 0-3 General Office and R-6 High Rise Apartment.The
Catholic High School is located at the north end of McKinley
Street at Lee Avenue.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On March 16,1999 various changes were made on University Avenue
between Markham and C Streets about-two blocks east of the
applicant's property.
May 11,2&
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-03-01-
On November 2,1996 various changes were made between Missouri
Street and Cantrell Road about a mile northwest of the area
under review.
The area is shown on the Future Land Use Plan as Single Family.
The area is also surrounded on three sides by Single Family uses
to the north,south,and west.The property to the east of the
expanded area is shown on the Future Land Use Plan as
Commercial.Two nearby areas on Lee Avenue are effected by this
application and lie to the northeast of the expanded area and
are shown on the Future Land Use Plan as Office and Public
Institutional.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
McKinley Street is shown on the Master Street Plan as a local
street.There is no bike route shown for McKinley Street on the
Master Street Plan.
PARKS:
There are no parks shown on the Master Parks Plan in the
immediate area effected by this application.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
This property is located in an area that is not covered by a city
recognized neighborhood action plan.
ANALYSIS
'hearea under review is located between a regional shopping
mall and a single-family neighborhood.In addition,the
property to the northeast on Lee Avenue is composed of intense
land uses.The nearby intense uses on Lee Avenue consist of
high rise buildings and apartments on the south side of the
street and a high school on the north side.The shopping mall
is the dominant feature in this neighborhood.The offices and
the school serve as a buffer between the residential area to the
north and the mall.A buffer does not exist between the mall
and the residential area to the west.The property in the
expanded area fronts on McKinley Street and face the mall.The
backs of these properties border the residential area to the
2
May 11,2(..J
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-03-01-
west.Alternative uses,other than single family,would seem
appropriate.If carefully designed so as not to negatively
impact the single-family homes which back up to the area,this
area could function as a buffer between the single family and
commercial uses.
NE I GHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:
Andover Square Residence Association,Apache Crime Watch,
Briarwood N.A.,Evergreen N.A.,Leawood N.A.,Meriwether N.A.,
Normandy Shanon P.O.A.,McMillan Trail,Overlook P.O.A.,
Robinwood P.O.A.,South Normandy P.O.A.,and the Heights N.A.
Staff has received 3 comments from area residents.2 are in
support,none are opposed to the change and 1 was neutral.At
time of printing,Staff has received no comments from
neighborhood associations.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
'taffbelievesthechange is appropriate.A change to Suburban
Office would provide a buffer between the intense Commercial and
Office uses to the east and the less intense Single Family uses
to the west.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
Brian Minyard,City Staff,made a brief presentation to the
commission.Commissioner Bob Lowry made a motion to approve the
item as presented.The item was approved with a vote of 8 ayes,
0 noes,2 absent and 1 open position.
3
May 11,2L
ITEM NO.:9 FILE NO.:Z-5505-I-
NAME:Bryant —Revised PCD
LOCATION:Southwest corner of Colonel Glenn Road and Rocky Lane
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Johnnie and Sandra Bryant White-Daters and Associates
3606 Rocky Lane 401 S.Victory Street
Little Rock,AR 72210 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:0.76 acre NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:PCD ALLOWED USES:Convenience store with gas
pumps,auto repair garage,
stone works business
PROPOSED USE:Same,with the addition of a
welding shop
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1.Continuation of the deferral of right-of-way dedication and
street improvements to Colonel Glenn Road and Rocky Leone
approved by Ordinance No.18,048.
BACKGROUND:
'his property was rezoned from R-2 to PCD in 1992,in order to
recognize the existing uses of the property.These existing
uses included a grocery store with gas pumps,a natural stone
business and a single-family residence (mobile home).The
property is outside the city limits but within the city'
extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction.
On July 6,1999,the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No.
18,047 approving a revised PCD for the property.The revised
PCD included the following:
May 11,2C
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-5505-I-
1.Utilization of 480 square feet of the 1,875 square foot
grocery store building for general retail use.
2.A 1,380 square foot building addition to be used as an auto
repair garage.
3.Storage bins for the natural stone business
4.Additional paved parking areas and landscaped areas
5.Five year deferral of right-of-way dedication and street
improvements to Colonel Glenn Road and Rocky Lane (Ordinance
No.18,048).
6.Removal of the mobile home within the south portion of the
property.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to revise the PCD as follows:
Phase I —construction of a 4 foot by 64 foot building
addition on the west side of the existing building
to be used for storage for the auto repair business.
construction of a 10 foot by 62 foot overhang on the
east side of the building.The applicant proposes
to place tables under the existing north overhang
portion for customers.
relocation of the existing storage bins for the
stone works business.
Phase II —construction of a 30 foot by 40 foot building
within the south half of the property to be used as
an office,storage and welding shop.
The applicant has also noted that he has received a permit
from the State to sell vehicles in conjunction with the
auto repair garage.A wall-mounted sign ("Bryant's Auto
Sales")has been noted on the revised site plan on the
south side of the existing building.
The proposed hours of operation are as follows:
~store (existing)6:30 a.m.—9:00 p.m.
~garage (existing)7:30 a.m.—5:30 p.m.
~welding shop (proposed —7:30 a.m.—5:30 p.m.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The property currently contains a grocery store building
with gas pumps located-within the northern portion of the
property.There is also an auto repair garage located
2
May 11,2(,
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-5505-I
within this building.There is also a stone works business
located on the property,with stone being stored within the
south one-half of the site.
There are single-family residences on larger lots located
across Rocky Lane to the east,across Colonel Glenn Road to
the northwest,to the south along Rocky Lane and to the
west along Colonel Glenn Road.There are several mobile
and manufactured homes in the area.
There is a grocery store with gas pumps located across
Colonel Glenn to the north.There is also a beauty shop
and a pet grooming/boarding business to the west.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
There was no established neighborhood association to notify
concerning this application.As of this writing,staff has
received one (1)phone call from a person requesting
information on this application.
D .ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Colonel Glenn Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as
a principal arterial,dedication of right-of-way to 55
feet from centerline is required.
2.Rocky Lane is classified on the Master Street Plan as a
commercial street.Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from
centerline.
3.A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required
at the corner of Colonel Glenn and Rocky Lane.
4.Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned
development.
5.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.
6.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
7.Stozmwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
8.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little
Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to Traffic
Engineering.
3
May 11,
20'UBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-5505-I
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Outside Service Boundary.No Comment.
AP&L:No Comment.
ARKLA:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:Contact the Water Works if additional water service
is required.
Fire Department:Fire hydrant may be required.Contact
Dennis Free at 918-3752 for details.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Affect-Not on a dedicated Bus Route
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
The request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning
District.The Land Use Plan shows Existing Business Node
for this location.The property is currently zoned for a
Planned Commercial Development and the zoning request is to
revise the PCD for the construction of an additional
building for a welding shop.This proposal does not
require a Land Use Plan amendment.Concerns arise over the
proposed uses and intensification of the PCD for
compatibility with the surrounding residential uses.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:This property
is located in an area that is not covered by a city
recognized neighborhood action plan.
Landsca e Issues:
The 6 foot high wood fence must continue the entire length
of the western perimeter of the property.
A four foot wide on-site landscape strip is required
parallel with Rocky Lane.
4
May ll,20~
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-5505-I-
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
April 26,2000.The revised plan addresses several of the
issues as raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee.
Areas of additional parking have been shown around the
proposed second building and the proposed hours for the
welding shop have been provided.The revised plan also
shows a 6 foot wood screening fence along the entire west
property line.
A total of 22 parking spaces is shown on the site plan.
The ordinance would typically require 20 spaces for this
proposed development.
As noted earlier,the applicant was granted a five (5)year
deferral of street improvements and right-of-way dedication
for Colonel Glenn Road and Rocky Lane on July 6,1999
(Ordinance No.18,048).The applicant is requesting
continuation of this deferral.Public Works supports the
continuation.
Although staff has no problem with the small additions
proposed to the existing building,staff cannot support the
intensification of the site as proposed.The applicant is
proposing a second building to be used as a welding shop,
used auto sales and additional parking areas on a site that
is already facing size constraints.The site is only
three-quarters of an acre in size.Staff feels that the
intensity of the uses as proposed extends beyond the scope
of the Business Node land use plan designation.
H.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends denial of the revised PCD as proposed.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(APRIL 20 2000)
Joe White was present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the revised PCD and noted concerns with the
intensification of uses proposed.
It was noted that a deferral of right-of-way dedication and
street improvements to Colonel Glenn Road and Rocky Lane were
5
May 11,2t.
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-5505-I
previously approved.It was noted that the applicant could
request that the deferral apply to this application also,or
request a new deferral.
Staff noted that adequate screening should be installed between
this site and the property to the west,preferably a screening
fence..
After the presentation,the Committee forwarded the revised PCD
to the full Commission for resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a
letter on May 11,2000 requesting that this application be
deferred to the June 22,2000 agenda.Staff supported the
deferral request.
With a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent and 1 open position,the
Commission voted to waive the bylaws and accept the request for
deferral,which was made less than five (5)working days prior
to the public hearing.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the
June 22,2000 agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The
motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent and 1 open
position.
6
May 11,2i
ZTEM NO.:10 FZLE NO.:Z-6629-A
NAME:Commercial Development Associates —Short-Form POD
LOCATZON:East side of University Avenue,between "B"and
"C"Streets
DEVELOPER:ENGZNEER:
Commercial Development Associates McGetrick and McGetrick
14502 N.Dale Murphy,Ste.333 319 E.Markham St.,Ste.202
Tampa,FL 33618 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:1.63 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:360 lf
ZONZNG:R-3/R-5 ALLOWED USES:Single Family Residential and
Multifamily Residential
PROPOSED USE:Commercial
VARZANCES/WAZVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to resone the property from R-3/R-5
to PCD to allow for the construction of a 25,600 square
foot commercial building.The applicant is proposing 74
parking spaces to serve the proposed building.
The applicant proposes to realign "C"Street to line up
with the Park Plasa access drive on the west side of
University Avenue.The applicant is proposing two (2)
access points from "C"Street and one (1)from "B"Street.
The existing rock retaining wall along University Avenue
will be shifted approximately 23 feet to the east and have
a height of six (6)feet.This will allow for construction
of a 12 foot turn lane and sidewalk along University
Avenue.The existing traffic signal at the northwest
corner of the property will be relocated.
May 11,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:10 (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-6629-A-
The proposed hours elf operation for the commercial building
are as follows:
9:00 a.m.—9:00 p.m.,Monday —Saturday10:00 a.m.—8:00 p.m.,Sunday
The proposed building,parking areas,drives and landscape
and buffer areas are noted on the attached site plan.The
applicant has shown a ground-mounted sign location near the
northwest corner of the property,on the south side of "C"
Street.The applicant has also submitted the proposedfrontbuildingelevationforPlanningCommissionreview.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The general area contains a mixture of residential,office
and commercial uses and zoning.There are single-family
and multifamily residences located to the east,north and
south.There are existing office buildings to the north
along the east side of University Avenue and a parking lot
immediately east of this site along the south side of "C"
Street.There is an office building/beauty shop located at
the southeast corner of University Avenue and "B"Street,
with the Park Plaza Mall being located to the west across
University Avenue.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Hillcrest Residents Association was notified of the
public hearing.As of this writing,staff has received one
(1)letter expressing concerns about the proposed project.
D .ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.University Avenue is listed on the Master Street Plan as
a principal arterial,dedication of right-of-way to 50
feet from centerline is required.
2."C"Street is classified on the Master Street Plan as a
commercial street.Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet
from centerline.
3.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.
4.Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned
development.(Additional lane on University will be
required with building permit.)
2
May 11,2C
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:10 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6629-A-
5.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
6.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
7.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little
Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to Traffic
Engineering.
8.Show access to adjacent properties to the North.
9.Eliminate access to "B"Street or meet with Staff to
modify.
10.A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec.29-186(e)
will be required with a building permit.
11.A Grading Permit per Secs.29-186(c)and (d)will be
required with a building permit.
12.University Avenue has a 1998 average daily traffic count
of 13,000.
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
APEL:No Comment received.
AR1U A:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment.
Water:A water main extension may be required to provide
fire protection to this property.Any needed relocation of
existing water facilities will be at developer's expense.
Fire Department:Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752
regarding fire hydrants.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Affect-Site is on route ¹21 and is close to
routes ¹5 and ¹8 ~
F .I SSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
The request is located in the Heights/Hillcrest Planning
District.The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use for this
location.The property is currently zoned R-3 Single
Family Residential and R-5 Urban Residence and the zoning
request is for a Planned Commercial Development for the
3
May 11,
20'UBD
IVI S ION
ITEM NO.:10 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6629-A-
construction of a retail development.This proposal is
consistent with Mixed Use Land Uses.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
This property is located in an area covered by the
Hillcrest Neighborhood Plan "A 'Blueprint'f our
Community."The neighborhood action plan calls for
locating intensive uses at the edge of the neighborhood,
establishing buffers between residential and non-
residential uses,and controlling the erosion of the
neighborhood's cpxality resulting from incompatible land
uses at the edge of the neighborhood.
Landsca e Issues:
It will be necessary to remove two of the parking spaces
within the middle of the proposed eastern parking lot to
provide for interior landscaping.
Areas set aside for buffers meet with ordinance
recpxirements .
A 6 foot high opacpxe screen is recpxired along the eastern
perimeter of the site.This screen may be a wooden fence
with its face side directed outward or dense evergreen
plantings.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan and additional
information to staff on April 27,2000.The revised plan
addresses most of the issues as discussed by the
Subdivision Committee.The revised plan eliminates one (1)
of the two (2)drives originally shown on "B"Street,and
reduces the number of parking spaces from 86 to 74.The
revised plan also shows a service drive along the south
side of the building and a screening fence along the east
property line.
The following are outstanding issues that need to be
resolved:
1.Proposed use mix needs to be provided.
2.Proposed ground-mounted sign details need to be
provided.
4
May 11,2(.
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:10 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6629-A
3.The landscape buffer between the service drive and "B"
Street needs to be increased to six (6)feet.
Staff will attempt to resolve those issues prior to the
public hearing.
The applicant is proposing 74 parking spaces to serve this
proposed development.The ordinance would typically
require 113 spaces for this development (shopping center
standards).Staff has no problem with the parking plan as
proposed.
Otherwise,to staff's knowledge there should be no other
outstanding issues associated with the site plan.As noted
in paragraph A.of this report,the applicant provided a
proposed front building elevation.Staff is very pleased
with the elevation and feels that the project will not have
the appearance of a "big box"development.Staff feels
that this project represents a good infill development.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the PCD rezoning subject to
the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D,E and F of this report.
2.The outstanding issues noted in paragraph G.must be
resolved.3.Any site lighting shall be low-level and directed away
from adjacent property.
4.The dumpster area must be screened on three (3)sides
with an 8 foot opaque fence or wall.
5.Staff recommends approval of the proposed building
elevation as a component of this project.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(APRIL 20,2000)
Pat McGetrick,Ron Tabor and Jim Irwin were present,
representing the application.Staff briefly described the PCD,
noting that additional information was needed.
The parking for the project was briefly discussed.Staff noted
that a smaller amount of parking was proposed than was typically
required by ordinance.There seemed to be no concern with this
issue.
5
May 11,20.
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:10 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6629-A-
Ron Tabor discussed the proposed building's facade.He noted
that he had met with the Hillcrest Neighborhood Association.
The Public Works recpxirements were discussed,with the primary
focus being on "B"Street construction.Access to "B"Street
from this project was discussed.Mr.Tabor noted that only one
(1)access point to "B"Street could be provided.The Committee
supported one (1)access point to "B"Street.
It was also noted that additional interior landscaping and
screening along the east property line were needed.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the PCD to the
full Commission for resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
Ron Tabor was present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the PCD with a recommendation of approval with
conditions.There were several persons present with concerns.
Ron Tabor addressed the Commission in support of the
application.He explained the project and noted who the
proposed tenants were.He also provided a history of the
property.He discussed the proposed realignment of "C"Street
and the proposed front building elevation.
George Campbell,of the Hillcrest Merchant's Association,
addressed the Commission in support of the project.He noted
that the project would be a "good fit"for the neighborhood.
Mac Helms addressed the Commission in opposition to the project.
He stated that he had concerns with increased traffic based on
there being a large number of children in the area.
Ruth Bell also addressed the Commission in opposition to the
project.She noted concerns with a commercial development being
introduced into this area.She also noted traffic concerns.
Carl Evans also spoke in opposition to the project.He
presented a petition to the Commission.He stated that he was
concerned with the appearance of the rear of the structure.He
also expressed concerns with drainage and traffic.
6
May 11,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:10 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6629-A-
Commissioner Lowry asked about the traffic issue.Tad
Borkowski,of Public Works,noted that traffic would be
increased slightly.Mr.Tabor noted that he would work with
Public Works regarding the traffic issue.He noted that the
developer considered a cul-de-sac for "C"Street,but the City
would not allow it.
Mr.Tabor noted that he had met with the Hillcrest Neighborhood
Association on two (2)occasions.He noted that the development
would be properly landscaped,screened and buffered.
Commissioner Lowry commented on a deferral to allow the
applicant additional time to meet with the neighborhood.
Vice-Chair Berry commented on waiving the required commercial
street right-of-way for "B"and "C"Streets.He also commented
on the traffic issues in this general area of Hillcrest.
Commissioner Earnest referred to the letter submitted by the
Hillcrest Neighborhood Association with regards to the design
standards and use mix.Mr.Tabor commented that the property is
not large enough to accommodate use mix which would include
residential.
Mr.Tabor commented that the City was requiring the improvements
to "B"and "C"Streets.
Chairperson Adcock asked about lights on the rear of the
building.Mr.Tabor stated that there would be shielded,
directional lighting on the rear of the building.
Chairperson Adcock asked about the color of the building.
Mr.Tabor noted that the building would be constructed of brick
and would be complementary to the clinic buildings to the north.
There was a brief discussion pertaining to the proposed »C"
Street construction.
Commissioner Faust commented on the project with regard to the
neighborhood and also commented on traffic issues.She noted
that this development had the potential to be an appropriate
infill development.
7
May 11,20l
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:10 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6629-A
Commissioner Earnest also commented that this could be a good
infill development.He noted that there were issues between the
developer and the neighborhood which needed to be resolved.
Commissioner Rector supported the idea of a cul-de-sac at "C"
Street and briefly discussed this issue.
Mr.Tabor made additional brief comments about the project.
Vice-Chair Berry briefly commented on the Hillcrest Neighborhood
Association letter.
A motion was made to defer the application to the June 22,2000
agenda.The motion passed by a vote of 7 ayes,0 nays,3 absent
and 1 open position.
8
e~~jO
~7
~M8'/7 "&"~~~~F
c-cu 'F~~re
c ~~~~~~r
~a~~~~~&
cP
C «~~@
/
p
~~
RECEIVED
APR 20 2000
BY:
May 11,20.
ITEM NO.:11 FILE NO.:Z-6829
NAME:Mini-storages at Chenal —Short-Form PD-C
LOCATION:West side of Champlin Drive,south of Rahling Road
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Deltic Timber Corporation White-Daters and Associates
¹7 Chenal Club Blvd.401 S.Victory Street
Little Rock,AR 72211 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:4.5 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:0-2/0-3/C-1 ALLOWED USES:General Office,
Neighborhood Commercial
PROPOSED USE:Mini-warehouse
Development
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone the property from 0-2/
0-3/C-1 to PD-C to allow for development of a mini-
warehouse complex.The proposed site plan shows a total of
eight (8)buildings with a total area of 72,600 square
foot.A manager's office and apartment is shown in
Building A.
Two (2)access points are proposed from Champlin Drive.
These drives will be gated entrances.There is a small
parking area (5 spaces)on the south side of Building A.A
ground-mounted sign is shown at each entrance drive.The
applicant also proposes an 8 foot screening fence around
the perimeter of the site.
The applicant has noted that the typical building height
will be as follows:
Buildings A and B —19 feet
Buildings C thru 8 —8.5 feet
May 11,2L
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:11 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6829
The applicant has noted that the roofs of the structures
will be constructed of a nonreflective material.Also,the
building facades will have an earth-tone color.The
applicant has noted that the hours of operation will be
from 7:00 a.m.to 10:00 p.m.There is also a land use plan
amendment application for this property (Item 11.1 on this
agenda).
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The property is undeveloped and brush-covered.The
property slopes generally to the south from Rahling Road.
There is a multifamily development to the east across
Champlin Drive,with undeveloped property to the north at
the southwest corner of Champlin Dr.and Rahling Rd.There
is a mixture of commercial,office and residential zoning
along Rahling in this area.There is undeveloped R-2 zoned
property to the south and undeveloped 0-2 zoned property to
the west.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
There was no established neighborhood association to
notify.As of this writing,staff has received several
calls in opposition to the proposed project.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Champlin Drive is listed on the Master Street Plan as a
minor arterial.A dedication of right-of-way to 45 feet
from centerline is required.(Dedicate right-of-way to
property line.)
2.Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned
development.0
3.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
4.Show driveway location on opposite side of Champlin
Drive.
5.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
6.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities
are required.
2
May 11,20&
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:11 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6829-
7.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the
Little Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to
Traffic Engineering.
8.A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec.29-186(e)
will be required with Building Permit.
9.A Grading Permit per Secs.29-186(c)and (d)will be
required with building permit.
10.Contact the ADEQ for approval before start of work.
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
AP&L:No Comment.
ARKLA:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:On site fire protection will be required.An acreage
charge of $300 per acre applies in addition to normal charges.
Fire Department:Place fire hydrants per city code.
Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752 regarding turning
radii .
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Comment.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
The request is located in the Chenal Planning-District.
The Land Use Plan shows Office for this location.The
property is currently zoned 0-3 General Office and the
zoning request is for a Planned Development-Commercial for
the construction of mini-warehouses.This case is the
subject of a Land Use Plan amendment on this agenda.
Cit Reco ized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan contained the
commercial development goal objective of promoting
3
May 11,2G
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:11 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6829-
commercial and office development that enhances the
primarily residential nature of the community.The plan
also contained an action statement calling for the
aggressive use of Planned Zoning Districts (PZD's)to
influence more neighborhood friendly and better quality
developments.
Landsca e Issues:
Areas set aside for buffers meet with ordinance
requirements.
G.ANALYSIS:
Staff met with the applicant on April 26,2000 to discuss
the project.The applicant has informed staff that a
revised site plan with substantial changes will be
submitted,in response to the staff comments at the
Subdivision Committee meeting.However,the revised plan
could not be submitted to staff for review prior to this
writing.
Staff will work with the applicant in reviewing the revised
plan and report to the Commission and present a
recommendation at the public hearing.
H.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
The staff recommendation will be presented at the public
hearing.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(APRIL 20,2000)
Tim Daters was present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the PD-C,noting that additional information
e
was needed.
Mr.Daters noted no problems with the Planning Staff comments or
Public Works requirements.
There being no further issues for discussion,the Committee
forwarded the PD-C to the full Commission for resolution.
4
May 11,
20'UBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:11 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6829-
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a
letter on May 11,2000 requesting that this application be
deferred to the June 22,2000 agenda.Staff supported the
deferral request.
With a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent and 1 open position,the
Commission voted to waive the bylaws and accept the request for
deferral,which was made less than five (5)working days prior
to the public hearing.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the
June 22,2000 agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The
motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent and 1 open
position.
5
+/(
GILL ELROD RAGON 2--~~sf
OWEN SKINNER &SHERMAN,P.A.
ATIDRNEYS
W.W.ELRDD II,P.A.JUDY P.MCNEIL
JDHN P.Gn.i.CHRismFHER L.TRAvis
DRAKE MANN RQGER H.FilzGIBRDN,JR.
MARIE-B.Mn.iER,P.A
CHARLES C OWEN~P A JOHN A.FOGLEMAN,OF COUNSEL
HEARTSILL RAGON III,P.A.
W.BRADFORD SHERMAN May 1,2000
H.EDWARD SKINNER,P.A.www.gill-law.corn
Little Rock City Planning Commission
723 West Markham Street
Little Rock,Arkansas 72201
Re:Zoning and Land Use Plan Amendment Applications
Planning Commission Case ¹Z-6829
Dear Commissioners:
.Our law firm represents L&W Development,LLC,which owns and operates Wellington
Village Self Storage ("Wellington"),and Guardsmart Corporation,which owns and operates
Guardsmart Self Storage ("Guardsmart").Wellington and Guardsmart oppose the granting the
subject applications to amend the City of Little Rock Land Use Plan and to re-zone property on
Champlin Road in Little Rock (the "Property")from an 0-3 zoning classification to a planned
commercial district ("PCD")for miniwarehouses.
Wellington is located on Wellington Hills Road,approximately 3,000 feet from the Property.
Guardsmart is located on Chenal Parkway,just north of the intersection of Chenal Parkway and
Highway 10.These two companies are engaged in the miniwarehouse business and oppose the over-
development of commercial tracts in the area to allow more miniwarehouses when the existing lands
zoned for that purpose are not fully utilized.
The Commission should deny the proposed Land Use Plan Amendment application because
the proposed amendment does not conform with the Land Use Plan for the Property.
According to the Land Use Plan,the Commission has determined that the Property should
be used for offices.The Property on the west is a large undeveloped office area,and immediately
east is an upscale apartment complex.The land northeast of the Property is being developed as a
convenience store.Immediately north of the Property is an undeveloped light commercial district,
while an undeveloped multi-family tract lies to the south.
Because there is no expanding commercial use in the area around the Property,a PCD
zoning for the Property is improper at this time.The Land Use Plan should not be amended to suit
3801 TCBY Tower,Capitol and Broadway,Little Rock,Arkansas 72201
Telephone (501)376-3800 Telefax (501)372-3359
Little Rock City Planning Commission
Page 2
May 1,2000
the needs of each developer.The Land Use Plan is developed and adopted to guide the Commission
and the citizens of Little Rock in their present development of the City.My clients understand that
flexibility must exist for Little Rock to grow,but if the Land Use Plan may be amended on other
than a land use planning basis,it means nothing.
The Commission should also deny the proposed zoning amendment application because the
Property is not suitable at this time for a PCD.
The Commission,when considering a PCD according to Ordinance No.36-451,must assure
that the proposed development would not "have a negative effect on the future development of the
area."
The Commission in this instance must be mindful of the economic impact of its actions.
Ordinance 36-451(d)(5)states that the Commission must encourage the "more efficient and
economic arrangement of varied land use"in approving PCD's.If the Commission approves these
applications,the Commission will have authorized two miniwarehouses approximately 3,000 feet
from each other.The Commission should deny the applications because that situation cannot be
described as "efficient and economic"land use.The miniwarehouse needs of the community,
moreover,are being well met in this area.
Miniwarehouse developers utilize two standards in their development decisions:plan on a
five-mile radius for customer draw,and assume each citizen will use,on average,three (3)square
feet of storage space.Using these two standards,there are approximately 68,056 people living
within a five-mile radius of the Property and these people require 204,168 square feet of storage
space.After conducting a market study,my clients report that there are now approximately 273,080
square feet of storage existing space in within that five-mile radius.That means that right now there
are about 68,912 empty feet of storage space within a five-mile radius of the Property.Wellington
has rented 103 of its 678 constructed units,and operates at a sixteen percent (16%)occupancy rate.
Guardsmart operates 212 units and has only utilized twenty-two percent (22%)of its available land
capacity,and,after two years,is still not full.My clients argue that,with the current zoning and
expansion capabilities in the area,there is unmet demand within the draw area of the Property,and,
thus a re-zoning to allow another miniwarehouse at this time does not make economic sense.The
Commission should consider these economic conditions and deny these applications.
The Commission must deny applications that have a "negative effect upon the future
development of the area."If a miniwarehouse is built only 3,000 feet from Wellington,one of those
businesses will likely fail.Guardsmart is only about two miles away,and the proposed
P:hDOCUM EN'ACLVL&VAZONE.LTR
Little Rock City Planning Commission
Page 3
May 1,2000
miniwarehouse would adversely effect it as well.y 's well.In the event that the proposed miniwarehouse,
e ington,or Guardsmart fail,the Commissionission,by granting these applications,will have violated
t e purpose of the Ordinance by creating a prospect for abandoned buildings.In fact,the
Commission may well have caused a negative eff t th fuecupone ture development of the area.To
avoid that negative effect,the Commission should d thouenyt ese applications.
a lic t'e
Onbehalfofmyclients,thankyou fortheopportu "teppounityto express their views regarding these
app ications.Please feel free to contact mc if any f"h e ";.'.i .rianyoyouavequestionsordesirefunher
information.Mr Fred Langford with Wellington or M .Chri Th
follow u with
n or r.s ornton with Guardsmark will
o ow up with a phone call in a few days to answer any questions that you may have.
Sincerel,
John P.Gill
P UXKUMENPCL'PL&VPZONE.LTR
RECEIVED
MAY 1 7.000
BY:
3 pA-~
P:&DOCUM EN'PCL'PL8cVAZONE.LTR
May 11,JOO
ITEM NO.:11.1 FILE NO.:LUOO-19-01
Name:Land Use Plan Amendment —Chenal Planning
District
Location:1801 Champlin Dr.
RecCcest:Office to Commercial
Source:Jack McCray,Deltic Timber Corporation
PROPOSAL /REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the Chenal Planning District
from Office to Commercial.The Commercial category includes
a broad range of retail and wholesale sales of products,
personal and professional services,and general business
activities.Commercial activities vary in type and scale,
depending on the trade area they have.The applicant
wishes to build a mini-storage warehouse.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The applicant's vacant property is currently zoned 0-3
General Office and is approximately 4.4 t acres in size.
The property is bounded by a vacant lot zoned C-1
Neighborhood Commercial to the north,a vacant tract R-2
Single Family Residential to the south,the Carrington Park
Apartments occupy a MF-18 Multi-family zone to the east,
while the 0-2 Office and Institutional zone to the west
remains vacant.A vacant lot zoned Planned Commercial
Development lying to the northeast of the applicant's
property is the site of a future Texaco convenience store.
A shopping center is located further to the west on the
Rahling Road /Chenal Parkway intersection in a Planned
Commercial Development zone.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On January 4,2000 a change was made from Office to
Commercial about a mile south of the applicant's property.
On April 20,1999 a similar change was made on another
piece of property from Office to Commercial about a mile
south of the applicant's property.
On December 15,1998 a change was made fram Single Family
to Public Institutional about 8 of a mile southeast of the
May 11,00
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:11.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-19-01
applicant's property.
On September 1,1998 a change was made from Single Family
to Multifamily and from Multifamily to Single Family about
1,000 feet northwest of the applicant's property.
On May 6,1997 various changes were made from Single
Family,Public Institutional,Neighborhood Commercial and
Park/Open Space to Single Family,Low Density Residential,
Public Institutional,Office,Neighborhood Commercial,and
Community Shopping.The changes resulted in the current
designation of the applicant's property as Office on the
Land Use Plan.
The applicant's property is bounded on two sides by Office
to the north and west.Multi-family land uses lie to the
east and south of the applicant's property.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Champlin Drive is shown on the Master Street Plan as a
proposed Minor Arterial.Rahling Road is shown on the
Master Street Plan as a Minor Arterial and is a segment of
the proposed West Loop.
PARKS:
The Park System Master Plan does not show any parks in the
vicinity of this proposed change that will be affected.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
This property lies just outside the boundary of the area
covered by the Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan on the
northwest corner.Nevertheless,the neighborhood action
plan has a Traffic and Transportation goal containing an
action statement that recommended the completion of
Champlin Drive.
ANALYSIS:
The applicant's property is located in a neighborhood
commercial node characterized by undeveloped land centered
on the Rahling Road /Champlin Drive intersection.The
existing PZD and the C-1 zoning should provide for
neighborhood services and goods.The Office future land
2
May 11,)00
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:11.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-19-01
use along Champlin Drive is acting as a buffer surrounding
the developing commercial node and residential areas.
Expanding commercial uses south and east along Champlin
Drive will erode the buffer between residential areas.In
addition,the commercial node at the Chenal Parkway /
Rahling Road still has vacant land shown as Commercial
available for development.The Chenal Parkway /Kanis Road
intersection has vacant land available in an area shown as
Mixed Office Commercial on the Future Land Use Plan.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood
associations Aberdeen Court P.O.A.,Bayonne Place P.O.A.,
Carriage Creek P.O.A.,Eagle Pointe P.O.A.,Glen Eagles
P.O.A.,Hillsborough P.O.A.,Hunters Cove P.O.A.,Hunters
Green P.O.A.,Johnson Ranch N.A.,Marlowe Manor P.O.A.,and
St Charles P.O.A.Staff has received no comments from area
residents.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is not appropriate.Approval of
this amendment will result in the erosion of the Office
buffer around the commercial node at a time when
undeveloped land shown as Commercial on the Future Land Use
Plan exists within surrounding commercial nodes.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(APRIL 13,2000)
This item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to
the May 11,2000 meeting to coincide with a Planned
Development application.A motion was made to accept the
consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
3
May 11,,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:11.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-19-01
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
This item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to
the June 22,2000 meeting.A motion was made by
Commissioner Bob Lowry to accept the consent agenda and was
approved with a vote of 8 ayes,0 noes,2 absent and 1 open
position.
4
May 11,20~v
THERE IS NO ITEM 12 .
This item was withdrawn by the applicant prior to the
legal ad.
May 11,2l
ITEM NO.:13 FILE NO.:Z-6847
NAME:Parents and Friends of Children,Inc.—Short-Form PRD
LOCATION:4300 West Markham Street
DEVELOPER:ARCHITECT:
Parents and Friends Williams and Dean Architects
of Children,Inc.18 Corporate Hill Dr.,Ste.210
801 West 3 Street Little Rock,AR 72205
Little Rock,AR 72203
AREA:0.98 acre NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:R-5 &0-3 ALLOWED USES:Multifamily and Office
PROPOSED USE:Residential guest house and
wellness center
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone the property from R-5/0-3
to PRD in order to contruct a "residential guest house and
wellness center."The applicant submitted a very detailed
and well-written cover letter to staff,with the following
excerpts being used to provide the project description:
"Parents and Friends of Children,Inc.,the
owners of the property,propose to construct
the guest house for the use of family and
friends of cancer and neonatal patients of the
University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences
(UAMS).The facility will be residential in
nature,similar to the Ronald McDonald House
located adjacent to Children's Hospital.
Parents and Friends of Children,Inc.will own
and operate both houses and will utilize the
same executive director for both houses.The
May 11,2L 0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:13 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6847
facility located at 4300 West Markham Street is
to be called the Guest House and Wellness
Center.
The owner's Mission Statement is:'To provide
lodging and a place of refuge for:
1.Adult cancer patients of UAMS2.Parents of neonatal patients at UAMS3.The Wellness Center for the Auxiliary
of the Arkansas Cancer Research Center
(ACRC).
'esidentswillbe referred by the medical staff
of the Arkansas Cancer Research Center (ACRC)
or Central Arkansas Radiation Therapy Institute
(CARTI)at UAMS.As a 'home-away-from-home',
no medical care will be administered in the newfacility.
Housing will consist of 15 double occupancy
bedrooms for a patient and a family member.
Each bedroom will have a private bath and two
small closets.Communal Living Room,Dining
Room and Kitchens will be provided.The
kitchens will be residential in scale and are
provided to be used by the residents in the
preparation of their own meals.Support
services will include a Food Pantry,Laundry,
Library,telephone and vending area.These
uses provide the 'lodging'f the mission
statement.
To support the lodging being provided,the ACRC
Auxiliary will provide services in the form of
the Wellness Center.This part of the facilty
will provide spaces for restful and therapeuticactivitiessuchasanexerciseroom,music
room,TV room,computer room,reading room,
Conference/Board room and outdoor gardening and
activity areas.These uses will provide the'refuge'eeded by the residents and families
facing the stress of medical treatment.
The physical facility will consist of a two
story,approximately 18,000 square foot
building.The building will be fully
sprinklered,equipped with a full-size elevator
and be fully ADA accessible.The building as
proposed will be classified as a Residential
Occupancy,with a Construction Type V—
Unprotected and Sprinklered.As proposed,the
2
May 11,2t
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:13 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6847
building complies with the height and area
limitations of this classification .The
building will face West Markham Street with an
open,covered vehicular drop-off area between
the building and an entry garden.The parkinglotisaccessedwithasingledrivewayentrance
located at mid-block on Rose Street and will
provide 32 parking spaces including two
designated handicapped spaces.A small service
drive off of Rose Street will provide for the
screened dumpster location as well as a place
to accommodate the building's infrequentdeliveries.
Due to existing underground utilities crossingatmid-point of the property and the
topographic slope of the north half of the
property,the building has been placed to the
rear of the property.This allows the building
to be nested into the natural slope of the site
and allows for an on-grade outdoor area to be
directly accessed from both floors.The north
facade will be one story tall and portray a
residential character to the residential zoning
north,east and west of the site.The parkinglotandentrancedrivefaceWestMarkhamStreet
and are in keeping with the 0-3 zoning of thestreet.
Thus,by placing the building and parking lot
as shown,the current zoning of the property is
maintained and the uses of the new facility are
sympathetic to the adjacent zoning.
All disturbed areas of the site will be
landscaped to exceed the minimum ordinance
requirements,specifically along both street
frontages,the parking lot,the entry garden
area,and the building perimeter.As much as
possible of the existing trees and vegetation
on the north and west sides of the property
will be retained.Landscaped,outdoor garden
areas are an important part of the building
program."
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The property is undeveloped and mostly grass-covered.
There are a few mature trees on the site.The property
generally slopes upward from West Markham Street to the
north.There is a paved alley within this block.
3
May 11,2t.
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:13 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6847
The UAMS campus is located across West Markham Street to
the south.There is a mixture of office and commercial
uses to the east and west along the north side of West
Markham Street.Single family residences are located to
the north across "A"Street and to the northeast and
northwest.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Hillcrest and Capitol View Stifft Station Neighborhood
Associations were notified of the public hearing.As of
this writing,staff has received no comments from the
neighborhood.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Markham Street is listed on the Master Street Plan as a
minor arterial.A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet
from centerline is required.
2.Rose Street and "A"Street are listed on the Master
Street Plan as a commercial streets.Dedicate right-of-
way to 30 feet from centerlines.
3.A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required
at the corner of Rose and "A",Rose Street,and Markham.
4.Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned
development.
5.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
6.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
7.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little
Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to Traffic
Engineering.
8.Relocate existing 36 inch drainage pipe and provide
drainage easement.Plans of all work shall be submitted
for approval prior to start of work.
9.West Markham has a 1998 average daily traffic count of
13,000.
10.Alley exists and needs to be maintained to provide
access to adjacent property owners.
4
May 11,2L J
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:13 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6847
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available,Capacity Analysis required.
Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for details.
AP&L:No Comment received.
ARKLA:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment.
Water:No Comment.
Fire Department:Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752
regarding the height (clearance)of the covered drive.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Affect-Site is on Bus Routes ¹1,¹8,¹22.
F .ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
The request is located in the Heights/Hillcrest Planning
District.The Land Use Plan shows Office and Low Density
Residential for this location.The property is currently
zoned 0-3 General Office and R-5 Urban Residential and the
zoning request is for a Planned Office Development to build
a temporary living facility.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
This property is located in an area covered by the
Hillcrest Neighborhood Plan "A 'Blueprint'f our
Community."The neighborhood action plan calls for
locating intensive uses at the edge of the neighborhood,
establishing buffers between residential and non-
residential uses,and controlling the erosion of the
neighborhood's quality resulting from incompatible land
uses at the edge of the neighborhood.
5
May 11,2v
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:13 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6847
Landsca e Issues:
The proposed street buffer width along Markham Street drops
one foot below the minimum allowed at any given point of
six feet.The full buffer width required along Markham
Street is thirteen feet.The proposed street buffer width
along Rose Street drops two feet below the minimum allowed
at any given point of six feet.The full buffer width
required along Rose Street is eight feet.
A six foot high opaque screen,either a wooden fence with
its face side directed outward or dense evergreen
plantings,will be required along the eastern perimeter
adjacent to residential property.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan and additional
information to staff on April 27,2000.This information
addresses all of the issues as raised by staff and the
Subdivision Committee.The following revisions have been
made to the site plan:
1.Building height noted-maximum of 40 feet.
2.Dumpster screening provided.
3.Sign location noted —monument-type,height —30 inches,
area —30 square feet.
4.Parking reduced from 32 to 30 spaces.
5.Increased buffers along West Markham and Rose Streets
provided .
6.Relocation of storm drain provided.
7.Street improvements shown,including "A"Street.
8.Breakdown of building area noted:
13,500 square feet —Guest House
4,440 square feet —Wellness Center
There is an existing paved alley which runs east/west
through this block.The alley is not a dedicated right-of-
way,however,the other property owners within this block
have a "prescriptive right"to use the alley.The
applicant has noted that the appropriate signatures will be
obtained from the required property owners and that formal
petition to abandon the alley will be filed with the Public
Works department and taken to the City Board.
6
May 11,2t J
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:13 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6847
As noted,the applicant will relocate an existing storm
drain on this property.The applicant has noted that they
will continue to work with Public Works regarding this
issue.The applicant has also noted that the covered entry
on the front of the building will meet or exceed height
clearance as defined by the fire department.
Otherwise,there should be no outstanding issues associated
with the proposed site plan.The applicant has done an
excellent job in addressing the issues associated with this
development.Staff feels that the proposed project
represents a nice infill development and should have no
adverse impact on the general area.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the PRD zoning,subject to the
following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D,E and F of this report.2.Any site lighting should be low-level and directed away
from adjacent property.3.The dumpster should be screened on three (3)sides with
an 8 foot opaque fence or wall.
4.The existing paved "prescriptive"alley must be abandoned
prior to a building permit being issued.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(APRIL 20,2000)
Mark Aldefer and representatives of Parents and Friends of
Children,Inc.were present,representing the application.
Staff briefly described the proposed PRD,noting that additional
information was needed.
Mr.Alderfer provided a north/south section through the property
to the Committee.This was briefly discussed.
The paved alley within this block was briefly discussed.Mr.
Alderfer noted that this was not a dedicated alley.Staff noted
that there were prescriptive rights for the other owners along
the alley to use it.Staff instructed the applicant to obtain
sign-offs from the other abutting property owners to the west.
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.
7
May 11,2(
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:13 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6847
The landscape and buffer requirements were also discussed.
Staff noted that there was sufficient area to provide the
required six (6)foot landscape strips along West Markham and
Rose Streets.
After the presentation,the Committee forwarded the PRD to the
full Commission for resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
The staff presented a positive recommendation on this
application,as there were no further issues for resolution.
There were no objectors to this matter.
Bob Turner,of Public Works,noted that Public Works supported a
waiver of the required 20 foot radial dedications of right-of-
way (corner of Rose and "A"Streets,corner of West Markham and
Rose Streets)and a waiver of the required 30 foot right-of-way
dedications for Rose and "A"Streets.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended
by staff.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed
by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent and 1 open position.
8
May 11,2t,J
ITEM NO.:14 FILE NO.:Z-6848
NAME:Pleasantree 4 Addition —Short-Form PRD
LOCATION:East end of Pickering Drive
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Pickering,Inc.White-Daters and Associates
11,600 Chenal Pkwy.,Ste.5 401 S.Victory Street
Little Rock,AR 72211 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:0.40 acre NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:R-2 ALLOWED USES:Single Family residential
PROPOSED USE:Attached Single Family
residences
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
BACKGROUND:
The 0.40 acre property located at the east end of Pickering
Drive was dedicated to the Plesantree Property Owners
Association some years ago for use as a recreation facility.A
tennis court currently exists on the property.Several years
ago the property owners association gave the recreation area
back to the original developer,Pickering,Inc.,as they were
unable to maintain the facility.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone the property from R-2 to
PRD,remove the old tennis court and construct three (3)
attached single family residences (one building).This
structure would be similar to the existing attached single
family structures to the west and south.There will be a
private driveway for rear access.Access will be taken
May 11,2c J
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:14 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6848
from a private driveway in a designated private service
easement as dedicated with the original plat of Pleasantree2"Addition.The homes would be oriented to face Pickering
Drive and constructed to fit with the surrounding area.
The property will be developed as a horizontal property
regime.The units will be separately sold with the
property being controlled by a property owner's
association.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The property was previously utilized as a recreation area
for the single family structures to the west and south.
There is an existing tennis court on the property.
There is a multifamily residential development immediately
east of this site,with single family structures to the
west,north and south.The structures to the west and south
are similar attached single family units to what is
currently proposed.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Rainwood Cove Property Owners Association was notified
of the public hearing.As of this writing,staff has
received several phone calls from persons requesting
information on this project.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.
2.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is
damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
3.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
4.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
5.Construct sidewalk on access easement.
6.Circular driveway shall be 18 feet minimum.Parking
requires 40 foot minimum depth.
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements to
serve property.
2
May 11,2l.
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:14 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6848
APZL:No Comment received.
ARKLA:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:Contact the Water Works regarding extension of water
service to this development.
Fire Department:No Comment.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Affect-Not on a dedicated bus route.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
The request is located in the Rodney Parham Planning
District.The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this
location.The property is currently zoned R-2 Single
Family and the zoning request is for a Planned Residential
District for attached single family houses.This proposal
is a similar development to the existing surrounding land
uses.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
This property is located in an area that is not covered by
a city recognized neighborhood action plan.
Landsca e Issues:
No Comment.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
April 26,2000.The revised site plan appears to address
the issues as raised by the Subdivision Committee.
The building has been turned slightly to accommodate an
increase in the drive width along the west property line.
This driveway has been increased from 9 feet to 18 feet.
3
May 11,2L J
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:14 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6848
The revised driveway design conforms to the Public Works
requirements.
The applicant needs to verify the legal right of access to
this property by way of the private service easement along
the property's south boundary.The westernmost drive has
street frontage along Pickering Drive,but it is unsure as
to whether the eastern drive has a legal right of access.It is possible that the eastern drive will need to be
eliminated,with a turnaround at the east end of the rear
access drive.The applicant needs to have this issue
solved prior to a building permit.Staff will support the
site plan with either a circular drive (as shown)or a
single drive (west drive)with a turnaround at the end of
the rear access drive.
Otherwise,to staff's knowledge,there are no outstanding
issues.The proposed PRD should have no adverse impact on
the immediate area.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the PRD subject to the
following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs D
and E of this report.2.The issue of legal right of access to the easternmost
drive must be resolved prior to a building permit.The
applicant must submit documentation concerning the legal
right of access to staff.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(APRIL 20,2000)
Joe White was present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the proposed PRD.
Access to the property and driveway design were the only issues
discussed.Mr.White noted that he would attempt to relocate
the building to address these issues.
There being no further issues for discussion,the Committee
forwarded the PRD to the full Commission for resolution.
4
May 11,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:14 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6848
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
The staff presented a positive recommendation on this
application,as there were no further issues for resolution.
There were no objectors to this matter.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended
by staff.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed
by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent and 1 open position.
5
May 11,2(J
ITEM NO.:15 FILE NO.:Z-6850
NAME:Mother's Center —Short-Form POD
LOCATION:Northeast corner of Martin L.King Blvd.and
West 27 Street
DEVELOPER:SURVEYOR:
Pulaski Co.Mothers Center Donald W.Brooks
2623 Martin L.King Blvd.20820 Arch Street Pike
Little Rock,AR 72206 Hensley,AR 72065
AREA:0.16 acre NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:R-3 ALLOWED USES:Single Family Residential
PROPOSED USE:Office
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone the property from R-3 to
POD in order to utilize the existing single family
residential structure as an office-type use for the Pulaski
County Mother's Center.The applicant has provided the
following description of the proposed use:
"The Pulaski County Mothers'enter is an
organization that is incorporated in the state
of Arkansas and operates under a non-profit
status.The Mothers'enter is governed by a
Leadership Team which acts as a Board of
Directors.The Mothers'enter provides a safe
haven for the women to share their feelings,
have a positive impact on their lives and their
communities,acquire information on parenting
and develop a much needed support system.EachMothers'enter activity is designed to address
the needs of the specific group of
May 11,20uO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:15 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6850
participating women and mothers.Theactivitiesofthegroupareasmanyand varied
as the members needs,including informal and
formal training sessions,parent-to-parent
information exchange,group support meetings
and events."
In addition to the above referenced activities,the
Mothers'enter will also have as administrative office on
the site.The applicant has noted that there will be no
interior remodeling of the existing structure to
accommodate the proposed use.It has also been noted that
the residential exterior appearance of the structure will
be maintained.
The proposed hours of operation are as follows:
9:00 a.m.—6:00 p.m.,Monday —Friday
8:00 a.m.—5:00 p.m.,Saturday
2:00 p.m.—5:00 p.m.,Sunday
The applicant has also requested a land use plan amendment
for the property (Item 15.1 on this agenda).
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There is an existing one-story frame single family
structure located on the property.There is an existing
paved alley along the east property line.
There are single family residences to the east,south
(across West 27 Street),west (across Martin L.King
Blvd.)and to the north.There are several abandoned
houses in the immediate area.
There is a vacant commercial building one block to the
north at the southeast corner of Martin L.King Blvd.and
West 26 Street.There are existing commercial uses two
blocks to the north at the intersection of Martin L.King
Blvd.and Roosevelt Road.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Downtown,Wright Avenue,South Little Rock Community
Development and South End Neighborhood Associations were
notified of the public hearing.As of this writing,staff
has received no comments from the neighborhood.
2
t
May 11,2(
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:15 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6850
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required
at the corner of Martin Luther King Blvd.and West 27
Street.
2.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.
3.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is
damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
4.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
5.Show parking for customers and employees and drop off on
your property.
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
AP&L:No Comment received.
ARKLA:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:No Comment.
Fire Department:No Comment.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Affect-Site is on bus route ¹11.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
The request is located in the Central City Planning
District.The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this
location.The property is currently zoned R-3 Single
Family and the zoning request is for a Planned Office
Development for motherhood learning center.This case is
the subject of a Land Use Plan amendment on this agenda.
3
May 11,24
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:15 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6850
H.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the POD,subject to the
following conditions:
1.Compliance with the Public Works requirements.2.The only permitted uses for the property will be the
Pulaski County Mothers'enter and single family
residential.If the Mothers'enter vacates the property
the structure will be converted back to a single family
residence.3.There will be no interior remodeling to the existing
structure.
4.The exterior residential appearance of the structure will
be maintained.5.The ground-mounted sign must conform to the details as
noted in paragraph G.6.Any site lighting must be low-level and directed away
from adjacent property.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(APRIL 20,2000)
Simmons Smith was present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the proposed POD.Mr.Smith gave a brief
description of the proposed use.
In response to a question from staff,Mr.Smith noted that the
residential appearance of the structure would be maintained.He
noted that the interior of the structure would also be
maintained,no interior remodeling.
Staff suggested that two (2)paved parking spaces be provided in
the rear yard,accessed from the paved alley.This was briefly
discussed.
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.It was
noted that a 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way was
required in order to allow area for the sidewalks and ramps to
brought up to current ADA standards at the corner of Martin L.
King Blvd.and West 27 Street.This issue was discussed.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the POD to the
full Commission for resolution.
5
May 11,2G
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:15 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6850
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
Simmons Smith,Subrena McCoy and representatives from the
Lighthouse Center were present,representing the application.
Staff briefly described the POD with a recommendation of
approval with conditions.There were no objectors present.
With a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent and 1 open position,the
Commission waived the by laws and accepted the applicant's
notification of property owners being one (1)day late.
Tad Borkowski,of Public Works,noted that the applicant had
requested a waiver of the required 20 foot radial right-of-way
dedication at the corner of Martin Luther King Blvd.and West
27 Street and a waiver of the additional sidewalk construction
(ADA standards).He noted that Public Works supported the
waivers.
Commissioner Muse recused himself from the discussion and left
the board room.
Simmons Smith stated that the Mother's Center wished to maintain
the residential appearance of the property.Subrena McCoy
explained the Mother's Center use.
Jim Lawson,Director of Planning and Development,asked about
the parking area in the rear yard.Ms.McCoy explained that the
Mother'Center wished to provide two (2)parking spaces in the
rear yard and that the spaces needed to be gravel due to
financial reasons.
Mellow Moore and Mr.Robinson addressed the Commission.They
stated that they had no problems with the Mother's Center,but
did oppose rezoning the property.They expressed concerns that
this rezoning could lead to other non-residential developments
coming to the neighborhood.
Vice-Chair Berry explained that the proposed POD was for the
Mother'Center use only,and if the Mother'Center leaves the
site,the property would revert back to single family
residential.
Mr.Moore and Mr.Robinson indicated that this arrangement would
be acceptable,when questioned by Commissioner Faust.
6
May 11,20~~
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:15 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6850
Tad Borkowski noted that the gravel parking would be acceptable
to Public Works.Stephen Giles,City Attorney'Office,noted
that some type of edging would be desirable to help hold in the
gravel (railroad ties,etc.).Mr.Smith agreed to the edging.
A motion was made to approve the POD subject to the conditions
as noted by staff and the following:
1.Waiver of the recpxired 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-
way at the corner of Martin Luther King Blvd.and West 27
Street.
2.Waiver of the recpxired additional sidewalk construction
(ADA standards)
3.Gravel parking with edging in the rear yard.
The motion passed by a vote of 7 ayes,0 nays,2 absent,
1 recuse and 1 open position.
I
7
May 11,2G
ITEM NO.:15.1 FILE NO.:LUOO-08-01
Name:Land Use Plan Amendment —Central City PlanningDistrict
Location:2623 Dr.Martin Luther King Jr.Dr.
~Re est:Single Family tc Suburban Office
Source:Subrena McCoy,Pulaski County Mothers'enter
PROPOSAL /REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the Central City Planning District
from Single Family to Suburban Office.The Suburban Office
category provides for low intensity development of office orofficeparksincloseproximitytolowerdensityresidential
areas to assure compatibility.A Planned Zoning District is
required.The applicant wishes to operate a learning center
for mothers.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is currently zoned R-3 Single Family and is
approximately 0.16+acres in size.The property in question is
surrounded on three sides by an area zoned R-3 Single Family
while the area to the west is zoned R-4 Two Family.Most of the
surrounding area is occupied by single-family homes.Two lots
near the applicant's property lie vacant:one lies to the south,
and the other lies to the west.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On January 4,2000 a change was made from Single Family to Mixed
Use about a mile northeast of the applicant's property on SpringStreet.
On June 15,1999 a change was made from Single Family to Mixed
Use and Public Institutional about 8 of a mile northwest of the
applicant's property along Wright Avenue.
On June 1,1999 changes were made from Single Family,
Industrial,and Mining to Park/Open Space about 8 of a mile
south of the applicant's property along the Union Pacific
Railroad tracks.
On August 18,1998 a change was made from Single Family to Mixed
Use at 27 and I-30 about a mile east of the applicant's
property.
May 11,2L J
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:15.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-08-01
On February 20,1996 a change was made form Single Family to
Public Institutional about a mile northwest of the applicants
property between Marshal and Battery Streets from 13 to 14Streets.
On January 16,1996 a change was made from Single Family to
Public Institutional at 12 and Park Streets about a mile
northwest of the applicant's property.
The site under review is located in,and surrounded by,an area
shown as Single Family on the Future Land Use Plan.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Dr.Martin Luther King Jr.Drive is shown on the Master Street
Plan as a collector street while 27 Street is shown as a localstreet.The Master Street Plan shows a Class II bikeway
designated along Dr.Martin Luther King Jr.Drive from WoodlaneStreetto37Street.
PARKS:
The Master Parks Plan shows Southside Park located ten blocks to
the south of the site under review.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
This property is located in an area covered by the South End
Area Improvement Plan "A Neighborhood Action Plan."The plan
contains the residential development goals of improving and
introducing new housing stock into the neighborhood while
reducing the number of vacant houses.The Neighborhood Action
Plan does not specifically mention the need for the type of
service listed on the application.
ANALYSIS:
The applicant's property is located in an older residential area
south of downtown Little Rock.A variety of new infill housing
and older existing houses characterize the housing stock in this
area.The neighborhood also has a lot of abandoned homes that
are either boarded up our burned out.Vacant lots resulting from
the January,1999 tornado,also characterize the neighborhood.
To the east,houses are either being built or repaired as aresultofthedamagecausedbythetornado.To the west,many
houses stand vacant as either boarded up structures or burned
2
May 11,20bu
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:15.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-08-01
out shells.The areas of the neighborhood being rebuilt and
repaired lend a since of revitalization.In contrast,the areas
containing a large percentage of dilapidated structures give a
since of decline.The applicant's property is located between
the two contrasting areas.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:
Community Outreach Neighborhood Organization,Capitol Hill
Neighborhood Association,Central High Neighborhood Association,
East of Broadway Neighborhood Association,Meadowbrook
Neighborhood Association,South End Neighborhood Association,
South End Neighborhood Developers,South Little Rock Community
Development Association,and the Wright Avenue Neighborhood
Association.At time of printing,Staff has received no
comments from area residents or neighborhood associations.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is not appropriate.Approval of this
amendment will introduce a non-residential use in an area
surrounded by single family homes.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
Brian Minyard,City Staff,made a brief presentation to the
commission.Commissioner Bob Lowry made a motion to approve the
item as presented.The motion failed due to lack of second.
3
May 11,24~0
ITEM NO.:16 FILE NO.:Z-1716-E
NAME:Pleasant Ridge North Office Building —Short-Form POD
LOCATION:North side of Cantrell Road,east of Southridge Drive
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Schickel Development Co.White-Daters and Associates
11601 Pleasant Ridge Rd.401 S.Victory Street
Suite 300 Little Rock,AR 72201
Little Rock,AR 72222
AREA:2.20 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:0-2 ALLOWED USES:Office
PROPOSED USE:Office
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone the property from 0-2 to
POD to allow for the development of an office building.
The property being zoned 0-2 would typically require a
zoning site plan review for any development.However,in
this case the property is within the Highway 10 Design
Overlay District,and according to the City's Zoning
Ordinance,any development that does not meet all of the
requirements of the DOD must be developed using a planned
zoning development.
The applicant proposes to construct a 34,551 square foot
office building (3 stories)and 117 parking spaces on the
site.The proposed use mix for the building includes a
bank and general/professional offices.A drive-thru bank
facility is proposed at the east end of the building.The
proposed hours of operation are from 7:00 a.m.to 7:00 p.m.
One (1)ground-mounted sign is proposed on the west side of
the Cantrell Road entrance.The applicant notes that this
May 11,24
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:16 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-1716-E
sign will conform to the Highway 10 Design Overlay District
(monument-type,maximum height —6 feet,maximum area —72
square feet).
Two (2)access points are proposed to serve the property
(one near the southeast corner of the property and one at
the northwest corner).Public Works has indicated support
of the proposed driveway locations.There is a 20 foot
wide utility and drainage easement which runs diagonally
through the center of the property.The applicant proposes
to relocate the easement to the property'perimeter.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There is an existing single family structure on the
property.The remainder of the site is undeveloped with
several mature trees.
There is a Little Rock Fire Station immediately west of thesiteatthenortheastcornerofCantrellRoadand
Southridge Dr.There is a convenience store and
undeveloped property (zoned PCD)across Cantrell Road to
the south.The Walton Heights Neighborhood is located to
the north,with undeveloped property (zoned 0-3)to the
east.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Walton Heights-Candlewood and Piedmont Neighborhood
Associations were notified of the public hearing.One (1)letter expressing concerns about the development was
received from the Walton Heights-Candlewood Neighborhood
Association.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Cantrell Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as a
principal arterial,dedication of right-of-way to 55
feet from centerline is required.
2.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.
3.Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
these streets including 5-foot sidewalks at property
line,with planned development.
4.Construct right turn lane on Cantrell Road into proposed
driveway.
2
May 11,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:16 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-1716-E
5.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
6.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.7.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities
are required.
8.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little
Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to Traffic
Engineering.
9.A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec.29-186(e)
will be required with a building permit.
10.A Grading Permit per Secs.29-186(c)and (d)will be
required with a building permit.11.Contact the ADEQ for approval prior to start of work.
12.Cantrell Road has a 1998 average daily traffic count of
25,000.
13.Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway
right-of-way from AHTD,District VI.
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
AP&L:No Comment.
AEKLA:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:There is a 12"water main that crosses this
property.Preliminary plans show relocation at the
developer'expense.This line is the suction line
for a pump station serving Walton Heights.Substantial
construction restrictions will be enforced.DOWNTIME
WILL BE A MINIMUM.
Fire Department:No Comment received.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Affect-Site is on bus route 525.
3
May 11,20~~
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:16 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-1716-E
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
The request is located in the River Mountain Planning
District.The Land Use Plan shows Transition for this
location.The property is currently zoned 0-2 Office and
Institutional and the zoning request is for a Planned
Office Development for an office building.This proposal
is generally in conformance with Transition Land Uses.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
This property is located in an area covered by the River
Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan.The plan contains an
action statement of preserving the Highway 10 Design
Overlay District under the goal of sustaining the natural
environment.
Landsca e Issues:
The proposed landscape buffer width along Cantrell Road is
fifteen feet short of the forty feet required by the
Highway 10 Scenic Corridor Overlay District.Also,the
proposed landscape buffer width along Southridge Drive is
three and one-half feet short of the fifteen feet required
by the Overlay District.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be
required.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
April 26,2000.The plan addresses the issues as raised bystaffandtheSubdivisionCommittee.Additional
information was provided as requested.The revised plan
shows the 15 foot landscape buffer along Southridge Drive
as typically required.Signage details and retaining wall
details have also been provided.The applicant notes that
the maximum retaining wall height will be 12 feet.
As noted in paragraph A.,a planned zoning development is
required within the Highway 10 Design Overlay District when
all of the requirements of the DOD cannot be met.In this
4
May 11,24~0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:16 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-1716-E
particular case,the applicant is proposing to measure the
front 40 foot buffer line and the front 100 foot building
setback from the existing right-of-way line.There is a 15
foot right-of-way dedication required.
The proposed front building setback as measured from the
new property line (after right-of-way dedication)is 92
feet.Only a small corner of the building is within the
100 foot setback.Staff has no problem with the proposed
setback.The rear and side setbacks conform with the DOD
requirements.
Public Works has noted that a franchise would be supported
to allow landscaping within the 15 foot right-of-way
dedication area.However,no berms would be allowed within
the right-of-way.The required berms would need to be
provided within the front 25 feet of the property.Staff
also supports the front 40 foot landscaped buffer area
arrangement as proposed by the applicant.
The applicant is proposing 117 parking spaces for the
proposed office building.The ordinance typically requires
a minimum of 79 spaces for an office development of this
size.Staff supports the proposed parking plan.
Otherwise to staff's knowledge,there are no other
outstanding issues associated with the proposed POD site
plan.The site plan conforms to all other aspects of the
Highway 10 Design Overlay District.
H.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed POD subject to
the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D,E and F of this report.
2.Any site lighting must be low-level and directed to the
parking areas and away from adjacent property.3.The proposed ground-mounted sign must conform with the
Highway 10 DOD,as noted in paragraph A.
4.The dumpster area must be screened on three (3)sides
with an 8 foot opaque fence or wall.
5
May 11,20~v
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:16 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-1716-E
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(APRIL 20,2000)
Joe White was present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the proposed POD,noting that the site plan
did not conform to the typical Highway 10 Overlay requirements
(front building setback,front landscape buffer area and
landscape buffer along Southridge Drive).
Mr.White noted that he would like to measure the front building
setback and landscape buffer from the existing right-of-way line
along Cantrell Road.He indicated that this was done previously
on another nearby site.This issue was discussed at length.
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.Mr.White
noted that the utility easement running diagonally through the
property would be relocated.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the POD to the
full Commission for resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
Joe White was present,representing the application.Staff gave
a brief description of the proposed site plan and a recommendation
of approval with conditions.There were three (3)persons
present with concerns.
Tad Borkowski,of Public Works,noted that Public Works
condition ¹4 (page 2),which is the right-turn lane requirement,
could be eliminated.He noted that there was no need for the
turn lane.This issue was briefly discussed.
Tom Badger addressed the Commission with concerns.He noted
that he was opposed to the curb cut onto Southridge Dr.
Paul Caldwell also addressed the Commission with concerns.He
also opposed the curb cut or Southridge Dr.and commented on
traffic issues.
Vice-Chair Berry asked about the Master Street Plan standards
for Southridge Dr.Tad Borkowski noted that Southridge was
classified as a collector street and that the street currently
conformed to ordinance standards.
6
May 11,2G
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:16 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-1716-E
Commissioner Rector asked about Candlewood Dr.Stephen Giles,
City Attorney's Office,noted that Candlewood Dr.is currently
closed.
Commissioner Lowry referenced the letter submitted by the Walton
Heights-Candlewood Neighborhood Association.Mr.White noted
that he would work with the neighborhood regarding the landscape
buffer along Southridge Dr.He stated that the developer should
be able to use Southridge Dr.for access.He noted that he
would be acceptable to the concerns of the neighborhood,with
the exception of the elimination of the drive on Southridge Dr.
The restriping of Southridge Dr.was briefly discussed.Mr.
White stated that he would restrip the street from the traffic
light to beyond the access drive on Southridge.
Mr.Caldwell noted concern with east bound traffic on Cantrell
into this development.He noted that a left turn signal onto
Southridge Dr.was needed.This issue was briefly discussed.
Jerome Grismer addressed the Commission and expressed concern
with the curb cut on Southridge Dr.
There was a motion to approve the POD as recommended by staff
and subject to compliance with the Walton Heights-Candlewood
Neighborhood Association letter,with the exception of
eliminating the curb cut on Southridge Dr.The motion passed by
a vote of 6 ayes,2 nays,2 absent and 1 open position.
7
May 11,2G J
ITEM NO.:17 FILE NO.:S-1281
NAME:The Cottages (Otter Creek)—Subdivision Site Plan Review
LOCATION:Southeast corner of Otter Creek Parkway and Quail
Run Drive
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Otter Creek Land Co.McGetrick and McGetrick
c/o 319 East Markham St.319 East Markham,Ste.202
Ste.202 Little Rock,AR 72201
Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:8.58 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:MF-24 ALLOWED USES:Multifamily
PROPOSED USE:Multifamily
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
BACKGROUND:
The property at the southeast corner of Otter Creek Parkway and
Quail Run Dr.is zoned MF-24 and the applicant is proposing a
multifamily development.Based on the fact that multiple
buildings are proposed,the site plan must be reviewed and
approved by the Planning Commission.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is proposing a site plan for a multifamily
development.The site plan includes 24 buildings,each of
which will contain four (4)apartment units,for a total of
96 units.A total of 144 parking spaces is proposed to
serve the development,with one (1)access point from Quail
Run Dr.A 2,700 square foot office for the development is
also proposed.Of the 96 units proposed,76 are to be one-
bedroom units and 20 are to be two-bedroom.The applicant
May 11,2(J
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:17 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1281
has noted that the elderly will be targeted as residents
for the proposed development.
The proposed buildings,parking,drives and
landscape/buffer areas are noted on the attached site plan.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The property is undeveloped and partially wooded.There
are churches located immediately west of the site and to
the northwest across Quail Run Dr.There is a multifamily
development and a patio home development across Otter Creek
Parkway to the north.There is additional multifamily
zoned property to the south.There is a mixed commercial
development immediately east of this site,along the west
side of Stagecoach Road.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Otter Creek and Crystal Valley Neighborhood
Associations were notified of the public hearing.As of
this writing,staff has received two (2)phone calls from
persons requesting information on this application.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Show sidewalk at right-of-way on Otter Creek Parkway.
2.Quail Run Drive is classified on the Master Street Plan
as a commercial street.Dedicate right-of-way to 30
feet from centerline.
3.Provide design of Quail Run to widen to 18 feet from
centerline,including 5-foot sidewalks with planned
development.
4.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
5.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
6.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities
are required.
7.Easements shown for proposed storm drainage are
required.
8.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little
Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to Traffic
Engineering.
9.Show drainage easements and construct improvements on
the East side of the property with concrete invert.
2
May 11,2G J
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:17 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1281
10.A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec.29-186(e)
will be required with a building permit.
11.A Grading Permit per Secs.29-186(c)and (d)will be
required with a building permit.
12.Contact the ADEQ for approval prior to start of work.
13.Otter Creek Parkway has a 1998 average daily traffic
count of 3,200.
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available.Capacity Analysis required,
contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for details.
AP&L:No Comment received.
Arkla:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment.
Water:On site fire protection will be required.
Fire Department:Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752 regardingfirehydrantsandsingleentranceissues.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Affect-Not on a dedicated bus route.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
No Comment.
Landsca e Issues:
Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with
ordinance requirements.However,the project immediately
to the east of this site is to provide a twenty foot wide
buffer on this property.Twenty-five feet of the eastern
perimeter of this site is for a drainage easement.
Therefore,it will be necessary to move the proposed
structures westward to be able to provide the necessary
twenty foot wide buffer out of the easement area.
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many
trees as is feasible on this tree-covered site.Extra
credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements
may be given when preserving trees of six inch caliper and
larger.
3
May 11,24 J
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:17 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1281
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
April 26,2000.The revised plan addresses the issues as
raised at the Subdivision Committee.The revised plan
shows the proposed sign location,additional parking spaces
and screening fence.
A monument-type ground-mounted sign is proposed at the
entrance to the property.The applicant has noted that the
sign will conform to ordinance standards for signs in
multifamily zones (maximum height —6 feet,maximum area—
24 square feet).
The ordinance requires a minimum of 144 parking spaces to
serve a 96 unit multifamily development.The revised site
plan shows 144 spaces.
As noted by staff at the Subdivision Committee meeting,the
buffer between this property and the mini-warehouse
property to the east must be observed on this property (20feetwide)as per the approved PCD for the mini-warehouse
development (Z-3454-J).The revised site plan makes
allowances for a 25 foot buffer and drainage easement along
the east boundary of this property.The applicant has
noted that the existing drainage ditch in this area will be
piped and that the appropriate land use buffer plantings
will be provided.
The revised site plan also notes that the typical building
height will be approximately 30 feet (2 stories).The
maximum height allowed in MF-24 zoning is 35 feet.The
building setbacks also conform to ordinance standards.
Otherwise,to staff'knowledge,there are no outstanding
issues associated with the site plan.The proposed
apartment complex should have no adverse effect on the
general area.The 8.58 acres of MF-24 zoning would allow
205 apartment units.The applicant is proposing only 96
units for this development,which is below the density for
MF-12 zoning.
4
May 11,20~J
SUBDZVZSZON
ZTEM NO.:17 (Cont.)FZLE NO.:S-1281
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATZONS:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed site plan,
subject to the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the conditions as noted in paragraphs D,
E and F of this report.2.Any site lighting should be directed away from adjacent
property.
SUBDZVZSZON COMMZTTEE COMMENT:(APRZL 20,2000)
Pat McGetrick was present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the site plan and noted that additional
information was needed.
Staff noted that the landscape buffer between this property and
the mini-warehouse property to the east needed to be shown on
this property,as per the previously approved PCD for the mini-
warehouse development.This issue was discussed.Mr.McGetrick
noted that the drainage ditch along the east property line would
be piped.
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.The issue
of right-of-way dedication and street improvements to Quail Run
Drive was discussed.
After the presentation,the Committee forwarded the site plan to
the full Commission for final action.
PLANNZNG COMMZSSZON ACTZON:(MAY 11,2000)
The staff presented a positive recommendation on this
application,as there were no further issues for resolution.
There were no objectors to this matter.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended
by staff.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed
by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent and 1 open position.
5
May 11,2L ~0
ITEM NO.:18 FILE NO.:Z-6051-F
NAME:Arkansas System (Lot 1)—Zoning Site Plan Review
LOCATION:East side of Chenal Parkway,north of System Drive
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Flake,Kelley and Co.White-Daters and Associates
425 W.Capitol,Ste.300 401 S.Victory Street
Little Rock,AR 72203 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:8.6 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:0-2 ALLOWED USES:Office
PROPOSED USE:Office
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
BACKGROUND:
Lot 1,Arkansas System is zoned 0-2,which is one of the City'
Zoning Site Plan Review districts.Any development within this
zoning district requires site plan review and approval by the
Planning Commission.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is proposing a two-phase development of Lot
1,Arkansas Systems.Phase I of the project will consist
of construction of 522 parking spaces and associated
landscaping.This parking will be used by the tenants in
the original Arksys building on Lot 2 to the east.Phase 2
will be the construction of a four (4)story,100,000
square foot office building.Construction of the building
will require modification to portions of the parking area
and result in a net loss of 22 of the 522 parking spaces.
The proposed building,parking areas,access drives and
landscape/buffer areas are noted on the attached site plan.
May 11,2v ~0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:18 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6051-F
See the attached letter (dated April 10,2000)from Hank
Kelley for a detailed explanation of how the proposed
phased development will be implemented.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The property is undeveloped and mostly wooded,and slopes
generally downward from the north.
The existing Arkansas System development is located to the
east and south.There is an existing PCD to the north (The
Village at Rahling Road).There is undeveloped property to
the west across Chenal Parkway,with the GMAC office
development to the southwest.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
There was no established neighborhood association to
notify.As of this writing,staff has received no comment
from the surrounding property owners.
D .ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned
development.
2.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.
3.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.
4.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is
damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
5.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
6.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
7.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little
Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to Traffic
Engineering.
8.Open access to Chenal Parkway with Phase I construction.
9.Close median on Arkansas System Drive as agreed on
previous submittals.
10.A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec.29-186(e)
will be required with a building permit.
11.A Grading Permit per Secs.29-186(c)and (d)will be
2
May 11,2l
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:18 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6051-F
required with a building permit.
12.Contact the ADEQ for approval prior to start of work.
13.Chenal Parkway has a 1998 average daily traffic count
of 12,000.
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements
to serve property.
AP&L:Will deal with right-of-way for power at a later
date.
Arkla:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:An acreage charge of $600 per acre applies in
addition to normal charges for water service.
Fire Department:No Comment.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Affect-Not on a dedicated bus route.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
No Comment.
Landsca e Issues:
Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with
ordinance requirements when averaged out.However,a
portion of the proposed street buffer along Chenal Parkway
drops to a width of only twenty feet.The full requirement
without transfers is fifty feet.
The City Beautiful recommends preserving as many trees as
feasible on this tree-covered property.Extra credit
toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be
given when preserving trees of six inch caliper or larger.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
April 26,2000.The revised plan addresses the issues as
raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee.The revised
3
May 11,2l.
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:18 (Cont.)FILE NO;:Z-6051-F
plan notes the building height,shows a ground-mounted sign
location and shows the access drive to Chenal Parkway as
part of the Phase I (as recommended by Public Works).
The revised plan notes the building height at approximately
65 feet.The 0-2 zoning district allows a building height
of 45 feet,which can be increased to 120 feet with
additional building setbacks.There is more than enough
building setback to accommodate the 65 foot building
height.The proposed building setbacks greatly exceed the
minimum setbacks as required by ordinance.A 25 foot
setback is required from all property lines.The building
is set back well over 100 feet from all property lines.
A ground-mounted sign is shown on the attached site plan
along the north side of the access drive to Chenal Parkway.
The applicant has noted that the sign will conform to the
City's ordinance requirements for the Chenal/Financial
Center Design Overlay District (maximum height —8 feet,
maxim 100 square feet).The sign must be monument-type.
As noted in paragraph A.of this report,the applicant is
proposing 522 parking spaces with Phase I,which will be
reduced to 500 with the building construction in Phase II.
The City's Zoning Ordinance requires 211 parking spaces for
a 100,000 square foot office building.The applicant has
submitted written jurisdiction for the amount of proposed
parking (see attached letter dated April 10,2000 from Hank
Kelley).Staff supports the parking plan as proposed.
Otherwise,there should be no outstanding issues associated
with the site plan.The proposed office development should
have no adverse effect on the general area.The site is
located within the Chenal/Financial Center Design Overlay
District and must conform to the district's requirements
for signage,lighting and utilities.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed site plan subject
to the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D,E and F of this report.2.Any site lighting should be directed away from adjacent
property according to the Chenal/Financial Center DOD.
4
May 11,2G
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:18 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6051-F
3.Utilities must conform to the Chenal/Financial Center
DOD.No overhead utilities within 100 feet of Chenal
Parkway right-of-way or in front of the rear buildingline.4.Signage must also conform to the Chenal/Financial DOD.
The ground-mounted sign must be monument-type with a
maximum height of 8 feet and a maximum area of 100 squarefeet.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(APRIL 20,2000)
Tim Daters was present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the site plan.
The justification for the amount of proposed parking was
discussed at length.Mr.Daters provided an explanation,and
stated that additional information would be provided.
The Public Works requirements were discussed.It was noted that
the access drive to Chenal Parkway should be constructed with
Phase I.This issue was briefly discussed.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the site plan to
the full Commission for final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
The staff presented a positive recommendation on this
application,as there were no further issues for resolution.
There were no objectors to this matter.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended
by staff.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed
by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent and 1 open position.
5
c
g-(c g/-F
FLAKE 6z KEuzv
MANAGEMENT
Specialists in Leasing,Property Management,and Real Estate Consulting
April 10,2000
Mr.Jim Lawson
Department of Neighborhoods &.Planning
723 W.Markham
Little Rock.,AR 72201
Dear Mr.Lawson:
I have filed for Site Plan Review for a proposed expansion of a parking and office
building on Lot 1 of the Arkansas Systems Office Park..This property is located
immediately north of the existing ArkSys Plaza.The purpose of this Site Plan Review
is to gain approval for a two-phase development for GMAC/Nuvell,one of the current
occupants of the ArkSys Plaza Building.Nuvell has requested relocation of
Euronet/ArkSys out of the ArkSys building into a new building.Euronet's new
building will be constructed on a site previously approved north of the Centre at
Chenal and south of ArkSys Plaza.It is our intent to relocate Euronet/ArkSys,
Corvel,and Heathcott into the new building making room for GMAC/Nuvell to
expand from their current occupancy of 80,000 square feet to 150,000 square feet.
GMAC/Nuvell's employees will grow from their current level of 425 employees to
approximately twice that number upon completion of the expansion.
In order to accommodate their employee needs our plan is to create a parking area on
Lot 1 until such time as they need additional office space.The additional office space
would then be added in the area identified on the site by constructing a building with
a 25,000 square foot footprint and up to 4 floors or 100,000 square feet.
When the additional office space is required on Lot 1,a parking deck.on Lot 2 (the
current ArkSys lot)can be added if necessary to accommodate additional parking
needs.A competing developer for Nuvell has received approval from the City for a
surface-parking ratio on a site directly across the street from the current location.
The approval is similar to our application for surface-parking ratio at the current site.
TCBY Totver,Suite 300 ~425 West Capitol Avenue ~Post Office Box 990 ~Little Rock,Arkansas 72203
(501)375-3200 ~Telefax (50l )374-9537 ~Home Page:tvtvw.flake-kelley.corn
Page Two
April 10,2000
We believe our strategy of accommodating their parking and space needs in a two-
phased approach is in the best interest of the office park and tenant.Their total site
would be in excess of twenty acres including a lake area which is considered a premier
site amenity for the office park.
We would appreciate any feedback you could give us regarding this Site Development
Plan and stand ready to work with you and your staff to make sure that the integrity
of the Arkansas Systems Office Park and adjoining properties are complimented by
this development.
Sincer y,
ank I(elley
President/CEO
HIC:skb
000407.jl
cc:Tim Daters
David Payne
John Flake
May 11,24 J
ITEM NO.:19 FILE NO.:Z-6849
NAME:Harris/Hathaway Office Building —Zoning Site Plan Review
LOCATION:Northeast corner of Centerview Drive and Shackleford
West Blvd.
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Harris/Hathaway J.V.,LLC Development Consultants,Inc.
100 Morgan Keegan Dr.2200 N.Rodney Parham Rd.,
Suite 120 Suite 220
Little Rock,AR 72202 Little Rock,AR 72212
AREA:6.92 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:C-2 ALLOWED USES:Commercial
PROPOSED USE:Office
VARIANCE S/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1.Variance from the minimum required driveway spacing standards.
BACKGROUND:
The property at the northeast corner of Centerview Dr.and
Shackleford West Blvd.is zoned C-2,which is one of the City'
Zoning Site Plan Review districts.Any development within this
zoning district requires site plan review and approval by the
Planning Commission.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to construct an office building on
the 6.92 acre site at the northeast corner of Centerview
Dr.and Shackleford West Blvd.The proposed facility will
house the new Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)fieldoffice.Incorporated into the building are areas for a
basement level parking garage and a maintenance/work area
May 11,2(
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:19 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6849
for operations vehicles,electronics and communication
equipment.The breakdown of building uses are as follows:
~office area —90,000 square feet
~maintenance area —16,000 square feet
~parking garage —41,500 square feet
The applicant is proposing a total of 227 parking spaces
for the project as follows:
~staff parking (exterior)—105 spaces
~visitor parking (exterior)—20 spaces
~staff and operation parking (parking garage)
102 spaces
Two (2)access points are proposed,one (1)from Centerview
Dr.and one (1)from Shackleford West Blvd.The applicantisrequestingavariancefromtheminimumdrivewayspacing
standards for each driveway (setback from property lines).
The applicant is proposing a 6 foot high ornamental iron
fence around the perimeter of the property.The fence will
be constructed to a standard which will allow it to
function as a vehicular barrier.
The applicant notes that the main office building will be
approximately 30.5 feet in height,with the maintenance
section of the structure being approximately 19.5 feet
high.The applicant has also noted that specific signage
has not been determined at this time,but any signageinstalledonthepropertywillconformtotheCity'zoning
Ordinance standards.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The property is undeveloped and mostly wooded.The site is
slightly above the grade of the existing adjacent streets.
There is office zoned property to the south across
Shackleford West Blvd.and to the west across Centerview
Dr.There is additional C-2 zoned property immediately
east,with an office building currently under construction
further east along the south side of Shackleford West Blvd.
There is a mixture of office,residential and undeveloped
property to the north along Kanis Road.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
There Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge and
Sandpiper Neighborhood Associations were notified of the
public hearing.As of this writing,staff has received
2
May 11,24
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:19 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6849
one (1)phone call from a person requesting information on
this project.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.
2.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that
is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to
occupancy.
3.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
4.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
5.Provide street light design and construct with prior
approval by Traffic Engineering.
6.Redesign employee entrance to accommodate safe turn
around without pulling on the street.
7.A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec.29-186(e)
will be required with a building permit.
8.The address assigned for this project is 10900
Shackleford West Blvd.
9.Kanis Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as a
minor arterial.A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet
from centerline is required.
10.Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned
development.
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely af fected.
APGL:A 10 foot easement is requested along the east and
west property lines.
ARKLA:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:An acreage charge of $150 per acre applies in
addition to normal charges.On-site fire protection will
be required.
3
May 11,20~J
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:19 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6849
Fire Department:Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752
regarding fire hydrants.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Affect-Not on a dedicated bus route.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
No Comment.
Landsca e Issues:
Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with
ordinance recpxirements when averaged out.However,a
portion of the proposed street buffer along Shackleford
West Blvd.drops below the full width recpxirement of
twenty-seven feet by twelve feet.
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many
trees as feasible on this tree-covered site.Extra credit
toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be
given when preserving trees of six inch caliper or larger.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
April 26,2000.The revised plan addresses most of the
issues as raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee.
The applicant has noted that the maximum retaining wall
height will be approximately 15 feet at the north end of
the parking and drive area.
The applicant has also noted the 40 foot OS strip along the
property's north boundary.The barrier fence is located
within this OS strip.The applicant proposes to angle the
fence through this area and to remove no trees,if
possible.Staff recognizes that a select number of trees
may have to be removed to construct the fence,and that
this number will be vary minimal.
4
May 11,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:19 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6849
The proposed building height and setbacks conforms to the
City's Zoning Ordinance standards.The applicant is
proposing 227 parking spaces for this development.The
ordinance requires a minimum of 191 parking spaces for this
amount of office space.The remaining 36 parking spaces
should be sufficient to serve the maintenance area of the
building.
As noted in paragraph A.,the applicant is proposing a
variance from the minimum driveway spacing standards for
each proposed driveway.The ordinance requires that a
driveway have a setback of 125 feet from a property line.
The driveway on Centerview Drive has a setback of 65.5 feet
and the driveway on Shackleford West Drive has a setback of
90 feet.Public Works supports the variance for driveway
spacing,as the drive locations are key components of the
applicant's site plan.
One issue which needs to be resolved is right-of-way
dedication and street improvements to Kanis Road.
According to Public Works,a portion of this property
(northwest corner)has Kanis Road frontage,which would
require right-of-way dedication and street improvements.
Staff will attempt to resolve this issue prior to the
public hearing.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the site plan,subject to the
following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D,E and F of this report.2.The issue relating to Kanis Road right-of-way dedication
and street improvements must be resolved.3.Any site lighting must be directed away from adjacent
property.4.The dumpster area must be screened on three (3)sides
with an 8 foot opaque fence or wall.
5.Staff recommends approval of the variance from the
minimum driveway spacing standards as noted in paragraph
G.
6.The 40 foot OS zoned area along the property's north
boundary line must remain undisturbed.
5
May 11,2(
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:19 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6849
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(APRIL 20,2000)
Robert Brown and John Kincaid were present,representing the
application.Staff briefly described the site plan,noting that
additional information was needed.
Mr.Brown noted that this development appeared to have no
conflict with the 40 foot OS strip along the south side of Kanis
Road.This area was briefly discussed.The proposed perimeter
fence was also discussed.
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.It was
noted that a variance for driveway spacing was requested.
There being no further issues for discussion,the Committee
forwarded the site plan to the full Commission for final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY ll,2000)
The staff presented a positive recommendation on this
application,as there were no further issues for resolution.
There were no objectors to this matter.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended
by staff.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed
by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent and 1 open position.
6
May 11,GOO
ITEM NO.:20 FILE NO.:Z-4586-A
NAME:St.Theresa's Catholic Church—
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:6219 Baseline Road
OWNER/APPLICANT:Catholic Diocese of Little Rock
PROPOSAL:To revise an existing conditional use
permit located at 6219 Baseline Road
to add a Family Center to the existing
facilities on property zoned R-2,Single
Family Residential,and C-4,Open Display
Commercial.There is an accompanying item
on this agenda (Z-4586-B)to rezone the
C-4 portion of the property to R-2.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
This existing church site is located on the south side of
Baseline Road,just west of Geyer Springs Road.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The existing church site is zoned R-2,Single Family
Residential.The added property which would contain the
parish center is zoned C4,Open Display Commercial.Thereisanaccompanyingitemonthisagendatorezonethis
part of the property to R-2 which would then allow the
C.U.P.to expand into this part of the property.The site
has R-2 zoning to the west and south,C-3,General
Commercial to the east,C-4 directly to the north
containing a fast food restaurant,and across Baseline a
mixture of C-3 and 0-3,General Office.
Staff believes this expansion of facilities for the
church would continue to be compatible with the
neighborhood with proper screening from the residential
area to the south.
The Cloverdale and Allendale Neighborhood Associations,
and the Southwest Little Rock United for Progress were
all notified of the public hearing.
May 11,JOO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:20 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4586-A
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
There are two existing drives entering the property
from Baseline Road.Those would not be changed by this
proposed addition.Access to the added area would be
through the existing property or by way of an extended
driveway from an existing access to the fast food
restaurant which abuts Baseline on the north side of
this proposed addition.No additional curb cuts would
be made.
4 .SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
The proposed land use buffer along the southern perimeter
meets the ordinance width requirement when averaged out.
However,a portion of the proposed buffer drops seventeen
feet below the full width requirement of twenty-eight
feet.
For quite some time there has existed a 50 foot buffer
between the C-3 and C-4 zoned areas abutting Roosevelt
Road and the residential area to the south along
Senate Street.The applicant at the urging of Staff
has agreed to maintain at least 30 feet of that long
standing 50 foot buffer.
A minimum four foot wide landscape strip has been
added east of the proposed parking lot driveway.
A six foot high opaque screen,either a wooden fence
with its face side directed outward or dense evergreen
plantings,is required along the southern and western
perimeters of the site,especially adjacent to the new
paved area.The natural vegetation should be
sufficient along the west side.Since the south side
is in a floodplain,a fence would not be allowed
because it would construct water flow too much.
A total of six percent (2,736 sq.ft.)of the interior
of the proposed future parking area must have
landscaping.
2
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:20 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4586-A
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
a.Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway
right-of-way from AHTD,District VI.
b.Baseline Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as
a principal arterial,dedication of right-of-way to
45 feet from centerline is required.c.Driveways shall confozm to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.
d.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk
that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to
occupancy.e.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted
for approval prior to start of work.f.Stozmwater detention ordinance applies to this
property.
g.Dedicate regulatory floodway easement to the City.
h.A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec.29-
186(e)will be required with a building permit.i.A Grading Pezmit per Secs.29-186(c)and (d)will be
required with a building pezmit.j.Baseline Road has a 1998 average daily traffic count
of 21,000.
k.Redevelopment permit is required.
6.UTILITY AND FIRE DEPT.COMMENTS:
Water:On site fire protection may be required.It
appears that this property is a separate tract.If itis,it does not have frontage on a water main.It
will have to be combined with the church'other
property to obtain service from the existing water
main.
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
ARKLA:No comments received.
Entergy:Approved as submitted.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
CATA:No affect.Not on a dedicated CATA bus route.
3
May 11,JOO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:20 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4586-A
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has requested to amend an existing
conditional use permit to expand their site and add a
family center with additional parking to the existingfacilitiesonthechurchproperty.
The 18,000 square foot facility would be equivalent to
two stories,but contain mainly a gymnasium with some
small meeting rooms,and would be used up to 9 or
10:00 p.m.several nights a week during the school
term.Some weekend activities would also occur.
All siting requirements are met.The proposed buildingissitedasfarfromtheresidentialareaonthesouth
as possible.A parking area would be between the
building,which could be a source for some noise,and
the residential area.The other surrounding uses are
commercial .
This added use would not add any parking requirements
according to the ordinance since parking for a church
site is based on the main sanctuary seating capacity.
However,the applicant is adding 14 spaces initially,and
showing an additional 60 future spaces.
Staff believes this would be a reasonable use of this
added property and be compatible with the neighborhood
with proper screening to the south.
8 .STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use
permit subject to compliance with the following
conditions:
a.Comply with the City's Landscape and Buffer
Ordinances.
b.Comply with Public Works Comments.c.All exterior lighting must be low intensity and
directed downward and inward to the property and
not towards any residential zoned area.
4
May 11,.-JOO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:20 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4586-A
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(APRIL 20,2000)
Bill Canino was present representing the application.Staff
gave a brief description of the proposal.
Staff reviewed the screening and buffer,and parking
requirements with the applicant.The applicant had no issue
with the Staff write-up.
There being no further issues,the Committee accepted the
proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for
final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
Bill Canino was present representing the application.There
were two registered supporters and no registered objectors
present.Staff presented the item with a recommendation for
approval subject to compliance with the conditions listed
under "Staff Recommendation,"paragraph 8 above.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
submitted to include staff comments and recommendations.
The vote was 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent,and 1 open position.
5
May 11,000
ITEM NO.:20.1 FILE NO.:Z-4586-B
Owner:Catholic Diocese of Little Rock
(St.Theresa's Catholic Church)
Applicant:Canino,Peckham and Associates
Location:6219 Baseline Road
Request:Rezone from R-2 and C-4 to R-2
Purpose:Expansion of existing church
(see associated conditional use
permit Z-4586-A.)
Size:1.6+acres
Existing Use:Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North —Restaurant;zoned C-4
South —Single Family;zoned R-2
East —Drugstore and vacant grocery store building;
zoned C-3
West —St.Theresa's Catholic Church;zoned R-2
PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS
(From Conditional Use Permit File Z-4586-A)
1.Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway
right-of-way from AHTD,District VI.
2.Baseline Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as a
principal arterial,dedication of right-of-way to 45
feet from centerline is required.
3.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.
4.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that
is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to
occupancy.
5.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
6.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
7.Dedicate regulatory floodway easement to the City.
8.A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec.29-186(e)
will be required with a building permit.
9.A Grading Permit per Secs.29-186(c)and (d)will be
required with a building permit.
May 11,JOO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:20.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4586-B
10.Baseline Road has a 1998 average daily traffic count of
21,000.
11.Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway
right-of-way from AHTD,District VI.
12.Redevelopment permit is required.
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
CATA Bus Routes extend down Baseline Road,north of this
site.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,
Southwest Little Rock United for Prograss and the
Cloverdale,Chicot and Allendale Neighborhood Associations
were notified of the rezoning request.Additionally,all
of the above as well as all residents within 300 feet were
notified of the Conditional Use Permit.
LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT
The site is located in the Geyer Springs West Planning
District.The Plan is reflective of the existing zoning
pattern,recommending Commercial for this C-4 zoned tract
and Public/Institutional for the adjacent church site.
Insomuch as this is an expansion of the less intensive,
adjacent church use across the line which generally divides
the PI and C,staff feels no plan amendment is necessary.
At some point in the future,the map may be adjusted to
reflect the expanded PI.The existing Land Use Plan
conforms to the Cloverdale/Watson Schools Neighborhood
Action Plan which was adopted on March 18,1997.One
objective of the Plan was to review neighborhood zoning
classifications for appropriateness.Eliminating the C-4
zoning adjacent to the residential properties to the south
is appropriate and appears to conform to that objective.
2
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:20.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4586-B
STAFF ANALYSIS
St.Theresa's Catholic Church is located on the R-2 zoned
property at 6219 Baseline Road.The church has recently
accpxired a 1.6+acre parcel of R-2 and C-4 zoned property
adjacent to the east for the purpose of constructing a new
parish hall and additional parking.The C-4 zoning
district does not allow churches.The church has recpxested
that the zoning of the property be reclassified from "C-4"
Open Display commercial to "R-2"Single Family residential,
the same zoning as the existing church property.The
church has also applied for a conditional use permit for
expansion of the church facilities onto this parcel (see
File No.Z-4586-A).The south 50 feet of the property is
now zoned R-2.
The property is located on the fringe of the commercial
node established at the intersection of Geyer Springs and
Baseline Roads.A vacant grocery store building and a drug
store are located on the C-3 zoned property to the east.
St.Theresa's Church and School occupy the R-2 zoned
property to the west.Single family homes are located on
R-2 zoned properties to the south.Various uses,including
a grocery store,a post office,a restaurant and a
Taekwondo Academy,are located on the C-4 and C-3 zoned
properties to the north.The proposed rezoning and
expansion of St.Theresa's is compatible with uses and
zoning in the area.Attention should be given,through the
conditional use permit process,to screening and buffering
the site from the adjacent residential properties.
The Geyer Springs West District Land Use Plan is reflective
of the existing zoning pattern.This site is shown as
Commercial on the plan but is on the dividing line between
the commercial and the Public/Institutional designation of
the St.Theresa's property.Allowing the church expansion
does not recpxire a Land Use Plan Amendment.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the recpxested R-2 zoning.
3
May 11,F00
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:20.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4586-B
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors
present.Staff presented the item and a recommendation of
approval.There were no other comments.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved by a
vote of 8 ayes,0 noes and 3 absent.
4
May 11,.&00
ITEM NO.:21 FILE NO.:Z-6079-C
NAME:Walnut Valley Christian Academy —Revised
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:19010 Highway Ten
OWNER/APPLICANT:Walnut Valley Christian Academy
PROPOSAL:To revise an existing conditional use
permit by changing the master plan,
rearranging the placement and phasing of
future buildings located at 19010 Highway
10 on property zoned R-2,Single Family
Residential.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
This site is located on the north side of Highway 10,
0.4 miles east of the intersection of Highway 10 and
Chenal Parkway.It is just within an area that was
recently annexed into the City.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This site contains 30 acres of R-2 zoned,single family
residential land,surrounded by large tracts of tree
covered R-2 zoned land on all sides including across
Highway 10 to the south.
There is a single family residence located immediately
to the east and one to the west.
With proper screening of this site from the adjacent
residential zoned properties,and compliance with the
Highway 10 Overlay District Ordinance,this proposed
use should have little adverse effect on the
surrounding properties.
The Aberdeen Court Neighborhood Association was
notified of the public hearing to consider this item.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The access consists of one main 4-lane entrance with a
median.That would not change.The proposal includes
480 parking spaces versus a requirement for 195
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:21 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6079-C
spaces.This is a large site,so the parking would not
appear to cover all the green area.
4 .SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with
ordinance requirements.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas is a
requirement of the Highway 10 Overlay District.
A six foot high opaque screen,either a wooden fence
with its face side directed outward or dense evergreen
plantings,is required in areas where this property
abuts residential properties.Credit toward
fulfilling this requirement can be given when
preserving existing vegetation that provides the
required year-round screening.
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
a.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and
ramps brought up to the current ADA standards.
b.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk
that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to
occupancy.c.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted
for approval prior to start of work.
d.Restripe Hwy.10 as agreed on previous submittal.
e.A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec.29-
186(e)will be required with a building permit.f.A Grading Permit per Secs.29-186(c)and (d)will be
required with a building permit.
g.Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway
right-of-way from AHTD,District VI.
6.UTILITY AND FIRE DEPT.COMMENTS:
Water:No objection.
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Southwestern Bell:No comments received.
ARKLA:No comments received.
2
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:21 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6079-C
Entergy:No comments received.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
CATA:No affect.Site is on Route ¹25.
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant,Walnut Valley Christian Academy,is
again requesting a revised conditional use permit to
revise their plan for the phased construction of a
private school on this R-2 zoned,30 acre site.This
site is located approximately 'c mile east of the
intersection of Highway 10 and Chenal Parkway,just
inside a newly annexed area.The proposed site is
within the Highway 10 Overlay District.
On December 12,1995,the Planning Commission granted
Walnut Valley Christian Academy a conditional use
permit for the phased construction of a private school
on a 20 acre,R-2 zoned site.After that date,Walnut
Valley Christian Academy obtained an additional 10
acres along the north end of the original 20 acres.A
revised conditional use permit was obtained on June
26,1997 to add the 10 acres,revise the master plan
and obtain approval for a specific Phase 1.On
September 3,1998,the Planning Commission granted a
revision to that master plan and Phase 2.
The Academy is requesting to change their master plan
once again and obtain approval for a new Phase 4.
This Phase 4 would consist of a new gymnasium just to
the north of the elementary school,with an access
driveway.
All on site lighting must be designed and oriented
such that the lighting is focused on the property and
the lighting located in such a manner as not to
disturb the scenic appearance preserved in this
corridor.As it is constructed,the lighting and
sound system for the football and baseball fields as
well as the lighting for the parking areas should be
directed inward and away from the adjacent residential
parcels.
3
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:21 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6079-C
Proposed buildings will be a mix of one and two story
construction and exceed the setback recpxirements of
the Highway 10 Overlay District Ordinance.The
proposed number of parking spaces also exceeds
ordinance recpxirements,480 versus 195 required.Any
signage must comply with the Highway 10 Overlay
District Ordinance.No new signage was proposed.
Due to facility planning issues and budget restraints,
the school desires to make these revisions.The
revised Master Plan changes the location and mix of
uses within most of the buildings on the north fourth
of the campus,and revises the phasing for their
construction.No new uses are proposed.The elementary
school total square footage has been reduced by about
12,500 feet.The large Gymatorium has been divided
into two smaller gym buildings with the same total
scpxare footage.The cafeteria,library,and
administration offices have been combined into one
building without any classrooms.The Middle and High
schools are still proposed together but now in a
building of their own.The student and teacher
populations remain the same,1100 and 110
respectively.
The remaining phases in the overall 9 phase Master
Plan consist of the following:Phase 4,a Practice
Gymnasium with an access road to it;Phase 5,a Middle
School/High School,Loop Drive and some additional
parking;Phase 6,a Cafeteria-Library-Administration
Building,relocation of the west side of the entrance
driveway,an extended deceleration lane along Highway
10,a Maintenance Building,a new Driveway along the
northeast side of the campus,finishing new parking
areas and removing the last house;Phase 7,an
Auditorium Gymnasium;Phase 8,a Baseball Field;and
finally,Phase 9,a Music Building.
There is an existing paved drive on site,which is
located too close to the west property line.This
drive is to be relocated 25 feet from the property
line,as indicated on the master plan.The school
would like to request a continuation of the deferral
on this relocation until the last remaining house on
the site is removed.The house is currently being used
4
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:21 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6079-C
as the Administration Suite.Utility lines that serve
this house are located under the future road location,
and the utilities need to remain in service at this
time.The school would also like to recpxest a
continuation of the deferral on the construction of
the sidewalks until the existing house is removed and
the existing road is relocated.There are currently
no sidewalks in close proximity to the school.Staff
believes the continued deferrals are reasonable.
There is an existing sign on site now.No changes toitwereproposed.
With proper screening of this site from the adjacent
residential properties and conformance to the Highway 10
Overlay District Ordinance,this proposed school
development should have little adverse impact on the
surrounding properties or area.
Staff believes these modifications are reasonable and
that the school would still be compatible with the
neighborhood with proper screening.
8 .STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use
permit subject to compliance with the following
conditions:
a.Comply with the City's Landscape and Buffer
Ordinances.
b.Comply with Public Works Comments.
c.All exterior lighting must be low intensity and
directed downward and inward to the property and not
towards any residential zoned area.
d.Comply with the City's Highway 10 Overlay District
Ordinance.
e.The lighting of the football field and baseball
field must also be directed inward and away from
adjacent parcels.f.The sound system for the football and baseball
fields must also be directed inward and away from
adjacent parcels.
Staff recommends approval of the continued deferrals
for relocation of the west part of the entry drive and
5
May 11,JOO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:21 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6079-C
also on the construction of the sidewalks until the
last house on this property is removed.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(APRIL 20,2000)
/
Jason Landrum was present representing the application.
Staff gave a brief description of the proposal.
Public Works briefly reviewed their comments.A discussion
followed regarding meetings the school had with the Highway
Department.The applicant stated that the Highway Dept.was
not in favor of center turn lanes or flashing school lights
at this location.Mr.Turner,Public Works Director,stated
that he would have his traffic engineer get with the
Highway Department and see what could be agreed to.
Screening requirements,and the continued deferrals for
moving the entrance drive and constructing sidewalks were
also briefly reviewed.
There being no further issues,the Committee accepted the
proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for
final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
Jason Landrum was present representing the application.
There were no registered objectors present.Staff presented
the item with a recommendation for approval subject to
compliance with the conditions listed under "Staff
Recommendation,"paragraph 8 above.The approval
recommendation included continuing the deferrals for
relocating the west part of the entry drive,and the
construction of the sidewalks,until the last house on this
property is removed.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
submitted to include staff comments and recommendations,
and the deferrals.The vote was 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent,
and 1 open position.
6
May 11,~00
ITEM NO.:22 FILE NO.:Z-6425-A
NAME:Lutheran High School —Revised Conditional
Use Permit
LOCATION:6711 West Markham Street
OWNER/APPLICANT:Lutheran High School
PROPOSAL:To revise an existing conditional use
permit to add a multipurpose gymnasium to
the site,and increase the allowed
enrollment from 200 to 250 at the existing
school located at 6711 West Markham Street
on property zoned R-5,Urban Residence
District.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
This existing 4.11 acre site is located on the
southeast corner of West Markham and Hughes Streets.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This site is zoned R-5,Urban Residential District,
and is surrounded by R-2,Single Family Residential
zoning.There is a single family residential use
immediately to the south and Christ Lutheran Church
and School located further south.There is a house
located immediately east that is owned by the Lutheran
Church also.Single family residences are located to
the west across Hughes and north across West Markham.
Adding a multi-purpose gymnasium to the site should
not increase the adverse effect to a large degree
since it would be used either by the students in
school during the day,or at hours other than when
school is in session.
The Briarwood Neighborhood Association was notified of
the public hearing.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
Access to the site would continue to be by using three
existing drives from Hughes Street.The southern most
May 11,JOO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:22 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6425-A
drive would be in only.The center drive would be out
only.The northern drive would become two way once the
gym is built.
The ordinance requires 84 spaces for the existing 14
classrooms;91 spaces exist now.The original C.U.P.
was for 18 classrooms,requiring 108 parking spaces.
The number of classrooms has been reduced.A total of
136 parking spaces are shown on the plan.The plan is
that the additional 45 spaces would be added later if
90%of the current parking spaces were regularly
filled.
4 .SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Areas set aside for landscaping and buffers meet with
ordinance requirements.
5 .PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and
ramps brought up to the current ADA standards.
2.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk
that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to
occupancy.
3.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted
for approval prior to start of work.
4.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this
property.
5.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the
Little Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded
to Traffic Engineering.
6.West Markham has a 1998 average daily traffic count
of 18,000.
7.Hughes has a 1998 average daily traffic count of
2,900.
6.UTILITY AND FIRE DEPT.COMMENTS:
Water:On site fire protection may be required.
Contact the Water Works if additional water service
is needed.
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
2
May 11,JOO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:22 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6425-A
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
ARKLA:No comments received.
Entergy:A 10 foot wide utility easement is required
for Entergy along the east side of the property from
Markham to the existing driveway on the east side of
the existing school building.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.A fire
hydrant may be required on site.Contact Dennis
Free,371-3752,at the fire department.
CATA:No affect.Site is close to CATA bus route ¹5.
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit
to add a multi-purpose gymnasium to this 4.11 acre
private school site,and increase the maximum
enrollment from 200 to 250 students.
The existing school structure would not be changed on
the exterior.One 16,000 square foot building not to
exceed 35 feet in height would be added on the north
portion of the property to be used as a multi-purpose
gymnasium with a gym for various sports activities,
locker rooms,and bathroom facilities.All siting
criteria are met.No additional curb cuts would be
made.An area for an additional 45 parking spaces is
shown and would be added once the existing parking is
regularly filled to 90%capacity.Existing parking is
adequate for the existing classrooms.The gymnasium
would not increase parking requirements according to
the ordinance.No change to signage was proposed.
The applicant held two meetings for the neighborhood
and had less than five people attend each one.Traffic
was the main concern.The school has restated its
position that it will participate in funding of a
traffic light at Markham and Hughes when it is
warranted,and they will do all they can to minimize
their traffic spilling into Hughes and prevent parking
on adjacent streets.
3
May 11,JOO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:22 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6425-A
Staff believes the proposed expansion is reasonable
and should not have an adverse impact on the
neighborhood.
8 .STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use
permit subject to compliance with the following
conditions:
a.Comply with the City's Landscape and Buffer
Ordinances.
b.Comply with Public Works Comments.
c.Comply with Fire Department Comment.
d.All exterior lighting must be low intensity and
directed downward and inward to the property and not
towards any residential zoned area.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(APRIL 20,2000)
Gary Langlais was present representing the application.Staff
gave a brief description of the proposal.
The applicant had no issue with the Staff write-up.A short.
discussion took place clarifying on site traffic flow and the
timing of constructing additional parking.No issue remained.
The applicant explained discussions they had with neighbors
revealing that traffic was their only concern.
There being no further issues,the Committee accepted the
proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for
final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
Gary Langlais was present representing the application.There
were no registered objectors present.Staff presented the item
with a recommendation for approval subject to compliance with
the conditions listed under "Staff Recommendation,"paragraph
8 above.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
submitted to include staff comments and recommendations.The
vote was 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent,and 1 open position.
4
May 11,F00
ITEM NO.:23 FILE NO.:Z-6426-A
NAME:Lovelace Day Care —Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:1219-1223 South Tyler Street
OWNER/APPLICANT:Herschel and Venita Lovelace
PROPOSAL:To obtain a conditional use permit to use
an existing duplex for a childcare center
with a capacity of 20 children located at
1219-1223 South Tyler Street,property
zoned R-3,Single Family Residential.
ORDINANCE DES IGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
This site is located on the northeast corner of South
Tyler and 13 Streets.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This site is zoned R-3,Single Family Residential,and
is surrounded by R-3 zoned property.One lot north and
one half block west the zoning is C-3,General
Commercial.Immediately west across Tyler is a vacant
lot,but the rest of the properties contain single
family residences.
This site is close to the northern edge of a
residential neighborhood and the site is large enough
to accommodate on site parking.Therefore,Staff
believes the proposed use would be compatible with
this neighborhood with proper screening.
The Oak Forest Neighborhood Association was notified
of the public hearing.
3 .ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
There is one existing driveway onto the property from
13 Street.That would be closed and a new one
constructed a few feet to the east along with a new
eight space parking area.Those eight spaces would
meet ordinance parking requirements for 20 children
and five employees.
May 11,JOO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:23 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6426-A
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with
ordinance requirements.
A six foot high opaque screen,either a wooden fence
with its face side directed outward or dense evergreen
plantings,is required north and east of this
property.Preferably this screen would be a wooden
fence.
5 .PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
a.Property f rontage needs to have the sidewalks and
ramps brought up to the current ADA standards.
b.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk
that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to
occupancy.c.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be
submitted for approval prior to start of work.
d.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this
property.e.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the
Little Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded
to Traffic Engineering.f.A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is
required at the corner of South Tyler and West 13
Street.
6 .UTILITY AND FIRE DEPT .COMMENTS:
Water:No objection.
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
ARKLA:No comments received.
Entergy:Approved as submitted.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
CATA:No affect.Site is close to CATA bus route ¹8.
2
May 11,~00
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:23 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6426-A
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has requested a conditional use permit
to use an existing duplex for a day care center with a
maximum capacity of 20 children and accompanying
parking on property zoned R-3,Single Family
Residential.
The site contains a single story duplex and no
exterior changes except for parking are proposed.All
siting requirements are met.An opaque screen would be
required on the north and east sides of the property.
The day care would be open from 6:30 a.m.to 11:30
p.m.Monday through Friday.There would be two shifts
with up to five employees and 20 children on each
shift.That would result in a requirement for seven
parking spaces which are shown on the site plan.If
needed,the applicant has obtained written permission
to use three parking spaces in the parking lot of
nearby Our Lady of Good Counsel Church.The applicant
has stated that he would not have children playing
outside later than 8:00 p.m.No signage has been
requested.
Staff believes this would be a reasonable use of this
property and be compatible with the neighborhood with
proper screening.
8 .STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use
permit subject to compliance with the following
conditions:
a.Comply with the City's Landscape and Buffer
Ordinances.
b.Comply with Public Works Comments.
c.All exterior lighting must be low intensity and
directed downward and inward to the property and not
towards any residential zoned area.
d.There are to be no outside activities,including
children playing,after 8:00 p.m.
3
May 11,JOO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:23 (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-6426-A
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(APRIL 20I 2000)
Herschel Lovelace was present representing the application.
Staff gave a brief description of the proposal.
A short discussion took place regarding how the two shifts
would work and how many employees would be on duty at any one
time.The applicant said that no more than five employees
would be on duty.If there were ever extra present at shift
change they could park in the three spaces at the church.He
also stated that he would not have children playing outside
after 8 p.m.
The Committee recommended the applicant contact the Oak Forest
Neighborhood Association about his proposal.
There being no further issues,the Committee accepted the
proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for
final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
Herschel Lovelace was present representing his application.
There was one registered objector present when the hearing
began,Ginny Williams,but the applicant talked with her about
a concern she had over cutting trees and she left before the
item came up for discussion.Staff presented the item with a
recommendation for approval subject to compliance with the
conditions listed under "Staff Recommendation,"paragraph 8
above.
Chairperson Adcock asked the applicant where the playground
would be in relation to Ms.Williams'roperty and he stated
that her house was the second one to the east from the
proposed daycare,not adjacent to the daycare.
public Works,in response to a question by Commissioner Berry,
responded that they did support a waiver of the 20 foot radial
corner dedication at South Tyler and 13'treet.
4
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:23 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6426-A
A motion was made to approve the application as submitted to
include staff comments and recommendations,but with a
recommendation to waive the 20 foot radial dedication at the
corner of South Tyler and West 13 Street.The motion passed
by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent,and 1 open position.
5
May 11,000
ITEM NO.:24 FILE NO.:Z-6841
NAME:Cleo's Furniture —Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:3400 West 65 Street
OWNER/APPLICANT:M 6 S Properties /Terry Moore
PROPOSAL:To obtain a conditional use permit to
allow retail sales from this location
located at 3400 West 65 Street,which
is zoned I-2,Light Industrial.
ORDINANCE DES IGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
This 1.93 acre site is located on the north side of
65 Street,just west of Murray Street.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This existing warehouse site is zoned I-2,Light
Industrial,and is surrounded by I-2 zoning.The area
contains a scattering of warehouse,office/warehouse,
and light industrial uses for three or four blocks in
every direction.Using the front part of this
warehouse for retail use should have no negative
impact on the surrounding area.
The Wakefield Neighborhood Association was notified of
the public hearing.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The site contains one access drive from 65 Street,
which will remain the same.The ordinance would
require one space for each 300 square feet of gross
floor space,on a decreasing sliding scale,or 93
spaces.The current site has 90 spaces,but some of
the parking area does not meet the ordinance design
standard.The applicant has agreed to give up a few
spaces in order to meet the current standard.That
would result in 79 total spaces on site.A variance
would be required for reduced parking.
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:24 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6841
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No comments.
5 .PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
a.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk
that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to
occupancy.
b.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be
submitted for approval prior to start of work.c.Revise parking lot layout to accommodate safe
parking layout for customers and visitors.
6.UTILITY AND FIRE DEPT.COMMENTS:
Water:No objection.Contact the Water Works if
there are any modifications to the fire protection
system.
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
ARKLA:No comments received.
Entergy:Approved as submitted.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
CATA:No affect.Site is on Route ¹15.
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has requested a conditional use permit
to add retail furniture sales to the existing
warehouse operation.I-2 zoning does not allow retail
sales "By Right".They want to use the front 40%of
the building for retail operations.The retail would
be open from 10:00 a.m.to 6:00 p.m.Monday through
Saturday.
No outside construction would be involved.The
existing building meets all setback requirements.No
change in signage is proposed.The existing parking
2
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:24 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6841
area does not meet current standards,but the
applicant plans to correct those deficiencies by
restriping.However,when that is done there will be
only 79 spaces remaining versus a requirement of 93.A
variance for reduced parking would be required.Staff
supports that variance because the actual parking
requirements for a furniture store are much less than
the ordinance requires.The applicant determined that
the Cleo'stores rarely use more than 25 parking
spaces for both employees and customers.
Staff believes this to be a reasonable added use to
this site and that it will not have a negative effect
on the area.
8 .STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use
permit subject to compliance with Public Works
Comments and adjusting the parking layout as shown in
the revised site plan.
Staff also recommends approval of the variance to
reduce the required parking spaces to 79.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(APRIL 20,2000)
Terry Moore was present representing the application.Staff
gave a brief description of the proposal.
Staff reviewed the parking requirements and identified some
deficiencies.It was agreed that the applicant would get
with Staff and make any required adjustments.The applicant
was asked by the Committee to check with their other stores
and determine an average parking lot usage to be used in
the justification of a variance for reduced parking.
There being no further issues,the Committee accepted the
proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for
final action.
3
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:24 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6841
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
Terry Moore was present representing his application.There
were no registered objectors present.Staff presented the
item with a recommendation for approval including the
variance for reduced parking to 79 spaces,subject to
compliance with the conditions listed under "Staff
Recommendation,"paragraph 8 above.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
submitted to include staff comments and recommendations and
a variance to reduce the required parking spaces to 79.The
vote was 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent,and 1 open position.
4
May ll,000
ITEM NO.:25 FILE NO.:Z-6846
NAME:Larry Freeman —Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:14400 West Baseline Road
OWNER/APPLICANT:Charles Higgins /Larry Freeman
PROPOSAL:To obtain a conditional use permit for a
two-section 1,120 square foot manufactured
home as the primary residence on property
zoned R-2,Single Family Residential,
located at 14400 West Baseline Road.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
This site is located on the north side of West
Baseline Road,just west of Colonel Miller Road.This
is just outside the City limits,but within the extra-
territorial zoning boundary.The area on the south
side of Baseline across the street from this site is
inside the City.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This site is zoned R-2,Single Family Residential,and
is surrounded by R-2 zoning.This site is vacant and
is just beyond a built up area of residential
subdivisions and an apartment complex.The area
surrounding this site is more rural and more sparsely
populated.There are site built homes on both sides
and across the street to the southwest.To the south
and southeast the property is vacant.The closest
other manufactured home is a single-wide located about
0.5 mile to the west on the south side of Baseline,
just inside the City limits.Along this 0.5 mile of
Baseline the north side is outside the City and the
south side is inside the City.
The proposed manufactured home is a brand new 28 foot
by 44 foot home,and would be set up to meet City
standards.Based on that and the construction and
condition of many of the structures along this stretch
of Baseline,Staff believes this proposed manufactured
home would not have an adverse impact on the
neighborhood.
May 11,JOO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:25 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6846
The Otter Creek Neighborhood Association was notified
of the public hearing.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
There would be a single driveway from Baseline,
typical of the other lots in this area.Normal single
family parking would be provided.
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No comments.
5 .PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No comments.
6.UTILITY AND FIRE DEPT.COMMENTS:
Water:As specified in Resolution ¹7,893 of 1988,
approval by the Little Rock Board of Directors is
required for all service connections and main
extensions outside the City of Little Rock.The City
will require execution of a Pre-Annexation Agreement.
A development fee based on the size of the connection
applies in addition to normal charges.
Wastewater:Outside service boundary.No comment.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
ARKLA:No comments received.
Entergy:Approved as submitted.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
CATA:No affect.This site is close to Routes ¹2&15.
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has requested a conditional use permit
to place a two-section manufactured home on this R-2,
Single Family Residential zoned vacant property as the
primary and only residence.
2
May 11,JOO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:25 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6846
The proposed home is 1120 gross square feet,28 feet
by 40 feet.The lot dimensions are 65 feet by 200
feet.All setbacks are exceeded.Normal single family
access and parking would be provided.
Staff believes this is a reasonable use of this site
and when set up using as a minimum standard,the City
requirements,it would not have an adverse impact on
the neighborhood.
8 .STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use
permit and recommends the home be set up and anchored
according to City Building Code requirements,and
Little Rock City Ordinance Section 36-254 (d)(5)as
follows:
a.A pitched roof of three (3)in twelve (12)or
fourteen (14)degrees or greater.
b.Removal of all transport elements.c.Permanent foundation.
d.Exterior wall finished so as to be compatible with
the neighborhood.
e.Orientation compatible with placement of adjacent
structures.f.Underpinning with permanent materials.
g.Off-street parking per single-family dwelling
standard.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(APRIL 20,2000)
The applicant was not present representing the application.
Staff gave a brief description of the proposal.
Since there were no open issues,even though the applicant
was not present,the Committee accepted the proposal and
forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
No one was present representing the application since
the applicant had requested a deferral.There were no
3
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:25 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6846
registered supporters or objectors present.Staf f presented
the item with a recommendation for deferral to the
June 22,2000 public hearing.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to
the June 22,2000 Planning Commission public hearing.The
vote was 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent,and 1 open position.
4
May 11,000
ITEM NO.:26 FILE NO.:Z-6851
NAME:Earlene Sheppard —Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:4421 West 17 Street
OWNER/APPLICANT:Mandy Hackett /Earlene Sheppard
PROPOSAL:To obtain a conditional use permit for a
two-section 2,560 square foot manufactured
home as the primary residence on property
zoned R-3,Single Family Residential,
located at 4421 West 17 Street.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
This site is located on the south side of 17 Street,
between Washington and Peyton Streets.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The proposed site is zoned R-3,Single Family
Residential,and is surrounded by R-3 zoned
properties,most of which contain single family site
built residences.This is a well established
residential neighborhood and there are no other
manufactured homes within the area.
Based strictly on a technical review,this proposed
home would be compatible with the neighborhood when
set up to meet City requirements for set up and
anchoring of manufactured homes.
Staff has received letters from the Midway,Hope,
Curran-Conway,and Oakforest Neighborhood
Associations,and The Movers 6 Shakers Crime Group,all opposed to this application.Their primary
objections center on decreased property values and
decreased appearance of the neighborhood.
3 .ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
There is one typical residential curb cut for access
to this site.Normal residential parking would be
provided.
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:26 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6851
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No comments.
5 .PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No comments.
6 UT IL ITY /FIRE DEPT ~AND CATA COMMENTS
No objections.
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has requested a conditional use permit
to place a two-section manufactured home on this R-3
Single Family Residential vacant property as the
primary and only residence.
The site is surrounded by R-3 zoned property
containing single family site built houses.All siting
requirements are met.Technically there are no issues.
Staff believes this is a reasonable request and would
not have an adverse impact on the neighborhood.
8 .STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use
permit and recommends the home be set up and anchored
according to City Building Code requirements,and
Little Rock City Ordinance Section 36-254 (d)(5)as
follows:
a.A pitched roof of three (3)in twelve (12)or
fourteen (14)degrees or greater.
b.Removal of all transport elements.
c.Permanent foundation.
d.Exterior wall finished so as to be compatible with
the neighborhood.
e.Orientation compatible with placement of adjacent
structures.f.Underpinning with permanent materials.
g.Off-street parking per single-family dwelling
standard.
2
May 11,JOO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:26 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6851
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(APRIL 20,2000)
Jerry and Earlene Sheppard,and Mandy Hackett were present
representing the application.Staff gave a brief description
of the proposal.
Neither the applicant nor Staff had any questions.The
Committee had no questions,but they strongly recommended that
the applicant contact the Hope Neighborhood Association and
discuss the proposal.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
Earlene Sheppard,the applicant,her son Jerry Sheppard the
proposed occupant,and Mandy Hackett,the property owner,were
present representing the application.There were six
registered supporters and four registered objectors present.
Staff presented the item with a recommendation for approval
subject to compliance with the conditions listed under "Staff
Recommendation,"paragraph 8 above.
Ms.Sheppard explained that she had decided to apply for a
manufactured home at this site because it was the lot next
door to her,and a cheaper alternative than adding on to her
existing house.She added that she was trying to have her
children live close to her because she was disabled and needed
their care when she gets sick.She continued that her son had
talked to the surrounding neighbors and to the Hope
Neighborhood Association and hadn't received any opposition to
the idea.Just recently she found out that many people did
oppose the manufactured home because they felt it would
decrease their property value.She stated that she didn'
understand why it would since many of the existing houses were
boarded up,illegal activities were occurring,the average
cost of the existing homes was about $20,000 with a few in the
$40,000 range,and this would be a brand new,nice $50,000+
manufactured home.She passed out pictures of some of the
current houses in the area,and the manufactured home.
Jerry Sheppard spoke in favor and basically reiterated Earlene
Sheppard's comments.
3
May 11,.JOO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:26 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6851
Robin Brooks,Barbara Williams,and Brae Lawrence spoke in
favor of the proposal and stated they felt the manufactured
home would not reduce the value of homes in the area,but
would actually increase the value.
Mandy Hackett,the property owner,spoke in favor of the
proposal and stated that the Sheppards are good people and
having her children close would be a good thing.
Margie Haney spoke in favor of the proposal and stated that
she was a long time resident in this neighborhood and that the
neighborhood had deteriorated due to the drug activity and
shootings.She asked why not get rid of the drug houses andletthemanufacturedhomecomein.She added that she wished
she could get one.
Valarie Conway,resident directly to the east of this site,
spoke in opposition.She didn'like the way the front of the
manufactured house would face the side of the lot instead of
toward the street.She felt that it wasn't a traditional
house,would be an eye sore,and decrease the value of her
$60,000 home next door.She added that in her work with
developing a neighborhood action plan that they wanted site
built homes constructed,not manufactured homes brought in.
She also submitted a copy of the petition of people opposed to
the manufactured home.
M.L.Morehead,resident at the northwest corner of Peyton and
17 Street,spoke in opposition.She stated that her house was
worth more than $45,000 and that she felt this proposed
manufactured home was being jammed into a long narrow lot and
would be oriented differently than any other home in the area.
Also,she felt many people in the neighborhood were working
hard to upgrade their homes and improve the neighborhood,and
that none of the homes immediately surrounding this vacant lot
were the type of run down homes the Sheppard's had shown.She
added that because of all the recent work people had done,
that maybe the records the Sheppard's found did not reflect
current values.She also stated that she talked to other
people about manufactured homes and that the values do go down
quickly according to her sources.She also was concerned
whether the proposed manufactured home would be placed on a
4
I
May 11,BOO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:26 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6851
regular foundation like the other homes.If it wasn',she
felt that would bring down the property value too.She
concluded by saying that she had worked hard to improve her
neighborhood and that this proposal would detract from it.
Glen Conway,resident immediately to the east,stated he
wasn'specifically opposed to this proposal,but asked
whether this home could be placed anywhere else in the City
such as next to any of the Commissioners.He added that when
the Sheppard's originally spoke to him about the proposal that
he didn'know the size of the unit,and the proposed unit
would take most of the lot.
Kimberly Jones,another resident nearby also spoke in
opposition.She stated that the value of her parent's house at
4322 W.17 was also much more than $45,000,and that neither
she nor her parents want the manufactured home in the
neighborhood.
Jerry Sheppard submitted to the Chair copies of the documents
he used to determine the property values in the area.He added
that he knew some homes were worth more,but that he felt that
values in the $20,000 range were indicative of the values in
the neighborhood in general.
Commissioner Lowry stated that he couldn't vote in favor of an
item when so many of the neighbors,about 50,showed their
opposition by signing a petition.
Commissioner Muse encouraged the applicant to look into
acquiring an existing home in the area of adequate size,and
taking advantage of resources available to renovate and expand
homes in neighborhoods like this under programs to upgrade
existing neighborhoods.He stated he didn'have anything
against manufactured housing,but he was concerned about the
orientation of the entrance and size of this particular unit
for the lot being proposed.He couldn't vote for the item
mainly because of the orientation.
A motion was made to approve the application as submitted to
include staff comments and recommendations.The motion failed
by a vote of 3 ayes,4 nays,1 abstention,2 absent,and
1 open position.Commissioner Rector abstained.
5
May 11,000
ITEM NO.:27 FILE NO.:2-6175-A
NAME:Hall Day Care —Revised Conditional Use
Permit
LOCATION:2723-2725 South Broadway
OWNER/APPLICANT:Bobby &Carol Hall
PROPOSAL:To revise an existing conditional use
permit to increase the capacity of an
existing day care from 20 to 34 children,
located a 2723-2725 South Broadway,on
property zoned R-3,Single Family
Residential.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
This existing day care site is located on the east
side of South Broadway near the intersection with 28
Street.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This site is zoned R-3,Single Family Residential,andissurroundedbypropertieszonedR-3 and R-4,Two
Family Residential.This is a well established
neighborhood of one and two family residences.
The original day care had a capacity of 20 children
and Staff believed that could be compatible with the
neighborhood.The proposed new capacity is 34
children.Staff believes that number would overload
the site and no longer be compatible with the
neighborhood because of increased noise,activity andtraffic.
The Meadowbrook Neighborhood Association was notified
of the public hearing.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
This site has two driveways from South Broadway since
each side of the original duplex had a driveway.The
applicant has widened both driveways so that two cars
can park side by side on each driveway.These areas
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:27 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6175-A
are intended to be child drop off areas with
additional parking for two employees behind the house
and next door on the owners property if needed.
Thirty-four children and three staff members would
generate a requirement for six parking spaces.Those
are shown on the site plan.The applicant has also
added to the over all site plan three parking spaces
on his property immediately to the north.
4 .SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
A six foot screen must be installed south of the
employee parking area.
5 .PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
a.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031 (Close one driveway).
b.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and
ramps brought up to the current ADA standards.c.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk
that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to
occupancy.
d.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted
for approval prior to start of work.
e.Revise parking plan for customers and employees.
6.UTILITY FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS:
No objections.
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has requested a revision to an existing
conditional use permit to raise the capacity of his
day care center from 20 to 34 children.To qualify for
the higher capacity,two more on site parking spaces
were added.The hours would remain from 6:30 a.m.to
5:45 p.m.,Monday-Friday.
Staff has concerns that this proposed increase in
capacity would overload the site due to the increased
activity,noise and traffic,and therefore,have a
negative impact on the neighborhood.This larger number
of children moves the operation into a more commercial
2
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:27 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6175-A
level of operation and changes requirements and related
impacts.
The lots in this area are narrow,resulting in the
houses being close together.Side yards are very
small.Staff believes that for those reasons the
larger operation would be more likely to have a
negative impact from the increased activity and
associated noise.The widened front driveways to
accommodate the increased capacity will increase the
number of cars backing out into South Broadway very
close to the intersection with 28 Street.Public
Works believes that would be an undesirable situation
at best,and possibly a dangerous situation at times.
Based on the above comments,Staff believes the
increased capacity would cause the site to have an
adverse impact on this neighborhood.
8 .STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the increase in capacity of
children from 20 to 34.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(APRIL 20,2000)
Bobby Hall was present representing his application.Staff
gave a brief description of the proposal.
Public Works reviewed their comments and expressed their
concern about the parking arrangement which forces cars to
have to back out into Broadway.They stated they would prefer
the front parking area be turned 90 degrees and have one
access onto Broadway constructed in a way that allows cars to
pull out,not back out.
Mr.Hall stated he did not feel the parking exiting would be a
problem because of the low volume of traffic on this part of
South Broadway,and so he wanted to leave the parking as shown
on the site plan.
Staff also reviewed the additional screening that would be
required from the residence to the south.
3
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:27 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6175-A
There being no further issues,the Committee accepted the
proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for
final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
Bobby Hall was present representing his application.There
were no registered objectors present.Staff presented the item
with a recommendation for denial based on the belief that the
proposed increase in capacity would overload the site due to
the increased activity,noise and traffic.Therefore,Stafffelttheproposedincreasewouldhaveanegativeimpacton the
neighborhood.
Mr.Hall commented that this use would not be incompatible
with the neighborhood,nor have any adverse impact on the
neighborhood.He stated that because of the location of thissiteneartheendofSouthBroadway,the traffic is not
through traffic,is very light and mainly only the residents
who live there.Therefore,he felt that there would not be any
problem caused by traffic to his site.He also disagreed that
there would be any noticeable increase in noise from the added
children,and that the times of operation correspond with
times the nearby neighbors are at work.So even if there was
some noise during recess,the neighbors won'be there to hearit.He mentioned that he had never received any complaints,
nor was he aware of any problems because of his daycare.He
also referred to the letter from the Meadowbrook Neighborhood
Association which endorsed the proposal.He added that he felt
his daycare had improved the neighborhood because he purchased
a run down house,turned it into an attractive facility,and a
daycare to serve the people in the neighborhood.He stated he
has people on a waiting list to use the facility,which shows
the increase in capacity is also wanted by the neighborhood.
Commissioner Earnest commented that he didn'see negative
impacts in this situation and would support the proposal.
Commissioner Berry acknowledged the reasoning behind the Staff
comments and conclusions.He added that each situation has to
be evaluated on its own merits and on the reaction of the
neighborhood.He agreed that in some locations this size of
4
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:27 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6175-A
operation could have negative impacts on a neighborhood.
However,based on the particulars of this location,and the
lack of neighborhood opposition,he could support this
particular proposal.
A motion was made to approve the application as submitted with
the requirement to complete the six foot privacy fence on the
south side of the property from the existing fence west to the
back edge of the house.The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes,
0 nays,2 absent,and 1 open position.
5
May ll,000
ITEM NO.:28 FILE NO.:Z-6845
NAME:Gary Tidball —Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:14220 Lawson Road
OWNER/APPLICANT:Gary 6 Shirley Tidball,Sr.
PROPOSAL:To obtain a conditional use permit for a
two-section 1,400 scpxare foot manufactured
home to be used as the primary and only
residence,located at 14220 Lawson Road on
property zoned R-2,Single Family
Residential.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
This 1.54 acre site is located on the north side of
Lawson road,outside the City limits,but within the
extraterritorial zoning boundary.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This site is zoned R-2,Single Family Residential andissurroundedbyR-2 zoning.The proposed site is in
an area of large rural tracts.There is another two-
section manufactured home across Lawson Road.The
property abutting this site on the north and west is
vacant,as is the property to the southwest.
The area contains a mixture of site built homes and
single and double-wide manufactured homes.Staff
believes this proposed use would be compatible with
the neighborhood.
There are no neighborhood associations serving this
area.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The proposed site would have one access drive from
Lawson Road.Plenty of room exists for residential
vehicle parking.
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:28 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6845
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No comments.
5 .PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No comments.
6.UTILITY AND FIRE DEPT.COMMENTS:
No objections or comments.
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has requested a conditional use permit
to place a two-section manufactured home as their
primary and only residence on this 1.5 acre tract of
land,zoned R-2,Single Family Residential.
The front of this property lies in a floodplain and the
grade slopes upward to the north from the creek that
crosses the front of the property.Therefore,the
applicant wishes to place his home as far back from the
front as possible on the highest part of the property.Heisaskingforavariancetoreducetherearsetbackto
only 15 feet instead of the normal 25 feet so he can gain
more height above the floodplain.Staff believes this is
a reasonable request.There are no other residences close
to his rear property line.Otherwise,all siting criteria
are exceeded.
8 .STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use
permit and recommends the home be set up and anchored
according to City Building Code requirements and
Little Rock City Ordinance Section 36-254 (d)(5)as
follows:
a.A pitched roof of three (3)in twelve (12)or
fourteen (14)degrees or greater.
b.Removal of all transport elements.c.Permanent foundation.
d.Exterior wall finished so as to be compatible with
the neighborhood.
2
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:28 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6845
e.Orientation compatible with placement of adjacent
structures.f.Underpinning with permanent materials.
g.Off-street parking per single-family dwelling
standard.
Staff also recommends approval of the reduced rear
yard set back to 15 feet.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(APRIL 20,2000)
Gary Tidball was present representing his application.Staff
gave a brief description of the proposal.
There were no questions from the applicant,Staff,or the
Committee.
There being no further issues,the Committee accepted the
proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for
final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MAY 11,2000)
Gary Tidball was present representing his application.
There were no registered objectors present.Staff presented
the item with a recommendation for approval,including the
variance for a reduced rear setback to 15 feet,subject to
compliance with the conditions listed under "Staff
Recommendation,"paragraph 8 above.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
submitted to include staff comments and recommendations,
and the variance to reduce the rear setback to 15 feet.The
vote was 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent,and 1 open position.
3
May 11,000
ITEM NO.:29 FILE NO.:Z-6275-C
NAME:Nextel Partners —Tower Use Permit
LOCATION:2720 Booker Street
OWNER/APPLICANT:William 6 Sonja McCauley /Nextel Partners
PROPOSAL:To obtain a tower use permit to allow
raising the height of an existing wireless
communication tower from 120 to 150 feet,
adding antennas to the tower,and adding
an equipment building,on property zoned
R-3,Single Family Residential,and C-3,
General Commercial,located at 2720 Booker
Street.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
This is an existing tower site located on the west
side of Booker Street north of the intersection with
Roosevelt Road,in the rear yard of the "Bugman"
Termite Business.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This site is in two zones,C-3 General Commercial for
the equipment building,and R-3 Single Family
Residential for the tower.The zoning to the east is
R-3,to the north is 0-3,to the northwest is R-3,to
the west is C-3,and to the south across Roosevelt
Road is a PCD for the County jail.The closest
residential structure is 125 feet from the face of the
tower to the northeast.
This tower was originally approved in June of 1997 as
a C.U.P.As far as Staff is aware the site has not had
an adverse impact on the area.Staff believes adding
30 feet to the monopole,an antenna on the taller
pole,and a small equipment building,would not make
the site incompatible with the neighborhood.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
Access to the site would continue to be through the
Bugman Property by an access easement.
May ll,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:29 (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-6275-C
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
The WCF ordinance requires a six foot wide landscape
strip around the perimeter of the entire lease area.
One evergreen shrub 30 inches in height at planting
placed every 30 inches is required within this strip.
In addition to this requirement,two trees are
required along each side of the lease areas.Also,an
eight foot high opaque wood fence is required around
the inside of the entire landscape strip.
5 .PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No comments.
6.UTILITY AND FIRE DEPT.COMMENTS:
Water:No objection.
Wastewater:Sewer not required for this project.
Southwestern Bell:No comments received.
ARKLA:No comments received.
Entergy:Approved as submitted.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
CATA:No affect.Site is near Route ¹14.
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has requested a tower use permit to
raise the tower height from 120 feet to 150 feet,add
an antenna at the 150 foot level,and add a 9 foot by
16 foot equipment building at the base.
This would be the third user on this site,a good
example of collocation.However,some of the
development standards and the new landscaping
requirements can not be met,which resulted in this
request.
2
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:29 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6275-C
The setbacks for the tower from residential properties
must be the same as the height of the tower.The new
tower height would be 150 feet,but the setback for
the tower to the east is only 72 feet,and to the west
is only 133 feet.The equipment setback to the east is
only 5 feet versus 15 feet required.The other
equipment setbacks are met.The closest residential
structure is about 125 feet from the face of the tower
to the northeast.
The applicant is requesting a complete waiver for the
new landscaping and screening requirements.The waiver
request will have to be forwarded to the Board of
Directors for a final decision.The Board wants the
Commission to make a recommendation regarding the
waiver request in conjunction with the Tower Use
Permit review.
The site lies in the gravel parking area where the
property owner parks trucks for the "Bugman"
commercial property and is only five feet from the
east property line.To conserve space,the W.C.F.
leased area does not have its own chain link security
fence,since the entire compound is fenced in.To make
room for a six foot landscape strip,the owner would
have to give up more of his parking area which is
already cramped,and cut down some large trees.On the
east side there is physically not six feet of space
between the existing WCF and the property line,and
what space there is,is in a utility easement with
underground lines.The property owner does not want to
have an opaque fence or screen around the leased area
because that would reduce space,and reduce visibility
into the compound so that police patrols could no
longer see if thieves or vandals were in the compound.
The use to the east is a day care,not a residence.
The equipment buildings are both faced with aggregate
rock and will provide a screen for the base of the
tower and the power rack that is now visible from the
road.
Staff believes this is a good opportunity to further
the goal of collocation,and a justified request to
waive the new landscape and screening requirements.
3
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:29 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6275-C
8.STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the tower use permit to
include the variance for a reduced tower setback of 72
feet to the east and 133 feet to the west,plus a
reduced equipment setback of 5 feet on the east side,
subject to compliance with the following conditions:
a.No signs,logos,decals,symbols or messages may be
displayed on the site except for a small message
containing provider identification and emergency
telephone numbers.
b.Only lighting allowed is that required by State or
Federal law,and that required for safety and
security of equipment.Even that must be down
shielded and kept within the boundaries of thesite.
Staff also recommends approval of the waiver of
landscaping and screening of this site as required by
the new ordinance.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(APRIL 20,2000)
Alissa Coffield was present representing the application.
Staff gave a brief description of the proposal.
The required setbacks and new landscaping/screening
requirements were reviewed.The applicant stated their
intent to ask for setback variances and
landscaping/screening waivers.
There being no further issues,the Committee accepted the
proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for
final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(May 11,2000)
The review of this item began with a general discussion
between the Commissioners and Staff regarding items of this
nature,and whether they should come to the CommissionfirstorgodirectlytotheBoardofDirectorswhenthe
4
May 11,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:29 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6275-C
only issue is a waiver of the current landscaping
requirements.It was decided to proceed with this Tower Use
Permit review and discuss the other general issue later.
Alissa Coffield and Randy Frazier were present representing
the application.There were no registered objectors
present.Staff presented the item with a recommendation for
approval subject to compliance with the conditions listed
under "Staff Recommendation,"paragraph 8 above,to include
the variance for a reduced tower setback of 72 feet to the
east and 133 feet to the west,plus a reduced equipment
setback to 5 feet from the east property line.Staff also
recommended approval of the waiver of landscaping and
screening for this particular site.
Commissioner Berry asked if an additional equipment
building would be installed,and if there wouldn't be room
for landscaping?The answer given by Mr.Frazier was that
there would be an additional equipment building,a little
smaller than the existing one,and that the property owner
doesn'want a fenced in compound around this site taking
up the any additional space caused by landscaping or any
other reason.In addition,he stated that there wasn'
enough space on the east side to comply due to the
closeness of the property line.Mr.Lawson added that thereisautilityeasementintheareabetweentheWCFandthe
east property line that would preclude installing any
landscaping in that area.
Commissioner Rector asked why Staff had recommended
approval of the setback variances and the
landscape/screening waiver.Staff explained that the main
reason for the approval recommendation of the setback
variances was because that would allow the third provider
to locate on this existing site in accordance with one of
the goals of the ordinance,and not cause any additional
risk to,or be incompatible with,the surrounding uses or
residents.Staff had recommended approval of the waiver to
landscaping and screening for several reasons.First,thereisnotenoughspacetomeettherequirementontheeast
side of the property,plus what space there is contains a
utility easement with underground utility lines.Second,
the areas to the south,west,and north are used by the
property owner for parking and access,and Staff did not
believe the owner should be forced to give up parking space
and restrict access in order to provide screening and
5
May ll,000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:29 (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-6275-C
landscaping between his own buildings and the WCF if he did
not wish to.Third,the equipment buildings themselves
screen the rest of the WCF from view of the residential
property and the street to the east.Fourth,any additional
screening would make it more difficult for police patrols
to see into the owner's property to look for theft and/or
vandalism,which Staff felt was a reasonable concern of the
owner.
Commissioner Berry expressed concern that possibly the
ordinance may have the wrong provisions in it since in most
cases they can't be applied,or maybe the landowners need
to be made more aware of the restrictions caused by the new
landscaping provisions that could prevent collocation.He
stated that he felt the Board would not like all these
waiver requests coming to them.
Mr.Frazier made the point that these new landscaping
requirements are causing undue hardship in his opinion to
the newer providers in order to fulfill the City'
requirement for collocation,and at the same time to bring
these existing sites into compliance with the new
requirements.He added that the incentive to collocate islostwhenaproviderisfacedwithallthedifficultiesand
time involved in collocating versus building new sites,
most of which can be approved administratively in 5 days.
Mr.Giles,City Attorney,made the point that the Board's
main concern was for protection or screening of residential
areas,and that where that isn't an issue,he felt that
they weren'concerned.However,right now the ordinance
doesn'make that distinction.
Commissioner Faust asked how many total WCF sites Nextel
anticipates having.Alissa Coffield responded that right
now they are planning for twelve.Commissioner Faust then
asked for confirmation that the Board asked that landscape
waiver requests come directly to the Board.Mr.Lawson
responded yes.She then commented that she felt that the
waiver request for this site was justified.
A question was asked of the City Attorney if the T.U.P.
request could be voted on separately from the waiver
request.Mr.Giles said they could.
6
May 11,JOO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:29 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6275-C
A motion was made to approve the application as submitted
excluding the landscaping/screening waiver,but including
all other variances and Staff comments and recommendations.
The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays,2 absent,
and 1 open position.
A second motion was made to approve to send to the Board of
Directors a recommendation to approve the request to waive
the new landscaping and screening requirements for thissite.The motion passed by a vote of 7 ayes,1 nay,
2 absent,and 1 open position.
7
May 11,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:30 FILE NO.:Q-23-302
Name:Alley between West 6 and
West 7 "Street,Original
City of Little Rock
right-of-way Abandonment.
Location:Approximately 300 feet of
Alley north of West 7Street.
Owner/A licant:Arkansas Teacher Retirement
System /George Toombs Agent
~Re est:To abandon the 20 feet wide
by 300 feet long alley
right-of-way in Original
City of Little Rock.
STAFF REVIEW:
1.Public Need for this Street
Alley is currently constructed as a public alley with
10 wide pavement.
2.Need for Ri ht-of-Wa on Ad'acent Streets
There is sufficient right-of-way on all adjacent
streets.A 20 feet radial dedication will be required
at the corner of Victory and West 6 ,Victory and
West 7 ,Pulaski and West 6 and Pulaski and West 7
Streets.
3.Develo ment Potential
Arkansas Teacher Retirement System plans to construct
multi-story parking building at this location.
5.Nei hborhood Land Use and Effect
The general area is made up of a mixture of commercial
and office uses.
6.Nei hborhood Position
All abutting property owners and tenants were notified
of the public hearing.
1
May 11,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:30 FILE NO.:G-23-302
7.Effect on Public Services or Utilities
Entergy —has no objection to the abandonment.
AT%LA —has no objection to the abandonment.
Southwestern Bell —has no objection to the abandonment
but recpxested easement to access existing line.
Water Works —has no objection but will recpxire
sufficient room for main maintenance.
Wastewater Utility —has no objection.
Fire Department —has no objection.
Neighborhood and Planning —has no objection to
abandonment.
8.Reversionar Ri hts
No Reversionary rights-Original City of Little Rock.
Mayor and City Clerk will execute deed.
9.Public Welfare and Safet Issues
Abandoning this alley will have no adverse effects on
the public welfare and safety.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of alley abandonment,north of
West 7 Street subject to:
1.A 20 feet radial dedication of R-0-W on all corners in
Block 330 Original City of Little Rock.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(April 20,2000)
The application was discussed briefly.Committee forwarded
the item to the full Commission for final approval.
2
PL
A
N
N
I
N
G
CO
M
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
VO
T
E
RE
C
O
R
D
DA
T
E
MA
M
f
f
Zc
e
)
c
CO
/
V
S
F
J
V
7
ME
M
B
E
R
4
C'
'
f
D
6
Il
il
l
f
2+
54
t3
ty
&g
%
)
6
RR
&%
~
A
s
Ba
RE
C
T
O
R
,
BI
L
L
DO
W
N
I
N
G
,
RI
C
H
A
R
D
EA
R
N
E
S
T
,
HU
G
H
NU
N
N
L
E
Y
,
OB
R
A
Y
A
BE
R
R
Y
,
CR
A
I
G
AD
C
O
C
K
,
PA
M
RA
H
M
A
N
,
MI
Z
A
N
A
LO
W
R
Y
,
BO
B
OP
E
N
FA
U
S
T
,
JU
D
I
T
H
MU
S
E
,
RO
H
N
(
RE
G
S
R
~g
~
BY
L
A
W
WI
ID
L
E
R
S
q
ME
M
B
E
R
8'
F
E
V
8C
l
l~
l
5
l%
th
@
3
84
l
tl
M
Q
l5
g4
RE
C
T
O
R
,
BI
L
L
v'
y
v'
DO
W
N
I
N
G
,
RI
C
H
A
R
D
v
pv
.
v
'
v
'
EA
R
N
E
S
T
,
HU
G
H
'y
y
v'
'
'
NU
N
N
L
E
Y
,
OB
R
A
Y
A
BE
R
R
Y
,
CR
A
I
G
v
yv
'
/
c
'
y
~
v'
v
'
'
'
AD
C
O
C
K
,
PA
M
~
v
~
~
v'
RA
H
M
A
N
,
MI
Z
A
N
A
LO
W
R
Y
,
BO
B
~o
'
v
~
v
~~
v
o
~
~
v
ce
E
H
FA
U
S
T
,
JU
D
I
T
H
u'U
S
E
,
RO
H
N
~
v
y
Me
e
t
i
n
g
Ad
j
o
u
r
n
e
d
fO
Lt
P.
M
.
V
AY
E
~
NA
Y
E
~
AB
S
E
N
T
4
AB
S
T
A
I
N
8'
E
C
U
S
E
May 11,2000
SUBDIVISION MINUTES
There being no further business before the Commission,the
meeting adjourned at 10:15 p.m.
-c4-C
Date
Chairman ec tary