pc_03 10 2011sub
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION HEARING
SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD
MARCH 10, 2011
4:00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present there being eleven (11) members present.
II. Members Present: Tom Brock
William Changose
Janet Dillon
J. T. Ferstl
Rebecca Finney
Keith Fountain
Dan Harpool
Troy Laha
Obray Nunnley, Jr.
Amy Pierce
Bill Rector
Members Absent: None
City Attorney: Cindy Dawson
III. Approval of the Minutes of the January 27, 2011 Meeting of the Little Rock
Planning Commission. The Minutes were approved as presented.
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION AGENDA
MARCH 10, 2011
OLD BUSINESS:
Item Number:
File Number:
Title:
A. Z-8603 West Short-form PD-R, located at 2406 West 13th Street.
B. LA-0035 Tract 75 Chenal Valley Champagnolle Office Village Land
Alteration Variance Request.
C. Z-4470-G Pinnacle Ford Long-form PCD, located on the Northeast
corner of Chenal Parkway and Wellington Village Road.
D. Z-7603-F Cantrell Falls Revised Long-form POD, located at 14910
Cantrell Road.
E. Z-8610 McDonald’s USA Short-form PD-C, located at 104 South
University Avenue.
F. Z-8614 Islamic Center Short-form PCD, located at 1717 Wright
Avenue.
G. Z-2940-A Independent Hotel Pine Street Short-form PCD, located on
the Southeast corner of West 8th and Pine Streets.
H. Z-4411-J Pleasant Ridge Town Center Revised PCD, located on the
Southeast corner of Cantrell Road and Pleasant Ridge
Drive.
NEW BUSINESS:
I. PRELIMINARY PLAT:
Item Number:
File Number:
Title:
1. S-1221-F Chalamont – Chenal Valley Phase 18-K Revised Preliminary
Plat, located North of Chalamont Drive, just South of Joe T.
Robinson School.
Agenda, Page Two
I. PRELIMINARY PLAT: (CONTINUED)
Item Number:
File Number:
Title:
2. S-1664 On the River Estates Preliminary Plat, located on Pinnacle
Valley Road and County Farm Road on the Little Maumelle
River.
3. S-1665 Wildwood Ridge Addition Preliminary Plat, located on the
West side of Gordon Road and South of Chenal Valley
Drive.
II. SITE PLAN REVIEW:
Item Number:
File Number:
Title:
4. S-1474-A Kum and Go Subdivision Site Plan Review, located on the
Southwest corner of Colonel Glenn Road and South
University Avenue.
5. S-1515-B The Cottages of Good Shepard Site Plan Review, located at
2901 Aldersgate Road.
6. Z-3689-J Lisa Academy Zoning Site Plan Review, located on Lot 3R
Ensco Parkhill Phase III – Corporate Hill Drive.
III. PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS:
Item Number:
File Number:
Title:
7. Z-4923-J Shackleford Crossing Revised Long-form PCD, located on
the Southwest corner of Shackleford Road and I-430.
8. Z-5967-D Williams Revised Short-form POD, located at 5819 Young
Road.
9. Z-6698-C 3900 John Barrow Road Revised Short-form PCD, located
at 3900 John Barrow Road.
10. Z-8472-B Mid-Towne at Fair Park Revised Long-form PCD, located
on the Southwest corner of I-630 and Fair Park Boulevard.
Agenda, Page Three
III. PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS: (CONTINUED)
Item Number:
File Number:
Title:
11. Z-8631 3013 Fair Park Boulevard Short-form PD-O, located at
3013 Fair Park Boulevard.
12. Z-8632 Arkansas Urology Clinic Short-form POD, located on the
West side of Centerview Drive just South of Kanis Road.
IV. OTHER BUSINESS:
Item Number:
File Number:
Title:
13. G-25-210 LaGrande Drive street name change to St. Vincent Way
LaGrande Drive between Chenal Parkway and Rahling
Road.
March 10, 2011
ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: Z-8603
NAME: West Short-form PD-R
LOCATION: Located at 2406 West 13th Street
DEVELOPER:
Ms. Ruthie West
2907 Summit Street
Little Rock, AR 72206
ENGINEER:
Butler Surveying Group
P.O. Box 13087
Maumelle, AR 72113
AREA: 0.16 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-3, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential
PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R
PROPOSED USE: Single-family residential – Central High DOD, Allow the front porch
to remain enclosed
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT’S STATEMENT:
The property is located at 2406 West 13th Street and is located within the Central
High Design Overlay District boundaries. The property is currently under
enforcement. The owner has enclosed the front porch of this home, which is not
allowed per the Central High Design Overlay District. The DOD states the
primary entrance to the structure shall be consistent with that of other structures
on the developed block face. The ordinance also states all residential structures
must have a front porch that is a passageway from the street to the front door of
the unit on new residential construction and additions/modifications to the front
façade of existing residential structures.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8603
2
The applicant’s cover letter indicates she is primarily responsible for her 83-year
old father who lives in the home and suffers from Alzheimer’s, heart disease and
has a number of other medical concerns. She states the front porch was
enclosed to allow her father to sit outside without concern for him.
The Bill of Assurance for this site does not address this specific request.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The home is located one block north of Central High School and is the second
house from the corner of Rice Street located on West 13th Street. The lot
immediately to the west of this home is vacant. The home to the east is an
occupied single-family residence. The uses in this immediate area along West
12th and 13th Streets are single-family and two-family residences. There is an
area of commercial located along West 12th Street to the northeast and northwest
at the intersections of West 12th and Park, Dennison and Jones Streets.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received a few informational phone calls from area
residents. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site all residents,
who could be identified, located within 300-feet, and the Central High
Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. The Central High
Neighborhood Association has submitted a letter indicating opposition to the
request.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
No comment.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this project.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
AT & T: No comment received.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8603
3
Central Arkansas Water: No objection. All Central Arkansas Water requirements
in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Contact Central
Arkansas Water regarding the size and location of the water meter.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route.
Parks and Recreation: No comment.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Central City Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Residential Low Density for this property. The
applicant has applied for a rezoning to Planned Development Residential to allow
a variance from the Central High DOD. The request does not require a change
to the Land Use Plan.
This area is not covered by a Neighborhood Action Plan.
Master Street Plan: West 13th Street is a Local Street. The primary function of a
Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Local Streets which are
abutted by non-residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes
are considered as “Commercial Streets”. These streets have a design standard
the same as a Collector.
Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes shown in the immediate vicinity.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 14, 2010)
Ms. West was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of
the request stating the applicant had enclosed the front porch of her home
located on West 13th Street which was in violation of the Central High Design
Overlay District. Staff stated the violation was under enforcement and the
applicant was requesting a rezoning to PD-R to allow the enclosed porch to
remain as presently constructed. Ms. West stated the new construction made
the home look better and was done to allow her father to stay outdoors and not
be concerned for his safety or him wandering away due to his health condition.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8603
4
Staff noted there were few comments from the other reporting departments and
agencies. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then
forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
There were no issues raised at the October 14, 2010, Subdivision Committee
meeting requiring a revised site plan. The applicant is requesting to be allowed
to maintain the enclosed front porch which is in violation of the Central High
Design Overlay District. The construction was done without review by the
Planning Department prior to construction and the applicant did not purchase a
permit for the improvements.
The DOD states in order to ensure compatibility with the historic nature of the
neighborhood all new construction and addition are to be reviewed by the
Department of Planning and Development prior to the issuance of a building
permit. The department is to review the plans for consistency with the detailed
requirements of the DOD to determine consistency with the ordinance. The
ordinance states primary entrances are to be consistent with that of other
structures on the developed block face. The ordinance also states residential
structures must have a front porch that is a passageway from the street to the
front door of the unit on new residential construction and additions/modifications
to the front façade of an existing residential structure.
Based on the requirements of the DOD staff cannot support the request. The
enclosure is out of character with the remainder of the homes on the block. All
other houses on the block have front porches as did this home before it was
enclosed. The DOD was approved on October 20, 2009. Staff does not feel the
enclosure of the front porch meets the intent of the Central High Design Overlay
District.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 4, 2010)
The applicant was present. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented
the item stating the applicant was seeking a deferral of the item to the December 16,
2010, public hearing. The applicant approached the Commission stating additional time
was needed to gather information to present to staff.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8603
5
The Chair entertained a motion for a By-law waiver for the late deferral request. The
motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions. The Chair
entertained a motion for approval of the deferral request to the December 16, 2010,
public hearing. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open
positions.
STAFF UPDATE:
There has been no change to this application request since the previous staff write-up
and analysis. Staff continues to recommend denial of the request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 16, 2010)
Mr. Steve Morley and Ms. West were present representing the request. There were
registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of
denial.
Mr. Morley stated his client had indicated to him the improvements were completed prior
to the adoption of the DOD for Central High. He stated Ms. West had provided staff
with receipts indicating the purchase of materials prior to the adoption of the DOD.
Chairman Yates questioned Ms. Cindy Dawson, Deputy City Attorney, if the
Commission should hear the request if in fact the improvements were completed prior to
the adoption of the DOD. Ms. Dawson stated she and staff would need to review the
information provided by Ms. West to determine if in fact the improvements were
completed prior to the DOD adoption. Mr. Tony Bozynski, Director of Planning and
Development, stated he would need to confer with the enforcement officer to determine
if the improvements were completed prior to the adoption of the DOD.
Chairman Yates requested a deferral of the item to allow staff to make the
determination as to when the improvements were completed. A motion was made to
defer the item to the January 27, 2011 public hearing to allow sufficient time to
determine if the improvements were completed prior to the adoption of the DOD. The
motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
STAFF UPDATE:
Staff is meeting with the applicant to determine if the work was completed prior to the
adoption of the Central High Design Overlay District. Staff will provide the Commission
with an update at the January 27, 2011, public hearing.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8603
6
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 27, 2011)
The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the item stating since Ms. West was challenging staff’s determination that the
work was completed prior to the adoption of the Central High Design Overlay District
they felt the Zoning Board of Adjustment should hear and decide the case as an appeal
of staff’s determination of when the work was completed. Staff stated the item would be
placed on the Zoning Board of Adjustment’s February 28, 2011, docket. Staff stated if
the Zoning Board of Adjustment ruled against Ms. West and found there was not
sufficient documentation to determine the work was completed prior to the adoption of
the Central High DOD the item would be retuned to the Planning Commission at their
March 10, 2011, public hearing to determine the appropriateness of the enclosure of the
front porch. Staff stated if the Zoning Board of Adjustment felt there was sufficient
documentation to determine the enclosure was completed prior to the adoption of the
Central High DOD then the would be presented with a recommendation of withdrawal at
the Commission’s March 10, 2011, public hearing.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion of approval
of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
This item was reviewed by the City of Little Rock Zoning Board of Adjustment at their
February 28, 2011, public hearing. The Zoning Board of Adjustment determined the
work was started prior to the adoption of the Central High Design Overlay District. Staff
recommends withdrawal of this item.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the item stating the item was reviewed by the City of Little Rock Zoning
Board of Adjustment at their February 28, 2011, public hearing. Staff stated the Zoning
Board of Adjustment had determined the work was started prior to the adoption of the
Central High Design Overlay District therefore there was no violation of the DOD. Staff
presented a recommendation of withdrawal of the item.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
March 10, 2011
ITEM NO.: B FILE NO.: LA-0035
NAME: Tract 75 Chenal Valley Champagnolle Office Village Advanced Grading
Variance Request
LOCATION: NW Corner of Rahling Road and Champagnolle Drive, Chenal Valley
Tract 75
APPLICANT: Deltic Timber Corporation
APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATIVE: White-Daters & Associates
AREA: Approximately 3.5 Acres
CURRENT ZONING: Planned Office Development (POD)
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from the Land Alteration
Regulations to advance grade without construction being imminent.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting a variance from the Land Alteration Regulations to
advance fill 3.5 acres of Chenal Valley Tract 75 without construction being
imminent. The site is located on the northwest corner of Rahling Road and
Champagnolle Drive. The fill material will be hauled to this site from Chenal
Valley Tract 132 which is located on Chenonceau Boulevard. Tract 132 was
recently approved for an apartment development. The 3.5 acres is part of a
8 acre tract, zoned POD. The applicant desires to excavate approximately
23,000 cubic yards of dirt from Tract 132 which has excess material and use the
excess material as fill for this site. The fill will be placed in the floodplain area
located on this property.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The 3.5 acre wooded site is part of an undeveloped 8 acre tract, Chenal Valley,
Tract 75, zoned POD. The site was approved July 1, 2010 for a phased office
development. The approved site plan indicates 14 office buildings with
supporting parking areas. The property is adjacent to Rock Creek on the north,
Rahling Road on the east and Champagnolle Drive on the south. South of
Champagnolle Drive is an undeveloped wooded tract zoned C-1 and C-2. To the
west of Tract 75, is the Witry Court residential subdivision. Approximately 200
feet of undisturbed area will be provided between the proposed fill area and the
residential subdivision. Of this 200 feet, approximately 150 feet is zoned OS,
Open Space.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0035
2
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of the time of writing, staff has not received any inquiries into the variance
application. All adjacent property owners including those across streets or alleys
from the subject property were given notice.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
1. Provide location of vehicle tracking pad constructed per Little Rock Code
Section 20-190(12).
2. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186(c) and (d) will be
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other than
residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be submitted
and approved prior to the start of excavation.
3. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES stormwater permit
from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of
construction.
4. Per Section 29-189(d), groups of trees and individual trees that are not to be
removed or are located within required undisturbed buffer areas shall be
protected during construction by protective fencing and shall not be used for
material storage or for any more purpose.
5. Vegetation must be established on disturbed area within 21 days on
completion of harvest activities.
6. Erosion controls must be installed to reduce discharge of polluted stormwater.
7. A perimeter buffer strip shall be temporarily maintained around disturbed
areas and shall be six percent (6%) of the lot width and depth with a minimum
width of 25 feet and a maximum width of 40 feet.
8. Damage to public and private property due to hauling operations or operation
of construction related equipment from a nearby construction site shall be
repaired by the responsible party prior to issuance of a certificate of
occupancy.
E. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE:
Joe White of White-Daters & Associates was present representing the applicant.
Staff presented an overview of the variance application stating the applicant’s
desire to advance grade and fill the site. Staff stated the dirt would be hauled
from the Chenonceau Boulevard site which the Commission recently approved
for multi-family development to this site. Mr. White stated the site located across
Rahling Road would also receive dirt from the multi-family site.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0035
3
F. ANALYSIS:
The site plan has been revised to show a 25 foot temporary undisturbed buffer to
be provided along Champagnolle Drive on the southern property line with a
construction entrance. A 40 foot undisturbed buffer is to be provided along
Rahling Road on the eastern property line. The applicant is requesting to fill the
eastern 3.5 acres of Tract 75. The area of fill is located in the floodplain. The
approved POD site plan includes 8 acres and indicates 14 office buildings and
associated parking. The approved POD indicates an undisturbed buffer of
200 feet from the residential lots located west of the site. This buffer includes a
100 foot strip of open space and a 50 foot undisturbed buffer. Approximately
23,000 cubic yards of material is planned to fill the floodplain on the site with the
maximum fill being approximately 6 vertical feet.
At the completion of the excavation, the disturbed area will be vegetated.
Drainage will sheet flow from the filled area toward Rock Creek located to the
north of the site.
At the time of writing, a project is not proposed to begin construction on Tract 75
following the completion of the advanced grading activities. Section 29-186(b) of
the Land Alteration Regulations state no land alteration shall be permitted until all
necessary City approvals of all plans and permits, except building permit, have
been issued and construction is imminent. Per the Land Alteration Regulations,
imminent construction is defined as the installation of a foundation or erection of
a structure without unreasonable delay following land alteration activities.
Section 29-168 of the Land Alteration Regulations states the purposes of the
Land Alteration Regulations are to:
1. Prohibit the indiscriminate clearing of property;
2. Prevent excessive grading, clearing, filling, cutting or similar activities;
3. Prevent the pollution of streams, ponds and other watercourses by sediment;
4. Preserve natural vegetation which enhances the quality of life of the
community;
5. Preserve the contours or the natural landscape and land forms.
G. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of this variance application due to the fact the Land
Alteration Regulations were developed to prohibit this very activity in the City of
Little Rock. The Land Alteration Regulations clearly state in Section 29-168 as
provided above that the purpose of the regulations are to prohibit indiscriminate
clearing of property; to preserve natural vegetation; and preserve the contours or
natural landscape and land forms. At this time, Deltic Timber does not have a
buyer for the property and no one knows how long the property will sit before it is
sold and developed.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0035
4
If the variance application is approved, staff would recommend the approval be
subject to the comments found in paragraph D. Staff also believes the advanced
grading should comply with the following:
1. A 25 foot undisturbed buffer maintained along Champagnolle Drive with the
one construction entrance a maximum width of 26 feet. The construction
entrance should be designed to obstruct the view of the filled area from
Champagnolle Drive.
2. Section 29-170(j), damage to private and public property due to hauling
operations or operation of construction related equipment from a nearby
construction site shall be repaired by the responsible party at the completion
of the filling activities.
3. A grading permit will not be issued for the advanced grading on Tract 75 until
a grading permit is issued for the grading and excavation to begin on Tract
132 located on Chenonceau Boulevard.
4. Excavated material from Tract 132 can only be used on Tract 75 as
requested by this application and the St. Vincent Hospital West Campus site
located to the east.
5. Measures to control the increase in stormwater runoff from the excavated
area should be implemented to not damage adjacent property.
6. Erosion controls must be installed to reduce discharge of polluted stormwater
into Rock Creek.
7. At the completion of advanced grading and filling, all disturbed areas should
be mulched and revegetated within 21 days.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 27, 2011)
Mr. Tim Daters of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request.
There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the
applicant had submitted a request dated January 26, 2011, requesting deferral of this
item to the March 10, 2011, public hearing. Staff stated the deferral request was not
made as typically required by the Commission’s By-laws. Staff stated the deferral
request would require a waiver of the Commissions By-laws with regard to the late
deferral request. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion of approval
of By-law waiver with regard to the late deferral request. The motion carried by a vote
of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. The Chair entertained a motion of approval of the item
as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0035
5
STAFF UPDATE:
There has been no change to this application request since the previous staff write-up.
Staff continues to recommend denial of the request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011)
Mr. Tim Daters and Mr. Bill Spivey were present representing the request. There were
registered objectors present. Staff stated the request had been amended to limit the
clearing to 2.5 acres. Staff stated the developer was proposing to construct a
temporary earthen berm along the edge of the fill along the abutting streets. Staff
stated the berm would be approximately six to eight feet above the adjacent fill elevation
and the developers were proposing to establish a solid grass cover after the grading
activities. Staff stated they were still not supportive of the request and presented a
recommendation of denial.
Mr. Tim Daters addressed the Commission stating this was an expansion of the
approved site plan for the apartments located on Tract 132. He stated there was
excess material on Tract 132 in the range of 23,000 cubic yards. Mr. Daters stated the
plan had been revised to limit the clearing to 3 ½ acres. He stated additional buffers
would be placed around the sites perimeters to limit the visual aspects of the clearing.
Mr. Daters provided the Commission with sight profiles and lines of sight into the area to
be graded from the adjacent neighborhood and the adjacent streets. He stated there
would be approximately eight foot of fill with 3:1 slopes. He stated this would allow the
site to be filled to one foot above the 100-year flood elevation.
Ms. Susan Freeman addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She
stated the adjacent neighborhood, Witry Court, had met with the developer and were
still not in support of the request. She stated the site was not intended for development
in the near future and should not be cleared. She stated the residents understood once
the site was developed the trees would be removed but she did not want the developers
to speculatively clear the site without a potential development.
Ms. Angie Day addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated she
was opposed to the clearing of the site without a development. She stated once the lots
were sold then the lots should be cleared. She requested the Commission deny the
request.
Ms. Ruth Bell, representing the League of Women Voters, addressed the Commission
in opposition of the request. She stated the ordinance was approved to limit this
activity. She stated 1000 of hours were put into adoption of the Land Alteration
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0035
6
Ordinance and every time the Commission approved a variance request it was a
degradation of the ordinance.
Mr. Bill Spivey addressed the Commission as a representative of the Developer. He
stated the Commission approved a variance request at their July 2010, public hearing to
allow the material from Tract 132 to be moved from Chenonceau to the property across
the street from this site. He stated the variance request approval included conditions as
would the approval of this application request. He stated Deltic had met with the
neighbors of Witry on a number of occasions and had agreed to zoning changes and to
installing gates at their subdivision entrance. He stated with the zoning change a
100 foot OS zoned strip was placed between the development and the homes and there
was an additional 50 foot buffer proposed with the office development. He stated the
Commission had the ability to grant variances from the City’s Land Alteration Ordinance
when the variance request was logical. He stated the Commission also had the ability
to impose conditions on their approval.
Mr. Daters stated the problem was there were not as many developments within the
City as there were four years ago. He stated with the current conditions the need for fill
material was limited. He stated the St. Vincent’s site accepted material from the ball
filed construction at the Joe T Robinson School. He stated once this occurred all the
material from Tract 132 suddenly was not needed at the St. Vincent’s site. Mr. Daters
stated when there was not a site in Little Rock to receive the material then material was
hauled to North Shore in North Little Rock or out Highway 300. He stated North Little
Rock was expanding developable land with material hauled from Little Rock.
There was general discussion by the Commission concerning the Land Alteration
Ordinance and the reason for adoption of the ordinance. Commissioner Rector stated
the out cry for the ordinance was not clearing in this manner. He stated the
Commission was not degrading the ordinance by allowing variances when the variance
made sense. He stated the developers had to move excess material and this was an
efficient way to move the material.
The Commission questioned Mr. Daters as to the amount of material that would be
received by this site. Mr. Daters stated approximately 1/3 of the material. The
Commission questioned if the apartment development on Tract 132 would occur is the
material was not removed from the site. Mr. Dates stated the economics for the
development did not work unless the material was moved from Tract 132.
The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff. The
motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 1 noes, 0 absent and 1 abstention (Commissioner
Nunnley).
March 10, 2011
ITEM NO.: C FILE NO.: Z-4470-G
NAME: Pinnacle Ford Long-form PCD
LOCATION: Located on the Northeast corner of Chenal Parkway and Wellington
Village Road
DEVELOPER:
Crain Automotive Holdings LLC
15400 Chenal Parkway
Little Rock, AR 72223
ENGINEER:
White Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 7.6 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 4 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: C-2, Shopping Center District – CUP for Automobile
Dealership
ALLOWED USES: General Retail
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: C-2, Shopping Center District Uses and Auto paint body or
body rebuilding shop
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
The applicant submitted a request dated December 1, 2010, requesting deferral of this
item to the January 27, 2011, public hearing. Staff is supportive of the deferral request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 16, 2010)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was presented representing the request.
There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the
applicant had submitted a request dated December 1, 2010, requesting deferral of the
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4470-G
2
item to the January 27, 2011, public hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the
deferral request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes
0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant submitted a request dated January 13, 2011, requesting deferral of this
item to the March 10, 2011, public hearing. Staff is supportive of the deferral request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 27, 2011)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request.
There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the
applicant had submitted a request dated January 13, 2011, requesting deferral of this
item to the March 10, 2011, public hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the
deferral request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion of approval
of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant submitted a request dated February 25, 2011, requesting a deferral of this
item to the April 21, 2011, public hearing. The deferral request will require a By-law
waiver with regard to the number of previous deferral requests. Staff recommends
approval of the deferral request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011)
Mr. Joe White of White Daters and Associates was present representing the request.
Staff presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request dated February
25, 2011, requesting a deferral of the item to the April 21, 2011, public hearing. Staff
stated the deferral request would require a waiver of the By-laws with regard to the
number of previously approved deferral requests. Staff presented a recommendation of
approval of the deferral request.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4470-G
3
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for
approval of the By-law waiver request with regard to the number of previously approved
deferrals. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. The chair
entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried
by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
March 10, 2011
ITEM NO.: D FILE NO.: Z-7603-F
NAME: Cantrell Falls Revised Long-form PCD
LOCATION: Located at 14910 Cantrell Road
DEVELOPER:
PDC Companies
1501 N. University Avenue
Little Rock, AR 72207
ENGINEER:
The Holloway Firm, Inc.
Mr. Bob Holloway
200 Casey Drive
Maumelle, AR 72113
AREA: 7.93 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 5 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: PCD
ALLOWED USES: O-3, General Office District and C-3, General
Commercial District
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: O-3, General Office District and C-3, General Commercial District –
add a fifth lot to the development for automotive repair
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
A request to rezone a portion of this site from R-2, Single-family to POD was filed and
withdrawn from consideration prior to the June 3, 2004, Planning Commission Public
Hearing. The applicant proposed a development to include office and commercial
activities on 3.6 acres located along the western portion of this site. (Z-7603)
Ordinance No. 19,314 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on April 19, 2005,
established PDC Company Short-form POD. The request included the development of
a 3.6 acre parcel as a Planned Office Development with a restaurant facility on one of
the proposed lots and an office building on the second lot. Lot 1 would develop with a
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-F
2
restaurant without drive-through service containing 4,500 square feet and Lot 2 would
develop with 29,200 square foot of office space. The overall percent for each use on
the site was eighty-seven percent office and thirteen percent commercial. The approval
established the hours of operation from 6 am to midnight seven days per week. The
development has not been constructed. (Z-7603-A)
On June 22, 2006, the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request to allow
14910 Cantrell Road (adjacent to the east) and the PDC Company Short-form POD to
be rezoned from R-2, Single-family and POD to PCD to allow a four-lot subdivision with
a combination of sit-down and drive-through restaurants. The lots varied in size from
1.3 acres to 2.5 acres. Restaurant sizes range from 4,100 square feet to 7,200 square
feet. A cul-de-sac would be constructed as a public street from Highway 10 through the
middle of the lots to provide public street frontage for each lot. The developer
requested the flexibility to shift lot area and restaurant size within the development to
accommodate a variety of tenants. A 40-foot access and utility easement was proposed
from the cul-de-sac to a property located to the east of the site. The site was approved
as a PCD to allow the construction of a strip retail center with no parking or access
located along the rear of the building. According to the applicant access to the site to
the east would allow circulation between developments and limit the need for vehicles to
access Cantrell Road from the development site. Placement of the access easement
would allow vehicles from as far west as Regions Bank to access the existing traffic
signal for protected left turns. The item was not appealed to the Board of Directors.
(Z-7603-B)
On January 18, 2007, the Planning Commission approved a rezoning of 14910 Cantrell
Road from R-2, Single-family to PCD which allowed the development of 4.2 acres as a
two lot development. The site plan indicated two buildings would be constructed on the
site. A building containing 7,200 square feet and 107 parking spaces was proposed on
the lot fronting Cantrell Road and a second building containing 6,300 square feet and
110 parking spaces was proposed for the rear lot. A maximum of 13,000 square feet of
restaurant space was approved. A selected list of commercial uses was approved for
the site other than a restaurant. The hours of operation for a restaurant facility were
limited to 10:00 am to midnight seven days per week. The lots were proposed each
containing in excess of two acres. Access to the development was proposed through a
24-foot drive located along the western perimeter of the site and was to be shared with
the property approved for PDC Short-form POD located to the west proposed for future
development with office and commercial uses. On February 6, 2007, the Little Rock
Board of Directors approved Ordinance No. 19,694 allowing the rezoning.
The following uses were approved as allowable uses for the development: Bank or
savings and loan, Book and stationary store, Camera shop, Clinic (medical, dental or
optical), Clothing store, Eating place without drive-in service, Florist shop, Furniture
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-F
3
store, Hardware or sporting goods store, Health studio or spa, Jewelry store, Laundry,
domestic cleaning, Office (general and professional), Optical shop, Photography studio,
Retail uses not listed (enclosed).
A definition of a “sit down restaurant” was also approved. A “sit down restaurant” is a
type of restaurant, which provides tables where one sits down to eat a meal, typically
served by wait staff. Historically called simply restaurants, following the rise of fast food
restaurants, a retronym for the older “standard” restaurant was created. Most
commonly, “sit down restaurant” refers to a casual dining restaurant with table service
rather than a fast food service where one orders food at a counter. Sit down
restaurants are often further categorized as “family style” or “formal”. (Z-7603-C)
Ordinance No. 19,946 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on April 1, 2008,
rezoned both 14910 and the PDC development from POD and PCD to PCD. The
approval allowed a 3,400 square foot drive-through restaurant on Lot 1, a
29,180 square foot office building on Lot 2, a 6,560 square foot restaurant on Lot 3 and
a 6,000 square foot restaurant, a 10,500 square foot retail center and a 2,000 square
foot bank on Lot 4.
The hours of operation for the development were approved from 6:00 am to midnight
seven days per week for Lots 1, 2 and 4 and from 10:00 am to midnight seven days per
week for Lot 3. The hours of dumpster service and the service hours of supplies were
limited to daylight hours.
The approved uses were limited to the following: Bank or savings and loan, Book and
stationary store, Camera shop, Clinic (medical, dental or optical), Clothing store, Eating
place without drive-in service, Florist shop, Furniture store, Hardware or sporting goods
store, Health studio or spa, Jewelry store, Laundry, domestic cleaning, Office (general
and professional), Optical shop, Photography studio, Retail uses not listed (enclosed).
The development was required to construct an earthen berm along the Cantrell Road
frontage within the 40-foot landscape strip constructed to a minimum height of
42-inches measured from the average grade of the site. Within the 40-foot landscape
strip an earthen sculpture and stone water feature would be constructed along with the
landscaping as typically required to comply with the Highway 10 DOD.
On September 18, 2008, the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request to allow
the placement of an individual tenant sign on Lot 1 to serve the Burger King. The denial
was appealed to the Board of Directors and scheduled to be heard on January 5, 2009,
but was withdrawn by the applicant prior to the public hearing.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-F
4
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT’S STATEMENT:
The applicant is now proposing to amend the previously approved PCD to allow
a modification to the site plan along the eastern portion of the site (Lots 3 and 4).
The applicant is proposing to create an additional lot along the eastern perimeter
to allow the construction of an automotive repair shop within this area in addition
to the sit down restaurant and stand alone retail building. The revised site plan
allows for a reduction of parking in an effort to create additional landscaped
areas.
The revised plan includes Lot 1 which has developed with a 2,800 square foot
restaurant with a drive-through facility, Lot 2 which is proposed to be developed
with a 28,980 square foot office building. Lots 3 and 4 are proposed to be
divided into three (3) lots. A 6,560 square foot restaurant building is to be
located on Lot 3. Lot 4 is proposed to be developed with a 7,200 square foot
automotive repair business and Lot 5 is proposed to be developed with a
5,000 square foot restaurant building.
The development is indicated with cross access and cross parking. Located on
Lot 1 there are 30 parking spaces and on Lot 2 there are 74 parking spaces. Lot
3 is indicated containing 106 parking spaces. Lot 4 is proposed containing
30 parking spaces and Lot 5 is indicated containing 53 parking spaces.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The entire site was cleared and leveled with the construction of the Burger King
restaurant. No other buildings have been constructed. To the east of the site is
the Wal-Greens development, a strip retail center and Catfish City is located
further east. The area to the north is vacant and undeveloped; currently zoned
R-2, Single-family. To the west of the site is a branch bank adjacent to Cantrell
Road and a dentist office and medical office are located in the rear of the site on
separate lots. To the south of the site are vacant properties zoned R-2,
Single-family.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received a number of informational phone calls from
area residents. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site, all
residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site, the Tulley
Cove Neighborhood Association, the Pinnacle Valley Neighborhood Association,
Secluded Hills Property Owners Association, the Westchester Heatherbrae
Property Owners Association and the Westbury Neighborhood Association were
notified of the public hearing.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-F
5
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
2. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with
Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan along
with Cantrell Road and both sides of the public access easement.
3. The medians should be removed from the right turn lane and the
intersection. Handicap ramps should cross the entrance driveway into the
development at the property line.
4. Private access is proposed for these lots. In accordance with Section
31-207, private streets must be designed to the same standards as public
streets. A minimum access easement width of 60 feet is required and street
width of 36 feet from back of curb to back of curb.
5. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
6. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other
than residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be
submitted and approved prior to the start of construction.
7. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES stormwater
permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the
start of construction.
8. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from
AHTD, District VI.
9. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start
of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way
from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner).
10. The development is showing a driveway access to the property to the east.
This driveway access has not been recommended by staff in the past and
should not installed with this revised application. For additional information,
contact Bill Henry with Traffic Engineering at 379-1816.
11. Vehicle parking is not allowed along the drive access to the property to the
east. If the property to the east has similar parking along their access drive,
the parking must be removed.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-F
6
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements for Lots 3 and 4.
Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for additional information.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. The Little Rock Fire
Department needs to evaluate this site to determine if addition public and/or
private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required,
they will be installed at the Developer’s expense. Please submit plans for water
facilities and/or fire protection system to Central Arkansas Water for review. Plan
revisions may be required after additional review. Contact Central Arkansas
Water regarding procedures for installation of water facilities and/or fire service.
Approval of plans by the Arkansas Department of Health Engineering Division
and Little Rock Fire Department is required. Contact Central Arkansas Water
regarding the size and location of the water meter. A Capital Investment Charge
based on the size of meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to
normal charges. This fee will apply to all connections including metered
connections off the private fire system. Due to the nature of this facility,
installation of an approved reduced pressure zone backflow preventer assembly
(RPZ) is required on the domestic water service. This assembly must be
installed prior to the first point of use. Central Arkansas Water (CAW) requires
that upon installation of the RPZA, successful tests of the assembly must be
completed by a Certified Assembly tester licensed by the State of Arkansas and
approved by CAW. The test results must be sent to CAW’s Cross Connection
Section within ten days of installation and annually thereafter. Contact the Cross
Connection Section at 377-1226 if you would like to discuss backflow prevention
requirements for this project. This development will have minor impact on the
existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to
provide adequate pressure and fire protection.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department for additional information.
County Planning: No comment.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-F
7
CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #25 – the Highway 10 Express
Route.
Parks and Recreation: No comment.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use for this property. The applicant
has applied for a revised Planned Commercial Development for a commercial
and office use. This area is covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action
Plan. The Sustainable Natural Environment Goal states: “Promote vigorous
enforcement of Landscaping & Excavation Ordinance.”
Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is a Principal Arterial. The primary function of
a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic
generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits should
be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Cantrell Road
since it is a Principal Arterial. The street may require dedication of right-of-way
and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site.
Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes in the immediate vicinity.
Landscape:
1. Site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 24, 2010)
Mr. Eric Holloway of the Holloway Firm was present representing the request.
Staff presented an overview of the development stating there were a number of
outstanding technical issues associated with the request in need of addressing.
Staff requested details of the proposed signage including building signage and
ground signage. Staff also stated there were specific uses approved with the
original approval and question if there were any additional uses, other than auto
repair, being requested with the revision. Staff also noted specific hours of
operation were approved for the restaurant users and questioned if the hours
would change.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the drive indicated to
connect to the property to the east should be removed. Staff stated the drive had
been discussed on a number of occasions and was not supported by staff. Staff
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-F
8
stated a grading permit would be required at the time of development. Staff also
stated a private access was proposed to the lots. Staff stated private access was
to be designed to public street standard. Staff stated a minimum access
easement of 60 feet and 36 feet of pavement was required to serve the
development.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated a minimum landscape
strip of nine feet was required along the common lot lines. Staff also stated all
interior islands were to comply with the minimum standards of the Landscape
Ordinance.
Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies
suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing the issues raised
at the November 24, 2010, Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised plan
has removed the driveway connection to the development to the east, indicated
the nine (9) foot minimum landscape strip along the common lot lines and
indicated the signage plan. The applicant is requesting to amend the hours of
operation for Lots 1, 2, 4 and 5 to be from 6:00 am to midnight seven days per
week. The hours for Lot 3 will remain from 10:00 am to midnight seven days per
week.
The applicant has not requested to amend the previously approved uses with the
exception of the addition of automotive repair. The uses previously approved are
limited to the following: Bank or savings and loan, Book and stationary store,
Camera shop, Clinic (medical, dental or optical), Clothing store, Eating place
without drive-in service, Florist shop, Furniture store, Hardware or sporting goods
store, Health studio or spa, Jewelry store, Laundry, domestic cleaning, Office
(general and professional), Optical shop, Photography studio, Retail uses not
listed (enclosed) and Automotive repair.
The applicant is proposing to amend the previously approved PCD to allow a
modification to the site plan along the eastern portion of the site. The applicant is
proposing to create an additional lot along the eastern perimeter and allow the
construction of an automotive repair shop within this area. Along the eastern
perimeter there will be a sit down restaurant located to the rear of the site and
stand alone retail building located along Cantrell Road.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-F
9
Lot 1 has developed with a 2,800 square foot restaurant with a drive-through
facility. Lot 2 is proposed to be developed with a 28,980 square foot office
building. Lots 3 and 4 are proposed to be divided into Lots 3, 4 and 5. A 6,560
square foot restaurant building is proposed to be developed on Lot 3. The plan
indicates Lot 4 to be developed with a 7,200 square foot automotive repair
business and Lot 5 to be developed with a 5,000 square foot restaurant building.
The development is indicated with cross access and cross parking. Located on
Lot 1 there are 30 parking spaces and on Lot 2 there are 74 parking spaces. Lot
3 is indicated containing 87 parking spaces. Lot 4 is proposed containing 29
parking spaces and Lot 5 is indicated containing 49 parking spaces. Lot 1 is
existing. Lot 2 is proposed for the development of an office building which would
typically require the placement of 72 parking spaces. Lot 3 is proposed with a
restaurant building which would typically require the placement of 65 parking
spaces. Lot 4 is proposed as automotive repair which would typically require the
placement of 24 parking spaces and Lot 5 is proposed with a restaurant which
would typically require the placement of 50 parking spaces.
No new ground signage is proposed along Cantrell Road. Each of the interior
lots will be allowed a ground sign not to exceed six feet in height and sixty square
feet in area. Building signage for Lots 2 – 4 will be allowed on the front facades
of the buildings or on the façade abutting the access easement.
Although the overall square footage of the retail portion of the development has
not changed significantly staff is not supportive of the request. The previously
approved plan and uses allowed for a more neighborhood friendly retail
development and did not include automotive type uses. Typically automotive
repair is a use that is allow in strictly commercial areas and typically not
developed within or in close proximity to office and residential developments.
Staff has concerns with the potential future development of the site if the site
takes on this type use. Staff feels to add automotive repair to the site will only
push the commercial node further away from the intended intersection of Cantrell
and Taylor Loop Roads. Staff feels the retail development of this site should
maintain the original intended uses of neighborhood type retail uses limited to
uses which serve the immediate neighborhood.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request as filed.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-F
10
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 16, 2010)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the item stating the applicant had requested a deferral of the item on this
date to the January 27, 2011 public hearing. Staff stated the deferral request would
require a waiver of the Commission’s By-laws with regard to the late deferral request.
Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the By-law waiver with regard to the late deferral request. The motion
carried by a vote of 9 ayes 0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions. The chair
entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried
by a vote of 9 ayes 0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant submitted a request dated January 13, 2011, requesting deferral of this
item to the March 10, 2011, public hearing. Staff is supportive of the deferral request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 27, 2011)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request dated January 13,
2011, requesting deferral of this item to the March 10, 2011, public hearing. Staff stated
they were supportive of the deferral request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion of approval
of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
In the proposal request section of the staff write-up, staff incorrectly stated the office
building proposed to be located on Lot 2 contained 28,980 square feet. The proposed
building on Lot 2 was approved to contain 29,180 square feet. There is no change.
Lot 5 is proposed to contain a 6,000 square foot restaurant and not a 5,000 square foot
restaurant as indicated in the previous staff write-up. The Analysis section states the
hours of operation will be amended for Lots 1 – 5 when in fact the hours are as were
approved for the development.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-F
11
Staff continues to not support the request. The applicant is requesting approval of an
automotive repair business (tire and brake store) within the development which was
approved with a mix of uses intended to serve the near by neighborhoods. A few of the
listed approved uses were a bank, book store, camera shop, medical clinic, florist shop,
health studio or spa, which are typically not destination businesses but are developed in
close proximity to the neighborhoods they serve. Staff continues to have concerns with
the potential future uses of the site should the tire and brake store be approved located
within the heart of the development. Staff continues to feel this type business is a
destination business and not in keeping with the original approval for neighborhood type
retail uses which serve the near by residents.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011)
The applicant was present. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of denial.
Mr. Phil Wyle addressed the Commission as the applicant. He stated the request was
to amend the PCD to allow the creation of an additional lot along the eastern perimeter
of the development. He stated his company was a tire and brake store and desired to
locate on the newly created lot within the development. He stated with the revision to
the PCD there was less retail space being requested. He stated unlike staff he did feel
his business was a neighborhood retail use.
Ms. Celia Martin addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated
the neighborhood was opposed to the change. She started the development appeared
to be coming back to the Commission to get more and more commercial. She stated
the current approval allowed for a destination restaurant on the lot behind the proposed
tire and brake center. She questioned what national or local restaurant would want to
locate behind a tire center. She also questioned if the office users would want to look
and the tire center out their windows. She stated the concern was the amount of traffic
the development would potentially generate. She stated the residents were more
interested in keeping the previously approved uses, which were more neighborhood
retail type uses. She stated this development would potentially dictate the development
pattern of the property located to the south of Cantrell Road, which would directly
impact the Westchester neighborhood.
Ms. Ruth Bell representing the League of Women Voters addressed the Commission in
opposition of the request. She stated the Highway 10 DOD established nodes for retail
development. She stated the nodes for commercial development were limited to
intersections. She stated there were a number of uses in the development that did not
appear to go with auto repair.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-F
12
Mr. Wyle addressed the Commission once again. He provided the Commission with a
visual presentation of other service centers similar to his use and the relationship of
these uses to residential areas. He provided the Commission with a visual as to the
location of existing businesses, which provided a similar service in relation to the
proposed location.
The Commission questioned the days and hours of operation for the development.
Mr. Wyle stated the business was open from 7:30 am to 5:30 pm Monday thorough
Friday and Saturday from 7:30 until noon. The Commission questioned if any activities
would take place outside the building. Mr. Wyle stated no. All repairs were made on
the inside of the building. The Commission questioned if cars were left outside over
night. Mr. Wyle stated all cars were stored inside the building over night.
There was a brief discussion concerning construction materials and signage. Mr. Wyle
stated the building would be four-sided brick. He stated signage would comply with the
approved PCD and the Highway 10 DOD.
The Chair entertained a motion for approval of the item including the staff comments
located in the paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. The motion carried by
a vote of 10 ayes, 1 no and 0 absent.
March 10, 2011
ITEM NO.: E FILE NO.: Z-8610
NAME: McDonald’s USA Short-form PD-C
LOCATION: Located at 104 South University Avenue
DEVELOPER:
McDonald’s USA, LLC
3850 North Causeway Boulevard, Suite 1200
Metairie, LA 70602
ENGINEER:
Lee Morris, PE
Adams Engineering
910 South Kimball Avenue
Southlake, TX 76092
AREA: .9279 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District
ALLOWED USES: General Commercial District Uses
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: Restaurant – Mid-town Design Overlay District
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
The applicant submitted a request dated November 29, 2010, requesting deferral of this
item to the January 27, 2011, public hearing. The applicant has indicated the deferral
request is necessary to allow completion of the traffic study and allow staff sufficient
time to review the contents of the study. Staff is supportive of the deferral request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 16, 2010)
Mr. Randy Frazier was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a
request dated November 29, 2010, requesting a deferral of the item to the January 27,
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8610
2
2011, public hearing. Staff stated the applicant had indicated the deferral request was
necessary to allow completion of the requested traffic study and allow staff sufficient
time to review the contents of the study. Staff stated they were supportive of the
deferral request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes
0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant submitted a request dated January 11, 2011, requesting a deferral of this
item to the March 10, 2011, public hearing. Staff is supportive of the deferral request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 27, 2011)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request dated January 11,
2011, requesting a deferral of this item to the March 10, 2011, public hearing. Staff
stated they were supportive of the deferral request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion of approval
of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant submitted a request dated February 15, 2011, requesting a deferral of this
item to the April 21, 2011, public hearing. The deferral request will require a By-law
waiver with regard to the number of previous deferral requests. Staff recommends
approval of the deferral request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011)
Mr. Randy Frazier was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a
request dated February 15, 2011, requesting a deferral of the item to the April 21, 2011,
public hearing. Staff stated the deferral request would require a waiver of the By-laws
with regard to the number of previously approved deferral requests. Staff presented a
recommendation of approval of the deferral request.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8610
3
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for
approval of the By-law waiver request with regard to the number of previously approved
deferrals. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. The chair
entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried
by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
March 10, 2011
ITEM NO.: F FILE NO.: Z-8614
NAME: Islamic Center Short-form PCD
LOCATION: Located at 1717 Wright Avenue
DEVELOPER:
Islamic Center
c/o Muhammad Rashud
1717 Wright Avenue
Little Rock, AR 72204
SURVEYOR:
Brooks Surveying
20820 Arch Street Pike
Hensley, AR 72065
AREA: 0.59 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 zoning lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District
ALLOWED USES: General Retail Uses
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: C-3, General Commercial District – Add outdoor sales
of merchandise
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
The applicant failed to respond to comments raised at the November 24, 2010,
Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff recommends deferral of this item to the
January 27, 2011, public hearing.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 16, 2010)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the item stating the applicant had failed to respond to comments raised at the
November 24, 2010, Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff presented a
recommendation of deferral of this item to the January 27, 2011, public hearing.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8614
2
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes
0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
STAFF UPDATE:
There has been no contact by the applicant since the previous public hearing. Staff
recommends deferral of this item to the March 10, 2011, public hearing.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 27, 2011)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the item stating there had been no contact by the applicant since the
previous public hearing. Staff presented a recommendation of deferral of this item to
the March 10, 2011, public hearing.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion of approval
of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant has contacted staff and requested a deferral of this item to the April 21,
2011, public hearing. The applicant has indicated they are working with the area
neighborhood associations concerning the proposed development plan. Staff is
supportive of the deferral request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the items stating the applicant had contacted them and requested a deferral
of the item to the April 21, 2011, public hearing. Staff stated the applicant had indicated
they are working with the area neighborhood associations concerning the proposed
development plan. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
March 10, 2011
ITEM NO.: G FILE NO.: Z-2940-A
NAME: Independent Hotel Pine Street Short-form PCD
LOCATION: Located on the Southeast corner of West 8th and Pine Streets
DEVELOPER:
Moses Tucker Real Estate
Attn. Wes Lacewell
200 S. River Market Avenue, Suite 300
Little Rock, AR 72201
SURVEYOR:
Brooks Surveying
20820 Arch Street Pike
Hensley, AR 72065
AREA: 0.895 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 zoning lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: O-3, General Office District
ALLOWED USES: General Office
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: Hotel
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT’S STATEMENT:
The request is a rezoning of this O-3, General Office District site to PCD to
allow the construction of a 40-room two-story hotel. Drive locations are on
West 8th and South Pine Streets. The building construction is proposed as
EFIS, Stone and Hardi-Board Siding. The roof materials are proposed as
composition shingles. The building is indicated with a maximum height of
35-feet.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2940-A
2
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains three boarded single-family structures and a boarded
garage. To the north of the site is the I-630 Frontage Road and to the
west is the County Health Unit. Southwest of the site is a large church.
East of the site are occupied single-family homes and south of the site are
single-family homes, a few of which appear to be vacant.
Pine Street is constructed with curb and gutter. West 8th Street and South
Oak Street are substandard streets with open ditches for drainage.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from
the area property owners. All property owners located within 200 feet of
the site, all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of
the site, the Fair Park Residents Association, the Forest Hills
Neighborhood Association, the Pine to Woodrow Neighborhood
Association, the Hope Neighborhood Association and the Stephens
Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required to be
extended along 8th Street and Pine Street adjacent to the
development in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock
Code and the Master Street Plan.
2. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in
the public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
3. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way
from AHTD, District VI.
4. Stormwater detention ordinance does not apply.
5. Measures to control the increase in stormwater runoff from the
increased impervious surface should be implemented to not damage
adjacent property.
6. On site striping and signage plans should be forwarded to Public
Works, Traffic Engineering for approval with the site development
package.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2940-A
3
7. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and
circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The
driveway on Pine Street is to close to the intersection. The driveway
must be located as far from the intersection as possible. The width of
driveways must not exceed 36 feet.
8. Damage to public and private property due to hauling operations or
operation of construction related equipment from a nearby
construction site shall be repaired by the responsible party prior to
issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
9. With site development, provide the design of street conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvements to Oak
Street including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. The
new back of curb should be located at least 18 feet from centerline
including drainage improvements.
10. Existing curb cuts not to be used must be closed with curb, gutter,
and sidewalks.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this project. A Capacity Analysis is
required prior to Little Rock Wastewater giving approval to serve this
project with sewer service. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for
additional information.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in
effect at the time of request for water service must be met. The Little
Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether
additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional
fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the Developer's
expense. Please submit plans for water facilities and/or fire protection
system to Central Arkansas Water for review. Plan revisions may be
required after additional review. Contact Central Arkansas Water
regarding procedures for installation of water facilities and/or fire service.
Approval of plans by the Arkansas Department of Health Engineering
Division and Little Rock Fire Department is required. Contact Central
Arkansas Water regarding the size and location of the water meter. Due
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2940-A
4
to the nature of this facility, installation of an approved reduced pressure
zone backflow preventer assembly (RPZ) is required on the domestic
water service. This assembly must be installed prior to the first point of
use. Central Arkansas Water (CAW) requires that upon installation of the
RPZA, successful tests of the assembly must be completed by a Certified
Assembly Tester licensed by the State of Arkansas and approved by
CAW. The test results must be sent to CAW's Cross Connection Section
within ten days of installation and annually thereafter. Contact the Cross
Connection Section at 377-1226 if you would like to discuss backflow
prevention requirements for this project.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock
Fire Department for additional information.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route.
Parks and Recreation: No comment.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the I-630 Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use - Urban for this property. The
applicant has applied for a rezoning from O-3, General Office to Planned
Commercial District, to allow the construction of a new Hotel.
A Land Use Plan amendment is not required. This area is covered by the
12th Street Study. That planning effort recommended the Pine-Cedar
Corridor from I-630 to south of 11th Street be redevelopment into a more
‘urban’ form with two to four story structures, built to the street in a
pedestrian friendly form and with a variety of uses to become a new center
or core for this portion of Little Rock.
Master Street Plan: This application has frontage on Interstate 630, Oak
Street and Pine Street. Pine Street is shown as a Collector. The primary
function of a Collector Street is to provide a connection from Local Streets
to Arterials. Oak Street is a Local Street. The primary function of a Local
Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Local Streets, which
are abutted by non-residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than
duplexes are considered as “Commercial Streets”. These streets have a
design standard the same as a Collector. These streets may require
dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for
entrances and exits to the site.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2940-A
5
Bicycle Plan: Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III Bikeways are not in
the immediate vicinity of the development.
Landscape:
1. Site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
2. The landscape ordinance requires a minimum of eight percent (8%) of
the paved areas be landscaped with interior islands of at least 7 ½ feet
in width and 150 square feet in area. The interior islands must be
evenly distributed throughout the site.
3. Building landscaping will be required with the proposed development.
4. The site is located within the designated Mature Area of the City which
allows the minimum street buffer requirement to be reduced to six feet
nine inches (6’9”). The site plan as proposed does not meet this
minimum requirement along Pine Street. The site plan as proposed
does not meet the minimum requirements of the City Landscape
Ordinance. A variation from the Landscape Ordinance requirements
will require approval from the City Beautiful Commission.
5. The zoning buffer ordinance requires the placement of a minimum land
use buffer along the southern perimeter of the site of nine feet (9’).
Since the site is located within the designated mature areas the land
use buffer may be reduced to six feet nine inches (6’9”).
6. A water source located within 75-feet of the landscaped areas will be
required to water areas set aside for landscaping.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (March 17, 2011)
The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented the
item stating there were a number of outstanding technical issues in need
of addressing related to the site plan. Staff questioned the location of the
mechanical equipment, building elevations and the dumpster location.
Staff also questioned the applicant’s proposed signage plan.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the drive located
on West 8th Street would require approval by AHTD prior to construction.
Staff stated the stormwater detention ordinance would not apply to the
development of the lots. Staff stated measures to control the increase in
stormwater runoff from the increased impervious surface should be
implemented to not damage adjacent property. Staff stated street
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2940-A
6
construction to South Oak Street would be required adjacent to the
development area. Staff stated a minimum of 18-feet of pavement would
be required from centerline.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the site plan as
proposed did not allow for the minimum landscape strip required by the
landscape or buffer ordinances. Staff stated the site was located within
the designated mature area which did allow the minimum strip to be
reduced to six feet nine inches. Staff stated building landscaping would
be required at the time of development. Staff stated the property to the
south was zoned residentially and would require screening. Staff stated
this could be accomplished by the placement of a six foot fence or wall or
by providing plant materials which provided year around screening.
Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies
suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional
clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee
then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan addressing a number of the
issues raised at the February 17, 2011, Subdivision Committee meeting.
The applicant has provided building elevations, the location of the
mechanical equipment and provided the location of the dumpster facilities.
The applicant has also provided staff with the proposed signage plan.
The applicant is proposing the building constructed with no openings
along the southern and eastern facades in the areas of guest rooms. The
office is single story and will have openings on the east façade. The
building is proposed with a maximum height of 35-feet. The building is
proposed constructed with a shingled roof. The building materials are
proposed as EFIS, Stone and vertical Hardi-Board siding. The
mechanical equipment for the office portion of the development is located
on South Oak Street, adjacent to single-family homes.
The applicant has not provided details for the proposed building signage.
Staff would recommend signage be limited to signage allowed in office
zones or a maximum of ten percent of the façade area abutting the public
streets. The ground sign is indicated as eight by twelve with a maximum
height of forty feet. The signage is not consistent with signage allowed in
office zones. The maximum height and area typically allowed per the
zoning ordinance for office zones is six feet high and sixty-four square feet
in area.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2940-A
7
The revised site plan includes additional landscaping along the
perimeters. Abutting West 8th Street the site plan indicates a landscape
strip ranging from nine feet to twenty feet which is adequate to meet the
typical minimum standards of the landscape and buffer ordinances. The
landscape strip along South Oak Street ranges from seven feet to seven
feet four inches and the landscape strip along South Pine Street ranges
from twenty-five feet to five feet (along the southern perimeter adjacent to
the parking area) both of which are adequate to meet the typical minimum
ordinance requirements of the landscape and buffer ordinances. The
landscaping along the southern perimeter adjacent to the paved area is
deficient and does not meet the minimum landscape ordinance or the
buffer ordinance requirement. Adjacent to the paved area the strip is
indicated at three feet. The land use buffer strip adjacent to the building
along the southern perimeter is six feet nine inches as required by the
buffer ordinance. There are no landscape ordinance requirements in this
area.
The revised site plan has not addressed the screening requirement along
the southern perimeter. The property is adjacent to residentially zoned
property which requires the placement of a six foot screen. The screening
can be accomplished with the placement of a six foot fence or wall or by
placing plantings which provided year around screening.
The site is identified on the City’s Future Land Use Plan as Mixed Use
Urban or MXU. This category provides for a mix of residential, office and
commercial uses not only in the same block but also within the same
structure. This category is intended for older "urban" areas to allow
dissimilar uses to exist, which support each other to create a vital area.
Development should reinforce the urban fabric creating a 24-hour activity
area. Using the Planned Zoning District or the Urban Use District, high
and moderate density developments that result in a vital (dense)
pedestrian oriented area are appropriate.
The area is covered by the 12th Street Corridor Plan which was endorsed
by a resolution of support by both the Planning Commission and the Board
of Directors. The area between I-630 and 12th Street fronting Pine and
Cedar Streets including this area was identified as a primary activity node.
That planning effort recommended the Pine-Cedar Corridor from I-630 to
south of 11th Street be redevelopment into a more ‘urban’ form with two to
four story structures, built to the street in a pedestrian friendly form and
with a variety of uses to become a new center or core for this portion of
Little Rock.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2940-A
8
Staff has concerns with the site plan as proposed. The plan does not
include the minimum landscaping required per the zoning buffer ordinance
and the landscape ordinance. The applicant has not provided the
screening required along the southern perimeter adjacent to residentially
zoned property. The mechanical equipment is located on South Oak
Street adjacent to the residential property and the rear of the building does
not include a mechanism to visually reduce the massing of the structure.
Staff feels there are a number of issues related to the site plan and the
development as proposed does not fit well with the neighborhood.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 27, 2011)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present.
Staff presented the item stating the applicant did not appear at the January 5,
2011, Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff presented a recommendation of
deferral of the item to the March 10, 2011, public hearing.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion of
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of
9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011)
The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
stated the application had been revised since the staff write-up and
recommendation. Staff stated the request was a rezoning of this O-3, General
Office District site to PCD to allow the construction of a 38-room two-story hotel.
Staff stated the drive locations were on West 8th and South Pine Streets. Staff
stated the building construction was proposed as EFIS, Stone and Hardi-Board
Siding. Staff stated the roof materials were proposed as composition shingles
and the maximum height of the building was 35-feet. Staff stated the applicant
had provided them with building elevations, which broke the massing of the
structure along the southern and eastern facades. Staff stated the applicant had
also indicated the placement of plantings within this area to also aid in breaking
the massing of these walls. Staff stated the revised plan had also relocated the
mechanical equipment from South Oak Street to the interior of the development.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2940-A
9
Staff stated the applicant had indicated a pole sign 36-feet in height and
120 square feet in area. Staff stated they had contacted the applicant and
indicated they did not support a sign of this size. Staff stated the applicant was
now requesting a monument sign ten feet in height and one hundred square feet
in area. Staff stated building signage was to be limited to signage allowed in
office zones or a maximum of ten percent of the façade area abutting the public
streets.
Staff stated the revised site plan included additional landscaping along the
perimeters. Staff stated the site plan indicated the placement of two parking
spaces which in staff’s opinion could be removed to allow for proper buffering
along West 8th and South Pine Streets. Staff stated the remaining areas were
indicated with adequate landscape to meet the City’s landscape and buffer
ordinance requirements. Staff stated the applicant had agreed to these
conditions as well.
Staff stated the applicant was willing to install a six foot screening fence along
the southern perimeter as requested by staff. Staff stated in addition to the
screening fence plantings would be placed within this area to also provided
enhancement to the area.
Staff stated the revised plan submitted by the applicant on March 4th indicated
the placement of Crape Myrtles as trees. Staff stated these plants were no
longer allowed as trees per the City’s Landscape Ordinance. Staff stated they
would work with the applicant at the time of development to select trees as
allowed per the Landscape Ordinance.
Staff stated with the revised plan a number of their previously raised concerns
had been addressed. Staff stated by limiting the signage and removing the two
parking spaces the site plan now met the typical requirements of the various
ordinances. Staff stated presented a recommendation of approval of the request
subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in
paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report.
The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff.
The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
March 10, 2011
ITEM NO.: H FILE NO.: Z-4411-J
NAME: Pleasant Ridge Town Center Revised PCD
LOCATION: Located on the Southeast corner of Cantrell Road and
Pleasant Ridge Drive
DEVELOPER:
Pleasant Ridge Town Center
11601 Pleasant Ridge Road
Little Rock, AR 72212
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 0.68 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: PCD
ALLOWED USES: Shopping Center
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD
PROPOSED USE: Shopping Center - Modify the previously approved signage plan
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
On December 20, 1994, through Ordinance No. 16,808, the City Board of Directors
approved a PCD that would allow the development of a mixed use “Neighborhood
Commercial” shopping center and an accompanying office development. The site was
a 12.83 acre-tract and of the area, 11.48 acres was proposed to be developed as the
shopping center. The proposed structure was 97,680 square feet, and 463 parking
spaces were indicated. A 1.35-acre tract was to have 10,000 square feet of office
building space with an additional 50 parking spaces. The uses proposed for the
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-J
2
shopping center were all by-right C-2 and C-3 zoning district, except that there were to
be no service stations, auto glass or muffler shops, convenience stores, or car washes
within the scope of the PCD. The uses proposed for the office building were all uses by
right in the O-2 and O-3 zoning district.
On January 9, 1997, the Commission reviewed a request for a change in the right-of-
way dedication and street improvement requirement to Fairview Road. The developer
requested all right-of-way dedication and street improvements be taken from the
property located to the east of Fairview Road. The Board of Directors adopted
Ordinance No. 17,331 on December 3, 1996, which allowed a five-year deferral of street
improvements (or until development of the Pleasant Ridge Square PCD) to Fairview
Road.
The Little Rock Planning Commission granted a three-year time extension for the
proposed submission of the final development plan at their December 22, 1997, Public
Hearing. The applicant submitted a Final Development Plan for the Pleasant Ridge
Square Long-form PCD, which was approved on February 1, 2002.
The Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 19,233 on November 9,
2004, establishing a revision to the Pleasant Ridge Town Center PCD. The
development was proposed as a 300,000 square foot retail center with restaurant space
developed as a “Life-style Center”. The approval allowed the creation of three lots.
Ordinance No. 19,281 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on February 15,
2005, revised the previously approved PCD to allow Coulson Oil to add an additional
driveway to their site and adjust the southern property line. The site plan indicated the
drive would be added to the southwestern corner of the property to adjoin to the
proposed driveway for Pleasant Ridge Town Center. The applicant indicated with the
adjustment, the existing Coulson PCD would function more appropriately with the
approved Pleasant Ridge Town Center site plan. Coulson Oil also proposed the sale of
a portion of their lot to the Pleasant Ridge Town Center along the southern perimeter.
The sale of the property resulted in a rear yard buffer and landscape strip that was less
than the typical minimum required per the Highway 10 Design Overlay District.
The Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 19,633 on November 21, 2006, revising
the previously approved PCD for the shopping center to allow the creation of two (2)
additional lots for the Pleasant Ridge Town Center. The previous approval allowed for
the creation of three (3) lots which had been final platted. The developer proposed the
placement of the two (2) additional lots along Cantrell Road within the area identified as
future restaurant sites. According to the applicant the restaurant out-parcels were
needed to allow the transfer of property to prospective tenants. The approval brought
the total available lots on the site to five (5). There were no other modifications
proposed to the previous approval.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-J
3
On December 7, 2006, the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request to allow
the western-most drive located along Cantrell Road to become a full service
intersection. The denial of the request was appealed to the Board of Directors and was
scheduled to be heard on February 20, 2006. The item was withdrawn from the Board
of Directors agenda prior to action by the Board of Directors.
Ordinance No. 19,730 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on April 3, 2007,
allowed a revision to the previously approved PCD to allow additional sign locations
within the development. The approval allowed building signage located on the portion
of the flat wall located on the northeast corner and northwest corner of the center
shopping center building. No other modifications to the approved site plan were
proposed with the revision to the PCD.
On October 15, 2009, the Little Rock Planning Commission made a recommendation of
approval of a request by Chick-fil-A to place signage along their western façade. On
November 17, 2009, the Little Rock Board of Directors denied the request.
Ordinance No. 20,240 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on April 6, 2010,
allowed a revision to the PCD to allow seasonal sales on the site. The approval allowed
the placement of a temporary trailer for a shaved ice business to be placed on the site
from April through September yearly.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT’S STATEMENT:
The site is an out-parcel located along the eastern entrance drive to the Pleasant
Ridge Town Center shopping center. The request is to allow the placement of
signage along the eastern and western facades of the building, both located with
out public street frontage. The eastern façade abuts an access drive entering the
shopping center. The western façade faces the Chick-fil-A. The signs are
proposed with a maximum height of 15-inches and a maximum length of
13.5-inches for an overall sign area of 1.4 square feet. The previously approved
signage plan allowed for the placement of a ground mounted monument sign
within the front yard area not to exceed six feet in height and seventy-two square
feet in area and building signage on the front façade abutting Cantrell Road not
to exceed ten percent of the total façade area.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is developed with a shopping center with two out-parcels located along
Cantrell Road. The western most out-parcel is a Chick-fil-A restaurant and the
eastern most out-parcel remains vacant. Also located in the immediate area of
this development are a number of restaurants, two convenience stores, banks
and office buildings, a drycleaners, a liquor store and a City of Little Rock Fire
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-J
4
station. North of the site, across Cantrell Road, is the Walton Heights
Subdivision.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from the
area property owners. All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, all
residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site, the
Pleasant Valley Property Owners Association and the Walton Height
Candlewood Property Owners Association were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
No comments.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this project.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: No objection to the placement of signage on the
building facades.
Fire Department: No comment regarding the placement of signage for this
development.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #25 – the Highway 10 Express
Route.
Parks and Recreation: No comment.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-J
5
has applied for a rezoning for a revised Planned Commercial District, to allow for
additional signage. The request does not require a change to the Land Use
Plan.
Master Street Plan: This application has frontage along Cantrell Road, which is a
Principal Arterial. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through
traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized
areas. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of
traffic and pedestrians on Cantrell Road since it is a Principal Arterial. This street
may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for
entrances and exits to the site.
Bicycle Plan: Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III Bikeways are not in the
immediate vicinity of the development.
Landscape: No comment regarding the placement of signage for this
development. All previous comments will apply to the new building construction
with regard to parking lot and building landscaping.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (January 5, 2011)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the
request. Staff presented an overview of the request stating there were no
additional items needed to complete the review process. Staff stated the request
was to allow building signage inconsistent with signage allowed by the City’s sign
ordinance and the Highway 10 Design Overlay District.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
There were no outstanding issues associated with the request in need of
addressing raised at the January 5, 2011, Subdivision Committee meeting. The
applicant’s request is to allow signage without public street frontage on the
buildings eastern and western facades. The property is located within the
Highway 10 Design Overlay District which states signage shall comply with the
provisions of Article X of the zoning ordinance, except for a development sign
which is allowed as a ten foot high one hundred square feet in area and the
allowance of a ground mounted monument sign for each commercial building not
to exceed six feet in height and seventy-two square feet in area. The zoning
ordinance typically does not allow signage without public street frontage except
in complexes where a sign without street frontage is the only means of
identification for a tenant. Building signage is to not exceed ten (10) percent of
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-J
6
the total façade area of the façade abutting a public street. The signage along
the eastern façade abuts the eastern entrance drive to the Pleasant Ridge
Shopping Center from Cantrell Road and the sign proposed along the western
façade abuts the Chick-fil-A restaurant.
Staff is not supportive of the request. The Highway 10 DOD is specific on the
allowance of signage. Staff feels since the DOD is very specific in the allowance
of signage along this corridor and this is not a hardship case where the additional
signage is required to identify the business staff does not feel the signage without
public street frontage should be allowed. In areas covered by DOD’s staff has
not typically supported the allowance of signage inconsistent with the overlay
district. Staff feels the approved ground sign and the sign on the front façade of
the building are sufficient to identify the business.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 27, 2011)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request.
There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the
applicant had submitted a request dated January 19, 2011, requesting a deferral of this
item to the March 10, 2011, public hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the
deferral request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion of approval
of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant submitted a request dated February 25, 2011, requesting a deferral of this
item to the April 21, 2011, public hearing. Staff recommends approval of the deferral
request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011)
Mr. Joe White of White Daters and Associates was present representing the request.
There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-J
7
applicant had submitted a request dated February 25, 2011, requesting a deferral of the
item to the April 21, 2011, public hearing. Staff presented a recommendation of
approval of the deferral request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
March 10, 2011
ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: S-1221-F
NAME: Chalamont – Chenal Valley Phase 18-K Revised Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: Located North of Chalamont Drive, just South of Joe T. Robinson School
DEVELOPER:
Deltic Timber Corporation
7 Chenal Club Boulevard
Little Rock, AR 72223
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 26.8 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 82 FT. NEW STREET: 3170 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 19 – Chenal
CENSUS TRACT: 42.11
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1. A variance from Section 31-256 to allow a front building line on a residential lot of
twenty (20) feet.
2. A variance from Section 31-256 to allow a ten (10) foot front building line on
residential Lots 9, 23, 24 and 63.
3. A variance from Section 36-254(2) to allow side yard setback on each side of the lot
at five (5) feet.
4. A variance from the City’s Land Alteration Ordinance to allow grading of future
phases with the development of Phase I.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT’S STATEMENT:
The applicant is requesting to amend the previously approved preliminary plat for
Phase 18 of the Chalamont Subdivision. The applicant is requesting three (3)
variances from various City ordinances. The request includes a variance from
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1221-F
2
the City’s Subdivision Ordinance to allow a front building line of 20-feet and
5-foot side yard setbacks for all the lots proposed for development. Lots 9, 23,
24 and 63 are indicated with a 10-foot front building line. The request also
includes a variance from the City’s Land Alteration ordinance to allow grading of
the entire development with the construction of street improvements in Phase I.
The subdivision is proposed in four (4) phases with 20 lots developed in the first
phase, 16 lots in the second phase, 20 lots in the third phase and 26 lots
developed in the final phase. The average lot sizes proposed are 60-feet by
150-feet and 60-feet by 120-feet. The development is indicated with 3,170 linear
feet of new public street constructed to residential street standard. A secondary
emergency access is proposed to connect to an existing paved parking area
located on the adjacent private recreational area and extend to this subdivision
via a 16-foot all weather emergency access.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is wooded sloping upward from the street to the north. North of the site
proposed for development is Joe T. Robinson School and to the west is a private
recreational facility. East of the site is a developed single-family subdivision,
Bronte Court. South of the site is Chalamont Drive, which as been constructed to
Master Street Plan standard. Across Chalamont Drive is the Challain Place
Subdivision.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area property owners.
All abutting property owners of the site, the Coalition of West Little Rock
Neighborhoods and the Duqesne Place Property Owners Association were
notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. With site development, provide the design of the street conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct street improvements to these streets with the
planned development.
2. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start
of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way
from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner).
3. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1221-F
3
than residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be
submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. A variance is
being requested for advanced grading of future phases with the
development of the first phase.
4. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the
proposed location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan.
5. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES stormwater
permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the
start of construction.
6. Street Improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic
Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction.
7. Streetlights are required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Provide
plans for approval to Traffic Engineering. Streetlights must be installed prior
to platting/certificate of occupancy. Contact Traffic Engineer 379-1813
(Steve Philpott) for more information.
8. Since the streets are proposed to be 24 feet in width, show on the plan the
area of streets where parking will be restricted to one side.
9. Hammerheads should be designed to be at least 80 feet in length and the
same width as the street. A hammerhead built to this standard should be
provided Caurel Court.
10. The applicant proposes an emergency access across another property.
Provide proof of access granted by adjacent property owner. Today the
emergency access route is barricaded, not permitting access.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements for this project.
Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for additional information.
Entergy: Additional easements are required. A ten-foot easement is required to
extend from the existing subdivision to the east to the proposed Caurel Lane.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request to water service must be met. A water main extension will be
needed to provide water service to this property. Please submit plans for water
facilities to Central Arkansas Water for review. Plan revision may be required
after additional review. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1221-F
4
for installation of water facilities. Approval of plans by Central Arkansas Water,
the Arkansas Department of Health Engineering Division and Little Rock Fire
Department is required. This development will have minor impact on the existing
water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide
adequate pressure and fire protection. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required.
Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the
required placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water
regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s).
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. The proposed secondary access
may not be adequate to serve the development. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department to discuss secondary access alternatives.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is not located near a dedicated CATA Bus Route.
Parks and Recreation: No comment.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 17, 2011)
Mr. Joe White and Mr. Tim Daters of White-Daters and Associates were present
representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the development
stating there were few outstanding technical issues associated with the request
in need of addressing prior to the Commission acting on the request. Staff
questioned if the development would request a fence height variance for the lots
abutting the school. Staff questioned if the development would request a
variance to allow an increased size for the subdivision identification sign.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff questioned if advanced grading
was being requested. Staff stated the hammerheads should be designed to
allow at least an 80-foot length and to be the same width as the street to allow for
proper maneuvering.
Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies
suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1221-F
5
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff addressing the issues
raised at the February 17, 2011, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant
has indicated the subdivision identification sign will be a maximum of six (6) feet
in height and thirty-two (32) square feet in area. The subdivision identification
sign is consistent with signage allowed per the zoning ordinance. The applicant
has indicated a fence height variance for the proposed subdivision will not be
required. The revised site plan increases the length of the hammerhead turn
arounds as requested by Public Works staff.
The request includes a variance from the City’s Land Alteration Ordinance to
allow advanced grading of the lots with the installation of the basic infrastructure.
The applicant has indicated the need to grade the entire site is to allow the site to
balance eliminating the need to haul excess materials from the site.
The request is to amend the previously approved preliminary plat for Phase 18 of
the Chalamont Subdivision. The are variances from the City’s Subdivision
Ordinances to allow a front building line of 20-feet and 10-feet and 5-foot side
yard setbacks. Lots 9, 23, 24 and 63 are indicated with a 10-foot front building
line. The remaining lots are indicated with a 20-foot front building line. All lots
are proposed with five (5) foot side yard setbacks.
The subdivision is proposed in four (4) phases with 20 lots developed in the first
phase, 16 lots in the second phase, 20 lots in the third phase and 26 lots
developed in the final phase. The average lot sizes proposed are 60-feet by
150-feet and 60-feet by 120-feet. The development is indicated with 3,170 linear
feet of new public street constructed to residential street standard. A secondary
emergency access is proposed to connect to an existing paved parking area
located on the adjacent private recreational area and extend to this subdivision
via a 16-foot all weather emergency access. A portion of the subdivision is not
located within the City limits of the City of Little Rock. The applicant has
indicated Lots 9 - 19 will not be developed until the lots are annexed into the City
of Little Rock.
The applicant has indicated a number of the streets will be constructed to a minor
residential street standard. These streets will be constructed with 24-feet of
pavement within a 45-foot right of way. Although the Master Street Plan allows
for streets to be constructed to this standard the City typically restricts parking to
one side of a minor residential street. Public Works staff has requested the
applicant include on the preliminary and final plats the location of the restricted
parking. The applicant has not done so. Staff recommends the area of restricted
parking be included on the preliminary and final plats.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1221-F
6
Staff is supportive of the request to allow the subdivision of this property. The
development is proposed consistent with the City’s Future Land Use plan for this
site with an overall density of 3.06 units per acre. To staff’s knowledge there are
no remaining outstanding technical issues associated with the request. Staff
feels the subdivision and the associated variances is appropriate for the area.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda
staff report.
Staff recommends approval of the following variance request:
1. A variance from Section 31-256 to allow a front building line on a residential
lot of twenty (20) feet.
2. A variance from Section 31-256 to allow a ten (10) foot front building line on
residential Lots 9, 23, 24 and 63.
3. A variance from Section 36-254(2) to allow side yard setback on each side of
the lot at five (5) feet.
4. A variance from the City’s Land Alteration Ordinance to allow grading of
future phases with the placement of the basic infrastructure within the
development.
Staff recommends the applicant provide on the preliminary and final plats the
area of restricted parking on the streets proposed with 24-feet of pavement.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011)
Mr. Tim Daters and White Daters and Associates was present representing the request.
Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to
compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of
the agenda staff report.
Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the following variance request:
1. A variance from Section 31-256 to allow a front building line on a residential lot of
twenty (20) feet.
2. A variance from Section 31-256 to allow a ten (10) foot front building line on
residential Lots 9, 23, 24 and 63.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1221-F
7
3. A variance from Section 36-254(2) to allow side yard setback on each side of the lot
at five (5) feet.
4. A variance from the City’s Land Alteration Ordinance to allow grading of future
phases with the placement of the basic infrastructure within the development.
Staff also presented a recommendation the applicant provide on the preliminary and
final plats the area of restricted parking on the streets proposed with 24-feet of
pavement.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
March 10, 2011
ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: S-1664
NAME: On the River Estates Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: Located on Pinnacle Valley Road and County Farm Road on the Little
Maumelle River
DEVELOPER:
Pinnacle Valley Properties, LLC
Attn: Mollie Birch
310 Louisiana Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
SURVEYOR:
Arkansas Surveying and Consulting
1926 Salem Road
Benton, AR 72019
AREA: 34.15 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 7 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 1 – River Mountain
CENSUS TRACT: 42.05
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
The applicant submitted a request dated February 24, 2011, requesting withdrawal of
this item without prejudice. Staff is supportive of the withdrawal request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the items stating the applicant had submitted a request dated February 24,
2011, requesting withdrawal of the item without prejudice. Staff stated they were
supportive of the withdrawal request.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1664
2
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
March 10, 2011
ITEM NO.: 3 FILE NO.: S-1665
NAME: Wildwood Ridge Addition Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: Located on the West side of Gordon Road and South of Chenal Valley
Drive
DEVELOPER:
Wildwood Partners, LLC
P.O. Box 242146
Little Rock, AR 72223
ENGINEER:
Thomas Engineering Co
Attn: Thomas Pownall
3810 Lookout Road
North Little Rock, AR 72116
AREA: 27.78 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 85 FT. NEW STREET: 3472 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 19 - Chenal
CENSUS TRACT: 42.11
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1. A variance from Section 31-256 to allow a front building line on a residential lot of
twenty (20) feet.
2. A variance from Section 36-254(2) to allow side yard setback on each side of the lot
at five (5) feet.
3. A variance from Section 36-551 to allow an increased size of the proposed
subdivision identification sign.
4. A variance from the City’s Land Alteration Ordinance to allow grading of a portion of
Phase II with the development of Phase I.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1665
2
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT’S STATEMENT:
The developer is requesting preliminary plat approve for a subdivision containing
27.78 acres and 85 single-family residential lots. The lots are proposed with a
minimum and average lot size of 60-feet by 130-feet. The lots are proposed with
a variance from the City’s Subdivision Ordinance to allow a reduced front building
line and a reduced side yard setback. The front building line is proposed at
20-feet and the side yard setbacks are proposed at 5-feet. The development is
proposed in two (2) phases. The first phase will include the development of Lots
1 – 10 Block 3 and Lots 1 – 8 Blocks 1 and 2 and Lots 1 – 16 Block 4.
The request includes variances to allow an increase size for the subdivision
identification sign and to allow grading of a portion of Phase II with the
development of Phase I of the subdivision. The request also includes the right of
way abandonment for the portion of Gordon Road adjacent to Lot 1 Block 4.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is densely wooded located south of Chenal Valley Drive. Access to the
site is via a narrow drive extending from Chenal Valley Drive. There is a single-
family home, also access from this drive, located to the east of the proposed plat
area. South of the plat area is a developing single-family subdivision.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received a several informational phone calls from area
property owners. A few of the callers have indicated opposition to the proposed
subdivision. All abutting property owners of the site and the Coalition of West
Little Rock Neighborhoods were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. With site development, provide the design of the street conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to Gordon Road
including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development adjacent to the
proposed development. The street improvements should be made on
Gordon Road to Chenal Valley Drive to meet residential street standards.
The proposed street infrastructure accessing the subdivision is
substandard. The current street width is 18 feet.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1665
3
2. With site development, provide the design of street conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct street improvements to all streets within the
subdivision to residential street standards including 5-foot sidewalks with
the planned development.
3. A permanent turnaround must be provided at the southern end of Gordon
Road. The turn around should be at least 80 feet in length and the same
width as the street. Instead of a turnaround, the street can be terminated
with curb and gutter at Meadow View Drive. If the right-of-way is
determined not be abandoned and the applicant desires to construct curb
and gutter across Gordon Road, a petition will be required to be submitted
to the City of Little Rock, Planning Department to abandon that part of the
right-of-way.
4. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Detention
locations are being shown. During the grading and drainage plan review
process, calculations must be provided showing the stormwater going to the
proposed detention facilities is of sufficient volume for the entire
development.
5. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start
of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way
from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner).
6. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other
than residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be
submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. A variance is
being requested for advanced grading within the Phase II portion of the
development with construction of the Phase I portion.
7. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES stormwater
permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the
start of construction.
8. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with
Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan.
9. Street Improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic
Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction.
10. Damage to public and private property due to hauling operations or
operation of construction related equipment from a nearby construction site
shall be repaired by the responsible party prior to issuance of a certificate of
occupancy.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1665
4
11. If the subdivision is proposed to be private, no residential waste collection
service will be provided on private streets unless the property owners
association provides a waiver of damage claims for operations on private
property.
12. Temporary turn arounds must be provided at the end of Summershade
Drive as the phased construction is completed for City and emergency
vehicle turnaround. The turn arounds must provide at least 80 feet in length
or diameter for vehicle maneuvering and the same width as the street.
13. City records show Gordon Road right-of-way to be abandoned or is no
longer public and is not maintained by the City of Little Rock. Is the
applicant requesting to dedicate the Gordon Road private right-of-way or
access easement to Chenal Valley Drive to the City of Little Rock? With
current conditions, public streets are shown to gain access from a private
street. With Gordon Road being private, access to public streets could be
denied by the owner(s) of Gordon Road and damage could occur to Gordon
Road by City vehicles accessing the public streets for service.
14. Provide a Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan as required per Section
29-186 (e). Show 100-year stormwater overflow path through the
subdivision.
15. A traffic circle should be provided at Summershade Drive and Meadow View
Drive for traffic calming.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, for this project.
Contact Little Rock Wastewater utility for additional information.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. A water main extension will be
needed to provide water service to this property. Please submit plans for water
facilities to Central Arkansas Water for review. Plan revisions may be required
after additional review. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures
for installation of water facilities. Approval of plans by Central Arkansas Water,
the Arkansas Department of Health Engineering Division and the Little Rock Fire
Department is required. This development will have minor impact on the existing
water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1665
5
adequate pressure and fire protection. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required.
Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the
required placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water
regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). A Capital Investment
Charge based on the size of meter connection(s) will apply to this development in
addition to normal charges.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department for additional information.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: No comment.
Parks and Recreation: No comment.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 17, 2011)
Mr. Graham Smith and Mr. Thomas Pownall of Thomas Engineering were
present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the
development stating there were a number of outstanding technical issues
associated with the request in need of addressing prior to the Commission acting
on the request. Staff stated the right of way for Gordon Road appeared to have
been previously abandoned. Staff stated the developer was meeting with the
City Attorney to determine if the right of way access to the site was abandoned or
was still in place. Staff noted a number of items which would need to be included
on the revised preliminary plat to complete the review process.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff questioned if advanced grading
was being requested for the development. Mr. Pownall stated the developer
would grade off site to allow detention for the Phase I portion of the development.
He also stated some grading would occur to allow the proper turn-around as
requested by Public Works staff. Mr. Pownall noted the streets would be
constructed as public streets.
Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies
suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1665
6
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff addressing the
technical issues associated with the request. The applicant has indicated a small
amount of grading will take place within the Phase II portion of the development
with the development of the Phase I portion of the subdivision. The applicant has
indicated the areas to be advanced graded are within the proposed detention
areas and to allow for the proper turn-around on Summershade Drive. The
advanced grading will require a variance from the City’s Land Alteration
Ordinance.
The applicant has also indicated a subdivision identification sign six (6) feet in
height and ten (10) feet wide will be placed at the entrance to the subdivision.
The Subdivision Ordinance typically allows the placement of a subdivision
identification sign six (6) feet in height and thirty-two (32) square feet in area.
The sign size as proposed will require a variance from the City’s Zoning
Ordinance.
The applicant is requesting approval of a preliminary plat for a parcel containing
27.776 acres and 85 lots. The development is proposed with an overall density
of 3.06 units per acres. The proposed plat indicates two variance requests from
the typical lot development standards of the Subdivision Ordinance. The front
building setback per Section 31-256 is 25-feet. The applicant is requesting to be
allowed a front building line of twenty (20) feet. A variance from Section
36-254(2) to allow side yard setback on each side of the lot at five (5) feet is also
requested. The ordinance typically requires the placement of a side setback of
ten (10) percent of the lot width not to exceed eight (8) feet for R-2, Single-family
zoned property.
The request also includes the right of way abandonment for the portion of
Gordon Road adjacent to Lot 1 Block 4. The applicant has not provided staff with
approval from the various utilities as to the abandonment request. The
abandonment will be addressed as a separate item from the proposed
preliminary plat.
Ordinance No. 18,431 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on February
20, 2001, vacated and closed a portion of Gordon Road between Gordon Road
and Chenal Valley Drive. The ordinance states abutting owners of record,
receiving title to the abandoned right of way and easements shall at their cost
remove all vestiges of public use and access as may exist; such modifications
were to include the entrances on both ends of the abandoned right of way and
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1665
7
easement is to be offset and/or rebuilt to conform to the standard driveway
design as required by Little Rock, Ark. Revised Code Section 30-26-50(1988)
and the edge of pavement of the right of way is to be rebuilt to conform to
existing conditions in the general vicinity where the abandoned right of way and
easement intersects with the remaining public right of way. Chapter 30 states all
driveways into private property must be concrete from the street curbline to the
property line on approved grades. Single and two-family driveways may be
constructed of asphalt except where there is a sidewalk adjacent to the property.
In such cases the driveway is to be concrete to the back edge of the sidewalk.
The connection of the former Gordon Road right of way has been constructed as
required by the ordinance for residential drives.
The City Attorney’s office has reviewed this ordinance and their opinion is that
the portion of Gordon Road that lies to the east of property now owned by
Graham Smith was properly abandoned by City ordinance (Ordinance No.
18,431) after a public hearing. The City has taken subsequent steps in accord
with the abandonment and nothing has occurred subsequently to make the
former Gordon Road property a street dedicated to the public.
In addition Chenal Valley Drive was laid out and constructed based on this
access being a driveway and not a dedicated City street. At this location the
minimum sight distance is not adequate to meet minimum sight distance
requirements of the Master Street Plan for a street in the City of Little Rock. The
development is proposed with a minimum of 85 residential lots. Based on typical
traffic patterns residential lots typically generate a minimum of ten trips per lot per
day. The development would generate a minimum of 850 vehicle trips per day
utilizing this access. The intersection sight distance is 266 feet. AASHTO Green
Book Standards requires an intersection sight distance of 500 feet for a street
with vehicles traveling 45 mph.
The Subdivision Ordinance states every lot shall abut upon a public street,
except where private streets are explicitly approved by the Planning Commission.
The Master Street Plan states local streets should be developed with a minimum
right of way of 50-feet and a minimum paving width of 26-feet. Sidewalks are
required on one-side of the street. The service volume of a local street is
2,500 vehicle trips. The Subdivision Ordinance states private streets are to be
built to public street standard. In some instances one side of the street is
developed prior to the development of the other side. In these cases the
minimum paving width typically allowed is 20-feet. Although very substandard,
this minimum pavement width allows for two cars to pass and allows for City
services to be provided. The access/driveway to this site does not meet this
typical minimum standard.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1665
8
Based on the City Attorney’s opinion that Gordon Road is no longer a public right
of way and the applicant cannot provide adequate access to serve the proposed
subdivision staff cannot support the preliminary plat request.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the preliminary plat as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011)
Mr. Graham Smith and Mr. Don Eilbott were present representing the request. There
were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation
of denial.
Mr. Smith addressed the Commission on the merits of his request. He stated his
company had purchased a 40-acre parcel and was proposing to develop the site as a
single-family subdivision. He stated staff had raised concerns related to access and
sight distances. He stated he felt the right of way for Gordon Road was open. He
stated the sight distance should not be an issue. He stated the road was constructed as
a collector street in 2000. He stated the speed for a collector street was 30 mph.
Chairman Ferstl questioned Deputy City Attorney Cindy Dawson as what the
Commission was to review. Ms. Dawson stated official City records included a
four-page document indicating the road was closed. She stated something different
was filed at the Circuit Clerk’s office but the text of the ordinance clearly stated to see
Exhibit A. She stated it was clear the road was closed by ordinance. She stated the
City had allowed a subdivision to be created and platted over the former right of way.
She stated she nor the Commission had the authority to over ride a City ordinance.
There was a general discussion by the Commission as to the closing of Gordon Road
and land locking property. Ms. Dawson stated the property was not land locked. She
stated the property had access through a prescriptive easement along the eastern
boundary. She stated although it was not practice there were cases where City streets
signs were placed on driveways.
The Commission questioned Mr. Smith as to when he purchased the property. He
stated his company closed on the property in January of 2011. He questioned why the
City would allow the construction of Chenal Valley Drive in a manner that would land
lock a parcel.
Mr. Don Elibott addressed the Commission. He stated he felt the difference was in
interpretation of the ordinance. He stated it was clear that what was abandoned was
from Chenal Valley Drive to Chenal Valley Drive. He stated nothing south of Chenal
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1665
9
Valley Drive was abandoned. He stated the City only recorded ordinances, which
affected real estate. He stated these ordinances were filed with the Circuit Clerk. He
stated the clear way to see if property owners consented to the abandonment was to
look at the file. He stated there was no file.
The Commission questioned if there was a mechanism to allow land locked parcels to
be provided with access. Mr. Eilbott stated there was a process. He stated the process
involved the County Judge and involved payment for access. He stated his client had
access on Gordon Road, which was a public street.
Ms. Dawson stated once again the property was not land locked but did not have proper
access for a subdivision. She stated there were concerns with allowing the subdivision
to take access at this location due to sight distance concerns. She stated the
Commission did not have the authority to over ride a City Ordinance.
The Chair entertained a motion for approval of the item. The motion carried by a vote of
6 ayes, 4 noes, 0 absent and 1 recusal (Commissioner Pierce).
March 10, 2011
ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: S-1474-A
NAME: Kum and Go Subdivision Site Plan Review
LOCATION: Located on the Southwest corner of Colonel Glenn Road and South
University Avenue
DEVELOPER:
Kum and Go
Attn: Abbey Gilroy
6400 Westown Parkway
West Des Moines, IA 50266
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 2.02 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial
PLANNING DISTRICT: 10 – Boyle Park
CENSUS TRACT: 21.02
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT’S STATEMENT:
The applicant is requesting a subdivision site plan review for the placement of a
convenience store with a separate gas pump island on the site located at the
intersection of Colonel Glenn Road and South University Avenue. The request
also includes the creation of an out-parcel for the proposed convenience store.
The building is proposed containing 4,958 square feet and the canopy is
proposed as a 49-foot by 56-foot structure over ten (10) pump stations. The site
plan indicates the placement of 35 parking spaces. Two sign locations are
indicated on the site plan. The signs are indicated with a maximum height of
thirty-six (36) feet and a maximum sign area of 160 square feet. Two drive
locations are indicated; one existing located on Colonel Glenn Road and the
second a proposed newly constructed drive from South University Avenue.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1474-A
2
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
This intersection contains a number of uses including residential, commercial,
office and institutional uses. Within the shopping center development containing
this parcel there are restaurants, an office supply store, medical offices, a
carwash, a beauty supply store and a number of similar type uses. Across
Colonel Glenn Road to the north are two apartment developments, a Wal-Greens
and a strip retail center. To the northeast, across South University Avenue, is a
shopping center owned by UALR which contains a number of retail and office
use. To the east of the site there are retail and office uses including a former
movie theater, a strip center, fast food restaurants and a convenience store with
gas pumps and a drive-thru restaurant.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area property owners.
All property owners located within 200 feet of the site and the John Barrow
Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other
than residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be
submitted and approved prior to the start of construction.
2. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the
proposed location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan.
3. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES stormwater
permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the
start of construction.
4. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from
AHTD, District VI.
5. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
6. Vehicle parking is not allowed to back into access easement.
7. The maximum allowed driveway width is 36 feet.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1474-A
3
8. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start
of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way
from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner).
9. Shared access easement should be provided at the driveway locations.
10. If approved, the proposed right turn lane should be extended to the western
property line of the proposed development.
11. If approved, this portion of the intersection will be required to be resignalized
as part of the intersection improvements.
12. The bus stop located south of the University Avenue driveway should be
moved further south per CLR Traffic Engineering and AHTD requirements if
the driveway is installed. AHTD has the ultimate control of the future
location.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer is available to this project.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. Little Rock Fire Department
needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private
fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will
be installed at the developer’s expense. Please submit plans for water facilities
to Central Arkansas Water for review. Plan revisions may be required after
additional review. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for
installation of water facilities. Approval of plans by Central Arkansas Water, the
Arkansas Department of Health Engineering Division and the Little Rock Fire
Department is required. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding the size and
location of the water meter. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of
meter connection(s) will apply to this development in addition to normal charges.
Due to the nature of this facility, installation of an approved reduced pressure
zone backflow preventer assembly (RPS) is required on the domestic water
service. This assembly must be installed prior to the first point of use. Central
Arkansas Water (CAW) requires that upon installation of the PRZ assembly,
successful tests of the assembly must be completed by a Certified Assembly
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1474-A
4
Tester licensed by the State of Arkansas and approved by CAW. The test results
must be sent to CAW’s Cross Connection Section within ten days of installation
and annually thereafter. Contact the Cross Connection Section at 377-1226 if
you would like to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this project.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. The proposed fuel canopy must
be placed to maintain adequate height and clearance by all fire vehicles. Contact
the Little Rock Fire Department for additional information.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route.
Parks and Recreation: No comment.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape:
1. The site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
2. The landscape ordinance requires a nine (9) foot wide perimeter landscape
strip around the sites entirety unless the are cross accesses within these
areas.
3. The previous site plan indicated a landscape easement along University
Avenue.
4. Interior landscape islands are required to be provided. The landscape
ordinance requires a minimum of eight percent (8%) of the paved areas be
landscaped with interior islands of at least 7 ½ feet in width and 150 square
feet in area. The interior islands must be evenly distributed throughout the
site.
5. Building landscaping will be required with the proposed development.
6. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
7. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an
approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape
Architect.
8. Street trees are both highly encouraged and appreciated.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1474-A
5
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 17, 2011)
Mr. Tim Daters of White-Daters and Associates and Mr. Ernie Peters of Peters
and Associates were present representing the request. Staff presented an
overview of the development stating there were a number of outstanding
technical issues associated with the request in need of addressing prior to the
Commission acting on the request. Staff stated the plan as presented did not
comply with the City’s Landscape Ordinance.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the redesign of the
intersection of South University Avenue and Colonel Glenn Road would require
approval by AHTD prior to construction. Staff also stated vehicle parking was not
allowed to back into access easement.
Mr. Peters stated State Farm Insurance had reviewed a number of intersections
within the City and made recommendations for redesign to promote safety. He
stated one of the intersections reviewed was the Colonel Glenn/South University
Avenue intersection. He stated the recommendation removed the sweeping
curves that presently existed and channeling the traffic. Mr. Daters stated with
the channeling of the traffic into the traffic lanes this reduced the number of
accidents. Staff questioned if the Highway Department was on board with the
proposal. Mr. Daters stated AHTD was continuing to review the request.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated interior landscaping and
building landscaping would be required with the development. Staff also stated
an automatic irrigation system would be required and a certified landscape plan
would be required prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies
suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing a number of the
issues raised at the February 17, 2011, Subdivision Committee meeting. The
revised plan no longer indicates parking backing into the access easement. A
landscape strip along the southern perimeter nine (9) feet wide has been
indicated on the site plan and landscape islands have been included along the
western perimeter. The applicant has indicated interior landscaping and building
landscaping will comply with the typical ordinance standards.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1474-A
6
The development is proposed as a convenience store with a separate fuel
canopy. Per Section 31-13 multiple buildings located on a site are to be
reviewed through the Subdivision Site Plan Review process. The developments
are revised on a case by case basis for consideration of project particulars
including the provisions of parking and landscaping in accordance with the
appropriate ordinances, siting of buildings and the relationships with adjoining
properties. The applicant is also requesting the creation of a separate parcel for
the convenience store and fuel center. The lot is proposed containing
2.02 acres. The lot will be served by existing cross access easements within the
development.
The property is zoned C-3, General Commercial. The building is proposed
containing 4,958 square feet. The fuel center canopy is proposed 49-feet by
56-feet over ten (10) pump stations. The site plan indicates the placement of
35 parking spaces. Based on the typical minimum parking required for a retail
development a total of 16 parking spaces would be required. The maximum
building height proposed is 35-feet. The height is consistent with building heights
allowed in the C-3, General Commercial Zoning District.
The site plan indicates the placement of two (2) sign locations, one each on
Colonel Glenn Road and South University Avenue. The signs are indicated as
pole signs with a maximum height of thirty-six (36) feet and a maximum sign area
of one hundred sixty (160) square feet. Building signage is proposed on the
façade of the building and the fuel canopy on the facades abutting the public
rights of way. The signage plan as proposed is consistent with signage allowed
in commercial zones.
The site plan is proposed with a redesign of the intersection of South University
Avenue and Colonel Glenn Road and the placement of a new drive on South
University Avenue. The redesign of the intersection and the driveway placement
will require approval by AHTD prior to construction.
Staff is supportive of the request. The site is an existing developed site with this
piece being the only vacant area on the site. When the site was developed the
site was overlaid with cross access and cross parking agreements. The
applicant has included additional landscaping within the site and building
landscaping will be placed to comply with the typical ordinance requirements.
The request includes a plat to allow the creation of this out-parcel. Staff is
supportive of the plat as proposed. The plat area contains 2+ acres well in
excess of the typical minimum ordinance requirements for the zoning district. To
staff’s knowledge there are no remaining outstanding technical issues associated
with the request. Staff feels the development of the site as proposed complies
with typical development standards of the various ordinances.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1474-A
7
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda
staff report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011)
Mr. Tim Daters of White Daters and Associates was present representing the request.
There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a
recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments
and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
March 10, 2011
ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: S-1515-B
NAME: The Cottages of Good Shepard Site Plan Review
LOCATION: Located at 2901 Aldersgate Road
DEVELOPER:
Ecumenical Retirement Center Foundation, Inc.
c/o Terry Burruss Architects
614 Center Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 1.0 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: OS
PLANNING DISTRICT: 11 – I-430
CENSUS TRACT: 24.04
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT’S STATEMENT:
The developers are requesting permission to lay sanitary sewer through the open
space zoned area on the southeast corner of the property. The sewer line
follows the creek and is located along this property’s eastern edge or the
opposite side of the OS zoned portion of the property. The developer is
proposing to off set the sewer line and not lay the line in a straight line to help
mitigate the clearing within the OS zoned area. In addition the developer will
plant evergreen plantings to screen the clearing after the sanitary sewer has
been installed.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1515-B
2
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The property is wooded located south of the existing Good Shepard residential
towers and east of the nursing home. Within the area there is property zoned
MF-12, MF-18 and OS. Approximately 5.6 acres zoned OS, 8.94 acres zoned
MF-18 and 5.3 acres zoned MF-12. The MF zoned properties were recently
approved through a Site Plan Review for the development of senior housing.
There are single-family homes located to the east within the Kensington and
Twin Lakes Subdivisions. South of the site is property zoned POD owned by
Arkansas Hospice which is undeveloped. Southwest is property developed by
Our Way as residential housing. Camp Aldersgate is located across Aldersgate
Road to the west of the Good Shepard Campus.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from the area property
owners. All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, the John Barrow
Neighborhood Association, the Twin Lake A Property Owners Association, the
Twin Lake B Property Owners Association, the Twin Lakes B Special
Recreational Improvement District and the Kensington Place Neighborhood
Association were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Erosion controls must be installed to reduce discharge of polluted stormwater.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, for this project. A
capacity contribution analysis and fee will be required for the project. Contact
Little Rock Wastewater Utility for additional information.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. A water main extension will be
needed to provide water service to this property. Please submit plans for water
facilities to Central Arkansas Water for review. Plan revisions may be required
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1515-B
3
after additional review. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures
for installation of water facilities. Approval of plans by Central Arkansas Water,
the Department of Health Engineering Division and the Little Rock Fire
Department is required. This development will have minor impact on the existing
water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide
adequate pressure and fire protection. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required.
Contact Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the required
placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding the
procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). Please note that Central Arkansas
Water maintains an existing water line on the north of the property as shown on
the site plan.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department for additional information.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route.
Parks and Recreation: No comment.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: As proposed by the applicant the area cleared within this OS zoned
area must be reseeded and planted upon completion of installation of the utilities.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 17, 2011)
Mr. Joe White and Mr. Tim Daters of White-Daters and Associates were present
representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the development
stating there were no remaining outstanding technical issues associated with the
request. Staff stated the request was to allow the extension of the sewer line
through the OS, Open Space zoned property. Staff stated the applicants were
proposing to replant the area to provide screening.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
There were no outstanding technical issues associated with the request in need
of addressing raised at the February 17, 2011, Subdivision Committee meeting.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1515-B
4
The request is to allow a sanitary sewer line to be placed through the Open
Space zoned area on the southeast corner of the property. The existing sewer
main follows the creek and is located along this property’s eastern edge on the
opposite side of the Open Space zoned portion of the property. The developer is
proposing to off set the sewer line and not lay the line in a straight line to help
mitigate the clearing within the Open Space zoned area. In addition the
developer will plant evergreen plantings to screen the clearing after the sanitary
sewer has been installed.
Section 36-340(b)(3) and (6) states where the OS District is used as a buffer
zone, all such areas shall remain in their natural state unless otherwise
authorized by the City. The ordinance further states enhancements of the buffer
area, such as additional screening or plantings, may be required when granting a
rezoning or conditional use application. Although the request is not a rezoning or
conditional use application staff feels the enhancements should be provided as
indicated by the applicant. To staff’s knowledge there are no remaining
outstanding technical issues associated with the request. Staff feels the clearing
within the OS zoned are to allow the placement of the sanitary sewer line is
appropriate.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda
staff report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011)
Mr. Joe White of White Daters and Associates was present representing the request.
There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a
recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments
and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
March 10, 2011
ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: Z-3689-J
NAME: Lisa Academy Zoning Site Plan Review
LOCATION: Located on Lot 3R Ensco Parkhill Phase III – Corporate Hill Drive
DEVELOPER:
ESA Construction Inc.
10 Troy Court
Little Rock, AR 72211
SURVEYOR:
Brooks Surveying
20820 Arch Street Pike
Hensley, AR 72065
AREA: 2.30 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: O-2, Office and Institutional
PLANNING DISTRICT: 2 – Rodney Parham
CENSUS TRACT: 22.05
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from Section 36-280(d) to allow the
height of the building to be increased from the allowed 45-feet to 70-feet.
BACKGROUND:
On June 22, 2006, the Little Rock planning Commission approved a Zoning Site Plan
review request to allow the placement of a modular building on the site located to the
east to serve as additional classroom space for Lisa Academy. At the time of approval
the anticipated school enrollment for the 2006 – 2007 school year was 375 students.
With the approval staff presented a recommendation the modular building be removed
by July 19, 2009, to coincide with the required removal of portable classrooms per
Section 36-203(g). The portable classroom building has not been removed. Section
36-203(g) was subsequently amended to allow portable classroom buildings through
July 19, 2014.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3689-J
2
On January 27, 2011, the Little Rock Planning Commission approved a Zoning Site
Plan Review for this site to allow Lisa Academy to expand with construction of a new
building located on a lot immediately west of the existing school campus. The school
was proposed to house 20 classrooms, a computer lab and a science lab. The building
was proposed containing 36,215 square feet. The maximum building height approved
was 40-feet. The existing school would remain. The portable classroom building
located on the current school campus site would be removed.
The school currently has 473 students in Grades 6 – 12. The school indicated there
would be a maximum enrollment of 600 students. There are 41-faculty members
serving the school. With the addition of students a maximum of 46-faculty persons were
proposed. The school indicates their hours of operation are from 7:50 am to 3:00 pm
daily.
An existing access easement located on the adjacent lot to the west will serve as
ingress and egress to the new building. The pick-up and drop-off will occur in the rear
of the building for the high school students. Pick-up and drop-off for the middle school
students would take place on the front of the site.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT’S STATEMENT:
The applicants are now requesting a revision to the site plan to allow the building
to be approximately 70-feet in height. The building is proposed with three levels
above a finished basement. The Zoning Ordinance for the O-2, Office and
Institutional Zoning District states - No building hereafter erected or structurally
altered shall exceed a height of forty-five (45) feet at the required front, side or
rear yard setback lines. Building heights proposed in excess of forty-five (45) feet
may be authorized by the Planning Commission in conjunction with the site plan
review. However, the following formula shall rule: At the height permitted at said
yard setback lines, one (1) foot may be added to the height of the building for
each foot that the building or portion thereof is set back from the required yard
lines. In no instance shall the maximum height of the building exceed one
hundred twenty (120) feet.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a wooded site located south of Corporate Hill Drive. This area is an
office development with this site being the only remaining undeveloped site. East
of this site is the current Lisa Academy school campus. South of the site is Rock
Creek. The Corporate Hill Subdivision has developed with office users with the
buildings developed with shared access easements and shared parking lots.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3689-J
3
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from the area property
owners. All property owners located within 200 feet of the site were notified of
the public hearing.
D. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 17, 2011)
The applicant was not present. Staff presented the item to the Committee stating
the request was to allow an increase in building height. Staff stated the previous
approval allow for a maximum building height of 40-feet. Staff stated the building
as proposed was 40-feet at the street and approximately 70-feet in the rear.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
E. ANALYSIS:
There were no outstanding technical issues associated with the request raised at
the February 17, 2011, Subdivision Committee meeting. The request is a
revision to the site plan to allow an increase in the building height to
approximately 70-feet. The building is proposed with three (3) levels above a
finished basement.
The Zoning Ordinance for the O-2, Office and Institutional Zoning District states -
No building hereafter erected or structurally altered shall exceed a height of forty-
five (45) feet at the required front, side or rear yard setback lines. Building
heights proposed in excess of forty-five (45) feet may be authorized by the
Planning Commission in conjunction with the site plan review. However, the
following formula shall rule: At the height permitted at said yard setback lines,
one (1) foot may be added to the height of the building for each foot that the
building or portion thereof is set back from the required yard lines. In no instance
shall the maximum height of the building exceed one hundred twenty (120) feet.
The site plan as proposed has adequate setbacks to allow the increased height
along the northern, southern and western perimeters. The eastern perimeter has
the minimum setback required by the zoning district of 25-feet. The eastern
perimeter is located adjacent to the existing Lisa Academy School site.
Staff is supportive of the request to allow the building height as proposed. The
area in which the setback is not adequate to accommodate the typical height per
the zoning district is the property line located adjacent to this property owner’s
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3689-J
4
existing school facility. Staff does not feel this will significantly impact the
development or the area. At the street side the building is less than the 45-feet
allowed per the zoning ordinance. The increased height will be apparent from
the rear of the structure due to the slope of the site. The rear of the structure
abuts a large open space and floodway area and there is a significant distance
between this property and the abutting roadway, I-630. To staff’s knowledge
there are no remaining outstanding technical issues associated with the request.
Staff feels the increased building height is appropriate.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request to allow the increased building height
as proposed by the applicant.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011)
The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the item was a recommendation of approval of the request to allow the
increased building height as proposed by the applicant.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
March 10, 2011
ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: Z-4923-J
NAME: Shackleford Crossing Revised Long-form PCD
LOCATION: Located on the Southwest corner of Shackleford Road and I-430
DEVELOPER:
Drive Clean, LLC
1120 South Albert Pike Avenue
Forth Smith, AR 72903
ENGINEER:
Core States Group
216 East Popular Street
Rogers, AR 72756
AREA: 98.40 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 18 lots & Tracts FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: PCD
ALLOWED USES: C-2, Shopping Center District, O-2, Office and Institutional and the
Conditional Uses allowed in the O-2, Office and Institutional Zoning District
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD
PROPOSED USE: Add an additional lot to the overall site plan and site plan review and
approval of a carwash on one of the proposed out parcels.
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
The Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 19,237 on November 23,
2004, approving a Conceptual PCD known as Shackleford Crossing Long-form PCD,
which was located at the southwest corner of South Shackleford Road and Interstate
430. The conceptual plan included the north 62 acres being developed with C-2,
Shopping Center District permitted uses, the south 20 acres being O-2, Office and
Institutional District permitted uses and the middle 15 acres being a transition area
where O-2, Office and Institutional District and C-2, Shopping Center District permitted
uses would be allowed. The plan also showed four (4) out parcels along the
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4923-J
2
Shackleford Road frontage, with three (3) main entry drives from Shackleford Road.
The total project would consist of 1,000,000 square feet of gross building area.
Ordinance No. 19,399 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on September 20,
2005, established revisions to the previously approved PCD. The approval defined the
site plan for Phase I, the commercial portion of the project and one (1) of the office lots.
With the request, a preliminary plat for the subdivision of the site with sixteen (16) lots
and out-parcels was also approved. The approved site plan included an area previously
excluded containing the Comcast office tract on Shackleford Road and incorporated the
area into the overall project plan.
All the conditions that were a part of the approved Conceptual PCD were incorporated
into the submittal with one (1) revision. The one (1) change requested from the prior
conditions was to increase the allowable restaurant square footage and place a
minimum parking ratio requirement for restaurants on the site as imposed by the
developer.
Ordinance No. 19,699 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on February 20,
2007, revised the PCD to clarify the signage plan, allow dock doors to be oriented to
Shackleford Road and add food store as an allowable use for the site.
On May 8, 2008, the Little Rock Planning Commission recommended approval of a
request to allow a revision to the previously approved PCD for a 2.2-acre parcel located
near the southeastern portion of the site immediately south of the proposed Wal-Mart
retail store. The approval allowed for development of a four (4) story 92 room hotel with
paved drives and parking. The hotel was not proposed with any amenities such as
conference rooms, a restaurant or a bar. The approval allowed building signage on
three facades of the building and a ground sign with a maximum height of thirty-six (36)
feet and a maximum sign area of one hundred sixty (160) square feet. The Board of
Directors approved the request on June 3, 2008, by the adoption of Ordinance No.
19,980.
On July 15, 2008, the Little Rock Board of Directors approved a revision to the PCD by
the adoption of Ordinance No. 19,994 to clarify and amend some of the language in the
conditions. The modifications include the addition of Conditional Uses in the O-2, Office
and Institutional Zoning District to the allowable uses for the office portion of the
development and to increase the amount of restaurant square footage approved for the
development. The revision allowed 55,000 square feet of restaurant space on the out
parcels and a maximum of 80,000 square feet within the overall development.
The approval also allowed a hotel on Lot 11 which is located near the southwest corner
of the site. The hotel was indicated with a maximum of four (4) stories and 87 rooms.
The hotel would not have a restaurant or bar associated with it but a 1,200 square foot
meeting room was proposed. The approval allowed building signage on three facades
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4923-J
3
of the building and a ground sign with a maximum height of thirty-six (36) feet and a
maximum sign area of one hundred sixty (160) square feet.
On January 8, 2009, the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request by Cracker
Barrel to allow the placement of temporary storage modules within the rear parking area
of the restaurant to serve as temporary inventory storage for seasonal sales. The
denial was not appealed to the Board of Directors for reconsideration.
On February 25, 2010, the Little Rock Planning Commission was to hear a request to
allow the development of Lot 7B (an out-parcel located on South Shackleford Road)
with a four (4) story hotel containing 84 rooms. The applicant withdrew the item prior to
the Commission hearing the request.
Ordinance No. 20,282 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on June 15, 2010,
allowed a revision to the PCD to allow the construction of a four (4) story hotel
containing 72 guest rooms on a 1.8 acre lot within Shackleford Crossing Subdivision.
The development was proposed containing 80 parking spaces. The hotel was proposed
as a LaQuinta Inn and Suites. The hotel was proposed with a meeting facility and
indoor pool area but did not include a full service restaurant or bar.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT’S STATEMENT:
The developers are proposing to amend the previously approved PCD by
splitting Lot 4B into Lots 4B-R2 (+/- 0.81 acres) and 4D (+/- 1.0 acres). In
addition the request includes the addition of a carwash as an allowable use for
the development and the approval of a site plan for Lot 4B-R2 to allow the lot to
develop with an express tunnel carwash.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The shopping center has developed and Wal-Mart was recently completed and
opened. Comcast is located within the development and three hotels have been
constructed. Along Shackleford Road there are two restaurants located on out-
parcels and a third is under construction. Other uses in the area include Camp
Aldersgate, a vacant property recently approved as a PCD for a mixed use
development containing residential, office and retail, residential and a number of
small commercial uses located to the south along South Shackleford Road.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from the
area property owners. All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, all
residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site and the John
Barrow Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4923-J
4
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. The applicant should provide power for the streetlights located on the west
side of Shackleford Road from I-430 south to the southern property line of the
subdivision.
2. The processed wash water from the carwash should be discharged into the
Little Rock sanitary sewer.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this project. Contact Little Rock Wastewater
Utility for information concerning the procedures for discharge of wash water into
the sanitary sewer system.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. Due to the nature of this
facility, installation of an approved reduced pressure zone backflow preventer
assembly (RPS) is required on the domestic water service. This assembly must
be installed prior to the first point of use. Central Arkansas Water (CAW)
requires that upon installation of the PRZ assembly, successful tests of the
assembly must be completed by a Certified Assembly Tester licensed by the
State of Arkansas and approved by CAW. The test results must be sent to
CAW’s Cross Connection Section within ten days of installation and annually
thereafter. Contact the Cross Connection Section at 377-1226 if you would like
to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this project. The Little Rock Fire
Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public
and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are
required, they will be installed at the developer’s expense. Please submit plans
for water facilities to Central Arkansas Water for review. Plan revisions may be
required after additional review. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding
procedures for installation of water facilities. Approval of plans by Central
Arkansas Water, the Department of Health Engineering Division and the Little
Rock Fire Department is required. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding
the size and location of the water main. A Capital Investment Change based on
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4923-J
5
the size of meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal
charges. This fee will apply to all connections including metered connections off
the private fire system. This development will have minor impact on the existing
water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide
adequate pressure and fire protection. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department for additional information.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #3 – the Baptist Medical Center
Route.
Parks and Recreation: No comment.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the I-430 Planning District. The
Land Use Plan shows Mixed Office Commercial for this property. Mixed Office
Commercial requires developments to have office use but may also have
commercial use as part of a Planned Zoning District review. The applicant has
applied for a revision to an existing Planned Commercial District to create an
additional lot and review a carwash on this new lot. The overall development
has both office and commercial uses within it.
Master Street Plan: This application has frontage on Interstate 430 and along
Shackleford Road. Shackleford Road is a Principal Arterial. The primary
function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major
traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits
should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on
Shackleford Road since it is a Principal Arterial. This street may require
dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances
and exits to the site.
Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes shown in the immediate vicinity.
Landscape:
1. The site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
2. The development was reviewed as an overall development plan containing
multiple lots. The approval required each of the individual lots to contain an
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4923-J
6
automatic irrigation system to water landscape areas at the time of
development.
3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit a landscape plan must be submitted
to the City. The development is being reviewed as an overall development
plan therefore each of the lots will require a landscape plan stamped with the
seal of a registered landscape architect at the time of building permit.
4. The landscape ordinance requires a nine (9) foot wide perimeter landscape
strip around the sites entirety. A variance from the City Beautiful Commission
must be obtained prior to the issuance of a building permit.
5. Interior landscape islands are required to be provided. The landscape
ordinance requires a minimum of eight percent (8%) of the paved areas be
landscaped with interior islands of at least 7 ½ feet in width and 150 square
feet in area. The interior islands must be evenly distributed throughout the
site.
6. Building landscaping will be required with the proposed development.
7. Dumpster, loading docks, heating and air conditioning units, external storage
of materials, communications equipment and similar outside activities and
appurtenances must be screened from abutting properties and streets.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 17, 2011)
The applicant was not present. Staff presented the item stating the request was
to amend the previously approved PCD to add an additional lot and add a
carwash as an allowable use for the development. Staff stated they would work
with the applicant to resolve any outstanding technical issues associated with the
request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan and revised cover letter addressing
concerns raised by staff at the February 17, 2011, Subdivision Committee
meeting. The applicant is proposing a revision to the approved PCD for
Shackleford Crossing to add an additional out-parcel and to add a carwash as an
allowed use for the development.
The developer of the carwash has indicated there are two point sale terminals
located on the south side of the property. The sale terminals are only audible
during operating hours and are used to instruct the customers through the menu
selections. There is no live voice from either the carwash attendants or the
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4923-J
7
customers. The volume control is fully adjustable from 50-80 decibels. The
customer interacts by touching the screen as opposed to speaking commands.
The audible responses from the terminal allow the customer to hear the selection
made and instruct the customer as to the next action. The sound is set at normal
conversation levels. A screening wall is located on the site plan to aid in
deflecting the sound.
The revised site plan indicates the placement of a masonry wall on three sides
with similar materials as the building construction. Landscaping will be placed
around the enclosure to lessen the impact on the abutting street.
The site plan indicates the construction of a tunnel carwash facility and the
placement of six (6) vacuum stations servicing twelve (12) parking positions. The
vacuum stations are only a hose stand. The vacuum system is serviced from a
central vacuum motor located inside the trash enclosure, which reduces the
noise level significantly compared to other types of carwash vacuum systems.
As per the approved PCD the development will be served by a ground mounted
monument sign not to exceed ten feet in height and one hundred square feet in
area. Directional signage per the typical zoning ordinance standards will be
placed on the site. The maximum percentage of façade area to be covered by
signage will be less than the typical ordinance standards for commercial zones.
As per the approved PCD signage will be located on two facades; the southern
and western facades.
The hours of operation for the carwash facility will be Monday through Saturday
from 8 am to 8 pm and Sunday from 9 am to 7 pm. There are six to ten
employees of the business.
Although the applicant has done an adequate job in addressing the technical
issues associated with the site plan, staff has concerns with the placement of this
type use within the development. Carwash facilities are typically allowed within
the C-4, Open Display Zoning District. The Declaration of Restrictive Covenants
which is a part of the PCD approval limited the placement of auto repair bay
doors to areas which were not visible from South Shackleford Road. The plan as
proposed places the orientation of the building with the entrance to South
Shackleford Road and the front of the building oriented to the parking area. Staff
does not feel a carwash at this location on the site is appropriate.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4923-J
8
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011)
Mr. Scott McLain was present representing the application request. There were no
registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial
of the request.
Mr. McLain stated his company owned 23 carwashes in six (6) states. He stated the
company strived to be a good neighbor. He stated if the development was approved
the store would be the 10th location in Arkansas. He stated Camp Aldersgate had
provided a letter of support. Mr. McLain stated his carwash was not like most. He
stated there would be little to no noise generated from the site. He stated any noise
would be located along the western end of the building where the driers were located.
He stated the vacuum system was a central vacuum, which limited sound emissions.
He stated the signage plan was consistent with the approved PCD. Mr. McLain stated
the doors would be open during business hours but would be closed during the evening.
He stated the elevation of the street and the site would limit visibility of the tunnel from
South Shackleford Road. Mr. McLain stated the order boards did not offer interaction
with the customer. He stated once a choice was made the board instructed the
customer of the next steps.
The Commission questioned Mr. McLain as to the location of the dumpster. Mr. McLain
stated the dumpster was located along South Shacklefrod Road but would be placed in
an enclosure constructed of similar materials as the building. He stated gates would
also be placed on the enclosure to screen the dumpster from the customer traffic. He
stated landscaping would be placed around the enclosure as required by the approved
PCD. He stated there was staff on site to keep the premises clear of trash.
The Commission questioned the hours of operation. Mr. McClain stated the free air and
water and the vacuums were powered down when the business was not open. He
stated with these items not being available this limited the number of persons on the site
after hours. He stated the Shackleford Crossing development employed a security
guard. He stated if necessary he would also request the guard to patrol his property as
well.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as
outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. The motion carried by a
vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
March 10, 2011
ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: Z-5967-D
NAME: Williams Revised Short-form POD
LOCATION: Located at 5819 Young Road
DEVELOPER:
Latasha Williams
5819 Young Road
Little Rock, AR 72209
SURVEYOR:
James Farris, PLS
P.O. Box 10384
Conway, AR 72034
AREA: 0.208 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: POD
ALLOWED USES: Barber/Beauty Shop, General and Professional Office, Daycare
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised POD
PROPOSED USE: Add single-family residential as an allowable use
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
Prior to annexation, the structure at 5819 Young Road housed a day care center. The
property was brought into the City of Little Rock with a nonconforming O-1 zoning
status. At some point, the structure was remodeled into a four-unit apartment building,
which was a violation of the property’s zoning.
On April 18, 1995, the Planning Commission approved a rezoning of the property to R-5
to allow the use of the structure as a four-unit apartment. However, on May 16, 1995,
the Board of Directors denied the rezoning request.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5967-D
2
On March 28, 1996, the Planning Commission approved a rezoning of the property to
C-1, again to allow the four-unit apartment building. As before, the Board of Directors
denied the rezoning request on July 16, 1996.
Ordinance No. 17,931 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on February 16,
1999, rezoned the property from R-2, Single-family to POD. The approval allowed the
use of the existing building as an office and barber/beauty shop. The approval allowed
the utilization of 1,820 square feet of the structure as a law office and the remaining
980 square feet as a three (3) chair barber/beauty shop.
One of the two existing drives was to be closed and a new area of parking was to be
added on the south side of the building which would contain nine (9) parking spaces.
The front 12-foot by 21-foot canopy was to be removed in order to accommodate
two (2) additional parking spaces. The hours of operation were approved from 8:00 am
to 5:00 pm Monday through Friday. Wall signage was approved not to exceed ten (10)
percent of the façade area of the front of the building. The canopy was not removed
and the new parking areas were not developed.
Ordinance No. 20,190 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on November 17,
2009, allowed a revision to the previously approved POD to add daycare as an
allowable use for the property. The approval allowed up to thirty (30) children ranging
from six (6) weeks to twelve (12) years of age. The daycare center would provide all
day care and after school care. The hours of operation were approved from 6 am to
6 pm Monday through Friday. One van was proposed for the daycare center to provide
transportation to and from area schools. The center would employ four (4) staff
persons. The daycare center did not operate from this site.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT’S STATEMENT:
The applicant is now proposing to amend the previously approved POD to add
single-family residential as an allowable use for the property. The applicant has
indicated she intends to live within the structure and operate a single chair barber
shop from the building. No exterior modifications are proposed for the site.
Signage will be limited to building signage and a single ground sign consistent
with signage allowed in office zones.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The lot contains an existing one story brick and frame building which has
5,800 square feet of floor area. There is a shared common wall with an
additional 900 square feet of floor area located on a separate lot to the west of
this development. There is a small partially paved parking area located in the
front of the building.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5967-D
3
Interstate 30 is located immediately south of and adjacent to the property.
Single-family and multi-family residences are located to the north across Young
Road. There is one single-family residence located to the west, with commercial
uses further west along Geyer Springs Road.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from the
area property owners. All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, all
residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site, the
Wakefield Neighborhood Association and Southwest Little Rock United for
Progress were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
2. Young Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a collector street. A
dedication of right-of-way 30 feet from centerline will be required.
3. Backing into a collector street (Young Road) from this lot is considered
unsafe. A paved area should be provided for vehicles to turnaround on the
property and not back into Young Road.
4. Obtain a franchise agreement from Public Works (Bennie Nicolo, 371-4818)
for the private improvements located in the right-of-way.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this project.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: No objection. All Central Arkansas Water requirements
in effect at the time for request of water service must be met. Contact Central
Arkansas Water if additional fire protection or metered water service is required.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact Little Rock Fire
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5967-D
4
Department for additional information.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route.
Parks and Recreation: No comment.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the 65th Street East Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use for this property. Mixed Use
allows any combination of residential, office or commercial use or just one of
these uses as long as a Planned Zoning District is used for the review of the
application. The applicant has applied for a revision to an existing Planned
Office District to allow single-family use as an option.
Master Street Plan: This application is between the Frontage Road for Interstate
30 and Young Road. Young Road is shown as a Collector. The primary function
of a Collector Street is to provide a connection from Local Streets to Arterials.
This street may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street
improvements for entrances and exits to the site.
Bicycle Plan: A Class III bike route is shown along Young Road. A Class III
bikeway is a signed route on a street shared with traffic. No additional paving or
right-of-way is required. Class III bicycle route signage may be required.
Landscape:
1. The site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
2. Any new paved areas will require landscaping in compliance with the current
City Landscape Ordinance.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 17, 2011)
The applicant was not present. Staff presented the item stating there were no
outstanding technical issues associated with the request. Staff stated the
applicant was seeking approval to allow single-family as an allowable use for the
property. Staff stated there were no other modifications proposed.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5967-D
5
H. ANALYSIS:
There were no outstanding technical issues associated with the request in need
of addressing raised at the February 17, 2011, Subdivision Committee meeting.
The request is to amend the previously approved POD to add single-family
residential as an allowable use for the property. The applicant has indicated she
intends to live within the structure and operate a single chair barbershop from the
building.
The building is a single story building containing 5,800 square feet. There is a
common lot line extending through the building with an additional 900 square
feet. The site is currently paved but not striped. It appears six parking spaces
are available on this site. The adjoining lot is also paved and provides parking
for the adjacent use. Parking for a barbershop is based on square footage of
gross building area used for the activity. The applicant has indicated she will live
in a portion of the building and operate a single chair shop from the remainder of
the building. The parking as proposed is adequate to serve the proposed
residential and single barbershop use. There are no exterior modifications
proposed for the site. Signage will be limited to building signage and a single
ground sign consistent with signage allowed in office zones or a maximum of six
feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area.
Staff is supportive of the request. Staff feels the addition of a single-family
residence as an allowable use and to use a portion of the building as a single
chair barbershop will not significantly impact the site or the area.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda
staff report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011)
Ms. Latasha Williams was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the
request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in
paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report.
Commissioner Laha raised questions of ownership of the property. Ms. Williams stated
she was purchasing the property from Mr. Ryles. Commissioner Laha asked why there
were two property owners listed for the building. Ms. Williams stated one sister sold her
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5967-D
6
portion of the building but the second sister retained ownership. She stated Mr. Ryles
had not been able to reach a purchase agreement with the other sister.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes,
2 noes and 0 absent.
March 10, 2011
ITEM NO.: 9 FILE NO.: Z-6698-C
NAME: 3900 John Barrow Road Revised Short-form PCD
LOCATION: Located at 3900 John Barrow Road
DEVELOPER:
Alberta Wilson
3900 John Barrow Road
Little Rock, AR 72204
SURVEYOR:
Brooks Surveying
20820 Arch Street Pike
Hensley, AR 72065
AREA: 1.14 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 zoning lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: PCD
ALLOWED USES: Mixed Office/Commercial
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD
PROPOSED USE: Mixed Office/Commercial – Add Special Events Center, Additional
Retail and Restaurant
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
On August 3, 1999, the Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 18,078, rezoning the
property from R-3 to PCD. The approved PCD allowed a single building mixed
office/commercial development. The approved site plan included a 10,000 square foot
building (17 feet in height) located near the center of the site, with parking on the north,
south and east sides. The following uses were approved for the building:
1. Supplies Plus Co., Inc. (Office/showroom/warehouse) – 3,108 square feet
(760 square feet of warehouse space)
2. Two (2) beauty salons – 1,936 square feet total
3. General office use – 4,956 square feet
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6698-C
2
Alternate uses for the site were to be O-3, General Office District uses. Wall-mounted
signage conforming to the ordinance standards for office zoning was also approved for
the project. Approved hours of operation were from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm, Monday
through Saturday.
On August 21, 2001, the Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 18,535, revising the
previously approved PCD. The revision adjusted the amount of building area, within the
approved building, to be devoted to the approved uses. The following uses were
approved for the building:
1. Supplies Plus Co., Inc. (Office/showroom/warehouse) – 6,000 square feet
(3,600 square feet of warehouse space)
2. Two (2) beauty salons – 2,000 square feet total
3. General office use – 2,000 square feet
The adjustment in the amount of building area was the only modification to the
approved PCD. O-3, General Office District uses were retained as alternative uses.
On May 11, 2006, the Little Rock Planning Commission withdrew a request to amend
the PCD site plan to allow the placement of a ground mounted sign on the site. The
sign was proposed ten feet high and ninety square feet in area. There were no other
changes to the approved site plan proposed as a part of the application request.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT’S STATEMENT:
The applicant is now requesting an amendment to the previously approved PCD
to add an events center and additional retail as allowable uses for the site. The
applicant is proposing to use the 3,600 square feet formerly used as storage and
warehouse space as an events center and as a restaurant during hours the
events center is not in use.
The applicant has indicated the hours of operation for the events center will be by
booking only. The center is available for booking Monday through Friday from
7:00 pm to Midnight, Saturday from 11:00 am to Midnight and occasional Sunday
bookings are available for private family gatherings such as wedding receptions,
birthday celebrations, anniversaries and family reunions. The applicant has
indicated alcohol is not allowed nor are events charging admission. The
applicant has indicated security will be provided to ensure alcohol is not brought
on the premises. The restaurant hours of operation are from 11:00 am to
4:00 pm Monday through Friday. The restaurant will also provide pickup and
delivery to customers.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6698-C
3
The request also includes a change in the use mix of the development and the
allowance of an additional 2,400 square feet of retail space. The applicant has
indicated a dress shop or similar retail use is being requested as an allowable
use. O-3, General Office District uses will be retained as allowable alternate
uses.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is developed with the office/warehouse building. Within the Center is a
Church, Insurance Agency, Beauty Salon and warehouse space. There are
single-family homes located to the north, south and west with a church located to
the northwest along Ludwig Street. There are two daycare centers located in the
area, one on West 42nd and John Barrow Road and the second on West 36th and
Ludwig Streets. Single-family residences, vacant R-3 zoned property and
another church is located across Barrow Road to the east.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from the
area property owners. All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, all
residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site and the John
Barrow Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
2. Barrow Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A
dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be required. The
centerline of the Barrow Road right-of-way is not provided on survey.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer is available to this property.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6698-C
4
Central Arkansas Water: No objection. All Central Arkansas Water
requirements in effect at the time for request of water service must be met.
Contact Central Arkansas Water if additional fire protection or metered water
service is required.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department for additional information.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route.
Parks and Recreation: No comment.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Boyle Park Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Office for this property. Office use requires
developments with an office use and character. The applicant has applied for a
revision to an existing Planned Commercial District with no changes to the
existing structure just the addition of two commercial uses to the list of allowable
uses on the site.
Master Street Plan: The application is along John Barrow Road, which is a Minor
Arterial. A Minor Arterial provides connections to and through an urban area and
their primary function is to provide short distance travel within the urbanized area.
Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and
pedestrians on John Barrow Road since it is a Minor Arterial. This street may
require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for
entrances and exits to the site.
Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes shown in the immediate vicinity.
Landscape: No comment on the addition of uses within the existing building.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 17, 2011)
Ms. Alberta Wilson was present representing the request. Staff presented an
overview of the development stating there were few outstanding technical issues
associated with the request. Staff questioned the events proposed. Ms. Wilson
stated wedding receptions, birthday parties and similar activities. She stated no
alcohol would be allowed. She stated access would be allowed via invitation
only. The Commissioners questioned who would enforce these regulations.
Ms. Wilson stated she would be on-site to ensure compliance.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6698-C
5
Staff questioned if there was a church currently using the facility. Ms. Wilson
stated a church was meeting on-site. Staff questioned where the church was
meeting. Ms. Wilson stated the church was not meeting the events center area.
She stated they had leased space in the office portion of the development.
The Commission questioned if the proposed events center was in compliance
with the ordinance recently adopted by the Board of Directors concerning events
centers. Staff stated there were separation requirements which would be pointed
out to the Commission as a part of the review process.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated any broken curb, gutter or
sidewalk that was damaged in the public right of way would require repair. Staff
stated a dedication of right of way for John Barrow Road would be required if the
current right of way was not 45-feet.
Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies
suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised survey and cover letter to staff which
addresses a number of issues raised at the February 17, 2011, Subdivision
Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the hours of operation for the
development, the uses currently located within the development and provided
additional details concerning the request. The applicant is requesting to amend
to the previously approved PCD to add an events center, a restaurant and
additional retail as allowable uses for the site. The applicant is proposing to use
the 3,600 square feet formerly used as storage and warehouse space as an
events center and a restaurant during hours the events center is not in use. The
request also includes the allowance of an additional 2,400 square feet of retail
space. The applicant has indicated the additional retail space would house a
dress shop or similar retail use.
The applicant has indicated the hours of operation for the events center will be by
booking only. The center is available for booking Monday through Friday from
7:00 pm to Midnight, Saturday from 11:00 am to Midnight and Sunday bookings
will be available for private family gatherings such as wedding receptions,
birthday celebrations, anniversaries and family reunions. These events will be by
invitation only. The revised cover letter states alcohol will not allowed nor will
events charging admission or a cover charge. The applicant has indicated
security will be provided to ensure alcohol is not brought on the premises.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6698-C
6
The restaurant hours of operation are from 11:00 am to 4:00 pm Monday through
Friday. The restaurant will also provide pickup and delivery to customers. The
restaurant will not be open to the public when the events center is rented.
The hours of operation for the remainder of the center are from 9:00 am to
7:00 pm Monday through Saturday. There is church located in the center which
holds service on Sunday from 10:00 am to 1:30 pm.
The site currently has 33 parking spaces. With the use mix proposed
3,600 square feet as an event center or a restaurant the zoning ordinance would
typically require 36 parking spaces, 2,400 clothing sales would typically require
8 parking spaces, 2,000 square feet of beauty salon area would typically require
10 parking spaces and 2,000 square feet of office would typically require
6 parking spaces for a total of 60 parking spaces. Staff has concerns with the
use mix proposed and the parking available to serve the development.
Ordinance No. 20,407 adopted by the Little Rock City Board of Directors on
February 15, 2011, established guidelines for locating events centers. The
ordinance states event centers may not be located within 750 feet of a church or
other religious facility, a sexually oriented business as defined by Chapter 17
of the code of ordinances, public or private elementary, secondary or
post-secondary school, day care center or any facility that operates programs for
children or youth or any single-family or multi-family residential use, except a
hotel or motel, or a residential use that is within a unified development that
contains both the event center and the residential use. The measurement shall
be made in a straight line, without regard to intervening structures or objects,
from the nearest portion of the building or structure proposed for occupancy as
an event center to the nearest property line of any use listed.
Based on the existing conditions around the development and the Board of
Directors recent approval of the ordinance pertaining to the siting of special
events center staff is not supportive. Within the established buffer zone of
special events centers and the ordinance specified uses there are residential
homes located to the north, south and west of the development. There are also
two daycare centers and churches located within the 750-feet buffer zone. In
addition there is a church located within the shopping center proposed for the
special events center.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6698-C
7
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011)
Ms. Alberta Wilson was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial.
Ms. Wilson addressed the Commission on the merits of her request. She stated she
had lived in the area for 24 years and started as a tenant in the building and later
purchased the building. She stated the desire was to use the former warehouse
building as an events center. She stated the area was being used by a church and she
had used the area for fashion shows. She stated she would not allow events which
served alcohol or anyone on the premise consuming alcohol. She stated the events
were held on Friday and Saturday only. She stated the parking lot would accommodate
up to 75 cars and the building had an occupancy capacity of 160 persons.
There was a general discussion by the Commission concerning the newness of the
ordinance and the separation requirements placed in the ordinance by the Board of
Directors. The Commission questioned Deputy City Attorney Cindy Dawson if the
Commission had flexibility to approve a request. Ms. Dawson stated within the
ordinance there was language stating the separation requirements for events centers
was to be determined by the Planning Commission so as to not adversely impact the
neighborhood. She stated the ordinance further stated events centers were subject to
additional requirements which included the wording shall for siting criteria near
residential, daycare centers and schools as well as few other additional identified uses.
The Commission questioned Ms. Wilson as to the type events held. She stated church
functions, fashion shows, family gatherings. The Commission questioned how the site
could park 75 cars. She stated by angling and stacking the cars the lot would hold more
than it was striped to hold. Staff reminded the Commission there was no parking on
John Barrow Road and any over flow would spill into the neighborhood.
Mr. Marshal Peters addressed the Commission on behalf of Ms. Wilson. He stated his
company managed the property for Ms. Wilson. He stated the primary user of the
events center was a church. He stated the request was not to add a full service
restaurant but a catering business to the site. He stated the hours of the catering
service would not overlap with the hours of the events center.
The Commission question Ms. Wilson if she was willing to limit the approval to her use
and not allow the approval to transfer to any future owner. Ms. Wilson stated she was
willing to impose this condition on the approval.
The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as amended to limit the approval
of the events center to Ms. Wilson. The motion failed by a vote of 1 ayes, 10 noes and
0 absent.
March 10, 2011
ITEM NO.: 10 FILE NO.: Z-8472-B
NAME: Mid-Towne at Fair Park Revised Long-form PCD
LOCATION: Located on the Southwest corner of I-630 and Fair Park Boulevard
DEVELOPER:
AA Development
Attn. Scott Richburg
12911 Cantrell Road, Suite 7-118
Little Rock, AR 72223
ENGINEER:
Richburg Services Group
Attn. Scott Richburg
12911 Cantrell Road, Suite 7-118
Little Rock, AR 72223
Crafton Tull Sparks
Attn. Barry Williams
10825 Financial Center Parkway, Suite 300
Little Rock, AR 72211
AREA: 6.31 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 Lots FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: PCD
ALLOWED USES: Hotel, Restaurant, Parking lot
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD
PROPOSED USE: Add convenience store with gas pumps
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
The applicant submitted a request on March 1, 2011, requesting deferral of this item to
the April 21, 2011, public hearing. Staff is supportive of the deferral request.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8472-B
2
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request on March 1, 2011,
requesting deferral of the item to the April 21, 2011, public hearing. Staff stated they
were supportive of the deferral request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
March 10, 2011
ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z-8631
NAME: 3013 Fair Park Boulevard Short-form PD-O
LOCATION: Located at 3013 Fair Park Boulevard
DEVELOPER:
Quentin E. May, PLC
2725 Cantrell Road
Little Rock, AR 72202
SURVEYOR:
James Farris, PLS
P.O. Box 10384
Conway, AR 72034
AREA: 0.29 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 zoning lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-3, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential
PROPOSED ZONING: PD-O
PROPOSED USE: Lodge for fraternity chapter associated with UALR
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
The applicant failed to attend the February 17, 2011, Subdivision Committee meeting.
Staff recommends deferral of this item to the April 21, 2011, public hearing to allow the
applicant to attend the March 31, 2011, Subdivision Committee meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the item stating the applicant had failed to attend the February 17, 2011,
Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff presented a recommendation of deferral of the
item to the April 21, 2011, public hearing to allow the applicant to attend the March 31,
2011, Subdivision Committee meeting.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8631
2
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
March 10, 2011
ITEM NO.: 12 FILE NO.: Z-8632
NAME: Arkansas Urology Clinic Short-form POD
LOCATION: Located on the West side of Centerview Drive just South of Kanis Road
DEVELOPER:
Arkansas Urology
c/o Kincaid Development
2100 Riverdale Road, Suite 100
Little Rock, AR 72202
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 4.0 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential
PROPOSED ZONING: POD
PROPOSED USE: Parking lot to serve an adjacent business
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to
allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT’S STATEMENT:
The applicant is proposing the subdivision of an existing four plus acre parcel into
two lots and the rezoning of one of the lots to POD. The southern lot is proposed
for the rezoning to POD to allow the immediate construction of a parking lot to
serve Arkansas Urology Clinic which is located adjacent to the site. There are no
changes proposed for the remaining area which will remain zoned R-2, Single-
family.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8632
2
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The area proposed for rezoning is wooded with access extending via an access
easement from Kanis Road to the northern portion of this site. There are three
structures located on the overall parcel of property, an office fronting Kanis Road
and two other non-residential buildings accessed via an access easement
extending from Kanis Road. The areas to the east and south are developed with
office uses including Arkansas Urology Clinic, the Federal Bureau of
Investigations and the Arkansas Realtors Association. A property to the west is
zoned POD and is being redeveloped as a daycare center. Also to the west is a
property zoned POD which is developed as an office warehouse containing four
buildings.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from the
area property owners. All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, all
residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site and the John
Barrow Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other than
residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be submitted
and approved prior to the start of construction. Is the applicant requesting
advanced grading?
2. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
3. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES stormwater permit
from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of
construction.
4. Damage to public and private property due to hauling operations or operation
of construction related equipment from a nearby construction site shall be
repaired by the responsible party prior to issuance of a certificate of
occupancy.
5. Provide the proposed access to the proposed building, not possible access
locations.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8632
3
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this project.
Entergy: Easements are required around the sites perimeter. Contact Engergy
for additional information.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: A water main extension will be required to provide
water service to this property. All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect
at the time of request for water service must be met. Due to the nature of this
facility, installation of an approved reduced pressure zone backflow preventer
assembly (RPS) is required on the domestic water service. This assembly must
be installed prior to the first point of use. Central Arkansas Water (CAW)
requires that upon installation of the PRZ assembly, successful tests of the
assembly must be completed by a Certified Assembly Tester licensed by the
State of Arkansas and approved by CAW. The test results must be sent to
CAW’s Cross Connection Section within ten days of installation and annually
thereafter. Contact the Cross Connection Section at 377-1226 if you would like
to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this project. The Little Rock Fire
Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public
and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are
required, they will be installed at the developer’s expense. Please submit plans
for water facilities to Central Arkansas Water for review. Plan revisions may be
required after additional review. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding
procedures for installation of water facilities. Approval of plans by Central
Arkansas Water, the Department of Health Engineering Division and the Little
Rock Fire Department is required. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding
the size and location of the water meter. A Capital Investment Change based on
the size of meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal
charges. This fee will apply to all connections including metered connections off
the private fire system. This development will have minor impact on the existing
water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide
adequate pressure and fire protection. The facilities on-site will be private.
When meters are planned off private lines, private facilities shall be installed to
Central Arkansas Water’s material and construction specifications and
installation will be inspected by an engineer, licensed to practice in the State of
Arkansas. Execution of Customer Owned Line Agreement is required.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8632
4
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department concerning how the southern building will be served by fire
protection.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is located near CATA Bus Route #3 – the Baptist Medical Center
Route.
Parks and Recreation: No comment.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the I-430 Planning District. The
Land Use Plan shows Office for this property. Office use requires developments
with an office use and character. The applicant has applied for a Planned Office
District, to allow for a new parking lot and an office/warehouse structure.
Master Street Plan: The applications does not have frontage on a public street or
private street.
Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes shown in the immediate vicinity.
Landscape:
1. The site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
2. The landscape ordinance requires a minimum of eight percent (8%) of the
paved areas be landscaped with interior islands of at least 7 ½ feet in width
and 150 square feet in area. The interior islands must be evenly distributed
throughout the site.
3. The zoning buffer ordinance requires the placement of a minimum land use
buffer along the northern perimeter of the site of nine feet (9’).
4. The Landscape Ordinance requires the placement of a nine (9) foot
landscape strip around the site’s entirety.
5. The property to the north is zoned residential; therefore, a six (6) foot high
opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a
wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along this perimeter.
6. Building landscaping will be required with the proposed development.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8632
5
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 17, 2011)
Mr. Joe White and Mr. John Kincade were present representing the request.
Staff presented an overview of the development stating there were a number of
technical issues in need of addressing prior to the Commission acting on the
request. Staff stated the area of the entire existing parcel would be reviewed as
a subdivision.
The site plan as proposed included an office warehouse building on Tract B with
potential access from an adjacent property and through the parking lot proposed
to serve Arkansas Urology. There was a general discussion concerning the
building proposed for Tract B. Staff stated the primary concern was related to
access. Staff stated the site plan could not indicate possible access but should
include the access to serve the lot. Mr. White stated they would remove the
building from the site plan and resubmit if and when a development opportunity
occurred. He stated at that time the access issues would be resolved.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a grading permit would be
required prior to development. Staff also stated the stormwater detention
ordinance would apply to the development of the lots.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated screening would be
required along the northern perimeter. Staff also stated the parking lot would
require landscaping to comply with the City’s Landscape ordinance.
Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies
suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing the issues raised
at the February 17, 2011, Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised plan
includes two (2) lots. The office/warehouse building has been removed. The
northern lot, Lot 1, has frontage on Kanis Road. Lot 2 is proposed for rezoning to
POD. This lot is being created as a lot without public street frontage. There are
no redevelopment plans for Lot 1. Lot 2 will be developed with a 132 space
parking lot to serve an adjacent office use, Arkansas Urology Clinic.
The approval will require a variance from the City’s Subdivision Ordinance to
allow the creation of Lot 2 as a lot without public street frontage. The lot will be
served via an access easement extending from Kanis Road to the northern
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8632
6
boundary of this property and a driveway connection from the proposed parking
lot to the existing Arkansas Urology Clinic parking lot will be provided.
The site plan indicates the new parking area will be landscaped per the City’s
Landscape Ordinance requirements. In addition a screening fence will be
located along the northern perimeter to screen the use from the adjacent
residentially zoned property.
Staff is supportive of the request. To staff’s knowledge there are no remaining
outstanding technical issues associated with the request. Staff does not feel the
rezoning of this parcel to POD to allow the construction of the new parking area
or the subdivision of this existing parcel into two (2) lots and allowing the creation
of one of the lots as a lot without public street frontage will significantly impact the
area.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda
staff report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011)
Mr. Joe White of White Daters and Associates was present representing the request.
There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a
recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments
and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
March 10, 2011
ITEM NO.: 13 FILE NO.: G-25-210
Name: LaGrande Drive Street Name Change to St. Vincent Way
Location: LaGrande Drive; from Chenal Parkway to Rahling
Petitioner: St. Vincent Health System
Request: To change the name of LaGrande Drive to St. Vincent Way
Abutting Uses and Ownership:
Four large, undeveloped tracts are located on the south side of the street. Three of the four
are owned by Deltic Timber and the fourth is owned by St. Vincent. A driveway off of
LaGrande through one of the Deltic tracts provides access to an office building, which is
located on a tract to the south (the GMAC Building). Property on the north side of LaGrande
consists of vacant tracts owned by Deltic and Regions Bank and The Promenade
development owned by Red Development.
Neighborhood Effects:
Of the tracts noted above, only the GMAC Building tract takes an address off of LaGrande.
The Promenade businesses take a Chenal address. The remaining tracts are vacant. Under
this proposal, the GMAC building will continue to maintain a LaGrande Drive address. That
building’s driveway will be named LaGrande Drive. This is the same process that was done
on the north end of Champlin when it was renamed Kirk Road. At that time the driveway to
the existing apartment development was named Champlin so there would be no impact on
the residents of the apartments.
Renaming LaGrande Drive to St. Vincent Way will have no effect on the neighborhood.
Neighborhood Position:
As of this writing, written support has been provided by St. Vincent and Deltic. Notice has
been sent all abutting property owners and the Witry Court, Champagnolle Court and
Bascom Place Neighborhood Associations.
Effect on Public Services:
There will be no effect on public services. No opposition has been voiced by any of the
reviewing agencies. The total cost of new street signage is $1,750.00.
March 10, 2011
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-25-210
2
Staff Analysis:
St. Vincent Health System is requesting that the name of LaGrande Drive be changed to
St. Vincent Way. St. Vincent’s new West Little Rock campus is being built on the south
side of the street.
Changing the street name will have no effect on other parties. The Promenade Shopping
Center Development is located on the north side of the street and has a Chenal Parkway
address. The GMAC Building fronts onto Chenal Parkway but has a driveway and address
on LaGrande Drive. That driveway will be named LaGrande Drive so there will be no effect
on the tenants of that building. The other properties abutting the street are undeveloped.
There is no historic significance to the LaGrande name. It is one of the “French themed”
names in Chenal.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (FEBRUARY 17, 2011)
Michael Keck was present representing the item. Staff presented the item and noted there
were no outstanding issues. The Committee determined there were no issues and forwarded
the item to the full Commission.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request to change the name of LaGrande Drive to
St. Vincent Way.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011)
Mr. Michael Keck was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors
present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request to
change the name of LaGrande Drive to St. Vincent Way.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of
the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and
0 absent.
Sy_
V
I�...�U/
I..L
W
a
z
c
cn
0
z
` v
z
w
0
[�
0
--,
Q
LL
Z
~
w
<
�
o
J
Q
LU
CL'
1-
I �
W
C
m
S
0
0
w
L.L.
Z
LL-
LL
<
Z
rte(
J
Z
w
IZ
W
CL'
loin
laccc 580013
ININIIIIIII
a MCIEND I
mallmallim
amemall offil
No INIC m
March 10, 2011
There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned
at 7:02 p.m.