pc_06 30 2011
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING – REZONING – CONDITIONAL USE HEARING
MINUTE RECORD
JUNE 30, 2011
4:00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being ten (10) in number.
II. Members Present: Tom Brock
William Changose
Janet Dillon
J. T. Ferstl
Rebecca Finney
Keith Fountain
Troy Laha
Obray Nunnley, Jr.
Amy Pierce
Bill Rector
Members Absent: Dan Harpool
City Attorney: Cindy Dawson
III. Approval of the Minutes of the May 19, 2011 Meeting of the Little Rock
Planning Commission. The Minutes were approved as presented.
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING – REZONING – CONDITIONAL USE HEARING
JUNE 30, 2011
4:00 P.M.
I. OLD BUSINESS:
Item Number:
File Number:
Title:
A. G-25-209 West 19th Street Name Change to Annie Abrams Street
West 19th – From Main Street to Woodrow Street
B. Z-8610 McDonald’s USA Short-form PD-C, located at 104
South University Avenue.
II. NEW BUSINESS:
Item Number:
File Number:
Title:
1. LU11-11-01 A Land Use Plan Amendment near 11900 Colonel
Glenn Road from Public Institutional to Commercial
1.1 Z-3371-FF Rezoning from C-2 to C-3
Northeast corner of Colonel Glenn and Bowman Roads
2. LU11-18-01 A Land Use Plan Amendment near 12624 Lawson
Road, from Office to Commercial
2.1 Z-7978-A Rezoning from O-3 to C-3
West side of Lawson Road at Lawson Cut-Off
3. Z-8669 Rezoning from R-2 to R-7A
East side of Calleghan Road, 1,200 feet north of West
Baseline Road
4. Z-3826-B H. D. Malone Funeral Home – Conditional Use Permit
9910 Chicot Road
5. Z-4204-A Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints –
Revised Conditional Use Permit
13901 Quail Run Drive
Agenda, Page Two
II. NEW BUSINESS: (CONTINUED)
Item Number:
File Number:
Title:
6. Z-8416-A Liberty Hill Missionary Baptist Church Parking Lot –
Revised Conditional Use Permit
1215 S. Schiller Street
7. Z-8670 Sky Broadcasting and Management Event Center –
Conditional Use Permit
3915 S. University Avenue
8. Z-8671 Cosse Car Wash – Conditional Use Permit
11400 West Markham Street
■
r E
WY . ,-
a , aX:d kA31ZyHy :r �1
W
4 .J
r Ce)
as srwciH� wva
o
s SP` 7 a
.� i►. -,1lr
W
js
MOVaL}9 2$ H3?ly S
3
e
pp�
6
x
3
Moa(3oaM s
r
r;
e s
j
i
Ma
i
rr
f �
WY . ,-
a , aX:d kA31ZyHy :r �1
W
4 .J
r Ce)
as srwciH� wva
o
s SP` 7 a
.� i►. -,1lr
W
js
MOVaL}9 2$ H3?ly S
3
e
pp�
6
x
3
Moa(3oaM s
&1931H d—HFVi
as srwciH� wva
o
s SP` 7 a
.� i►. -,1lr
W
js
MOVaL}9 2$ H3?ly S
3
e
pp�
6
x
3
Moa(3oaM s
� x ntl ursa�nrrrn s
1S'1ddISiMiOW N
� n
n
ON MCUNVS NHW
�OM1t1353Z1
d3
a
z oa MQ� s
a
a �
•' r 1
7
ear a1 i
J..
z
• ; as iatlAn3is
A I..) 4
00 ,ws.NaH ,�.... n
..— a
f.I ON SHaVdS
,r p �Lo 37'b'gNL3J
C)
L
O
as aaHaao
6
S;bNrads 0,,,,
ri
ON SjHIads N3A3!)
a
� 1
ob sraa�os
y
W
� 3aara
. L
cu
tJJ
Z
Ui
Z)
cu
c
0
0
C)
I
0
w
&1931H d—HFVi
7
ear a1 i
J..
z
• ; as iatlAn3is
A I..) 4
00 ,ws.NaH ,�.... n
..— a
f.I ON SHaVdS
,r p �Lo 37'b'gNL3J
C)
L
O
as aaHaao
6
S;bNrads 0,,,,
ri
ON SjHIads N3A3!)
a
� 1
ob sraa�os
y
W
� 3aara
. L
cu
tJJ
Z
Ui
Z)
cu
c
0
0
C)
I
0
w
C)
L
O
as aaHaao
6
S;bNrads 0,,,,
ri
ON SjHIads N3A3!)
a
� 1
ob sraa�os
y
W
� 3aara
. L
cu
tJJ
Z
Ui
Z)
cu
c
0
0
C)
I
0
w
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: G-25-209
Name: West 19th Street Name Change
Location: West 19th Street, from Main Street to Woodrow Street
Petitioner: Muhammad Rasheed, New Africa Alliance
Request: To rename West 19th Street, from Main Street to Woodrow
Street, to Annie Abrams Street.
STAFF REPORT:
The Planning Commission and Board of Directors are considering potential changes to the
street name change process. Staff is recommending deferral of this request, pending those
potential changes. On December 9, 2010, the Subdivision Committee agreed that deferral
was appropriate.
Staff recommends deferral of the item to the February 24, 2011 Commission meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 6, 2011)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff recommended
deferral of the item to the February 24, 2011 meeting in light of potential changes to the street
name change process being considered by the Planning Commission and Board of Directors.
On December 9, 2010, the Subdivision Committee agreed that deferral was appropriate.
There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved
for deferral by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 2 open positions.
STAFF REPORT:
It has been determined that the names submitted with the petition are deficient. There are
approximately 70 addresses on the affected portion of West 19th Street, requiring the
submittal of at least 36 signatures in support. Many of the signatures submitted do not
indicate an address, making it impossible to determine if a sufficient number of residents
support the name change.
Staff recommends deferral of the item to the April 7, 2011 Agenda with the applicant
instructed to submit sufficient, proper signatures prior to the March 17, 2011 Subdivision
Committee meeting.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-25-209
2
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 24, 2011)
The applicant was present. There were no other interested parties present. The applicant,
Muhammad Rasheed, read a statement from Annie Abrams in which Ms. Abrams asked that
the effort to rename 19th Street in her honor be discontinued. He then read a statement from
the New Africa Alliance in which “the people” stated their desire to move forward with the
application. Mr. Rasheed stated he had spoken with Ms. Abrams and she was now
supportive of allowing the effort to go forward.
Commissioner Nunnley asked if the Wright Avenue neighborhood Association supported the
street name change. Mr. Rasheed responded that he did not know. Commissioner Nunnley
asked who “the people” were. Mr. Rasheed responded that they were the area residents who
supported the proposal to rename 19th Street for Ms. Abrams. Commissioner Nunnley stated
he supported the application but he wanted Mr. Rasheed to talk with the Wright Avenue
Neighborhood Association.
There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and deferred
to the April 7, 2011 meeting by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant did submit signatures after the March 17, 2011 Subdivision Committee
meeting. It appears that the signatures are still deficient. Additionally, staff has been advised
not to move forward with any proposed street name changes as the Board of Directors again
considers potential changes to the street name change process.
Staff recommends deferral of this item to the May 19, 2011 Commission agenda.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 7, 2011)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff recommended
deferral of the item as noted in the “staff report” above. There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the consent agenda and deferred to the May 19, 2011 meeting by
a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
Staff has been advised not to proceed with any street name applications at this time as
possible changes to the street name change process are being considered. Staff
recommends deferral of this item to the June 30, 2011 meeting.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-25-209
3
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 19, 2011)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff recommended
deferral of the item to the June 30, 2011 agenda. There was no further discussion. The item
was placed on the consent agenda and deferred to the June 30, 2011 agenda by a vote of
10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
This application has been deferred several times. The applicant has not yet submitted
sufficient proper signatures reflecting that at least 50% of those persons with an address on
the street support the proposed street name change. Additionally, there is still uncertainty
over the possibility of the City changing the street name change procedure.
For those reasons, staff recommends withdrawal of the application, without prejudice. The
applicant may refile at a later date once the procedural issue is resolved and the applicant
has sufficient signatures.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 30, 2011)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item
and recommended that it be withdrawn as noted in the “staff update” above. There was no
further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved for withdrawal
by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: B 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.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT’S STATEMENT:
The site is located within the Mid-town Design Overlay District which requires
redevelopment of site to rezone the property to a Planned Zoning Development.
The request includes the removal of an existing restaurant building and the
construction of a new 4,928 square foot McDonald’s restaurant. The restaurant
will provide a shared access from South University Avenue with a lot located to
the north. Parking will be provided via a cross parking agreement with the
adjacent lot. According to the applicant the restaurant will be a prototype of a
McDonald’s restaurant which is designed specifically for use in the Midtown
Overly District. Only a limited number of McDonald’s restaurants of this type
have been constructed.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8610
2
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains a vacant restaurant building with a shared access drive from
South University Avenue. North of the restaurant building is a multi-story office
building. South of the site is a vacant commercial property formerly a branch
bank. West of the site is a multi-family development and additional office
buildings. East of the site is the St. Vincent’s Medical Center. This area of
South University and West Markham Street is developed with regional shopping
centers, restaurants and a general office uses.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received a number of information phone calls from
area resident. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site, all
residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site, the Hillcrest
Residents Neighborhood Association and the Briarwood Neighborhood
Association were notified of the public hearing. The Mid-Town Advisory Board
has reviewed the site plan.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Conduct a traffic study to determine the impact of proposed traffic on City
streets. Determine with the proposed drive thru configuration, if vehicles will
stack on City streets. If the proposed drive thru design is not adequate and
alternative should be provided. If you have any questions, please contact Bill
Henry in Traffic Engineering at 501-379-1816.
2. Left turns from Markham Street at this location are prohibited due to the
distance from the University/Markham intersection. If left turns create a
problem, left turns will be prohibited by structural controls. If you have any
questions, please contact Bill Henry in Traffic Engineering at 501-379-1816.
3. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
4. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of
work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from
Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner).
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: No permanent building foundation is allowed within five (5) feet of
the existing sewer main. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for additional
information.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8610
3
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. 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.
CATA: CATA Bus Routes #17 – the Mabelvale-Downtown Route, #17A – the
Mabelvale UALR Route and #21 – University Avenue Route all run along the
property frontage.
Parks and Recreation: No comment.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the West Little Rock Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant
has applied for a rezoning from C-3 to PCD for a McDonald’s. Each Planned
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8610
4
Zoning District is to be reviewed on its own merits with consideration of the Land
Use Plan for the site and surrounding areas. This area is covered by the
Briarwood Neighborhood Plan, but the plan does not address this issue.
Master Street Plan: South University is shown as 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
University since it is a Principal Arterial. St. Vincent Circle and McKinley are both
shown as Local Streets. 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.
Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes shown in the immediate vicinity.
Landscape:
1. Site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
2. The site is located within the Midtown Overlay District and must comply to the
codes set forth.
3. University Avenue is classified as an arterial street; therefore, the site must
comply with the City of Little Rock’s Landscape Ordinance, Chapter 15.
4. The landscape ordinance requires a minimum nine-foot (9’) wide perimeter
landscape strip around the sites entirety. Currently, the site is deficient on
this minimal requirement along the northern perimeter of the site. A variance
from the City Beautiful Commission will be required prior to the issuance of a
building permit.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 24, 2010)
The applicant was present. 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 site was located within the
Mid-town Design Overlay District which established design criteria for
development. Staff requested additional information concerning signage,
dumpsters and screening, site lighting and the proposed materials for the
building construction. Staff also stated the order menu board would require
screening via a six foot screening wall a minimum of 20-feet in length.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8610
5
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a traffic study was
required to determine the impact of the proposed development on City streets.
Staff stated this was needed to determine if the proposed drive-thru configuration
would stack automobiles onto City streets. Staff also stated left turns from
Markham Street at this location were prohibited due to the distance from the
University /Markham intersection. Staff stated if left turns created a problem, left
turns would be prohibited by structural controls. Staff requested the applicant
provide a traffic impact study for the development.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the site development was
to comply with the minimum standards of Chapter 15 and the Mid-town Design
Overlay District requirements. Staff stated a nine (9) foot landscape strip was
required around the site’s perimeter to comply with the Landscape Ordinance
requirements.
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
issues raised at the November 24, 2010, Subdivision Committee meeting. The
applicant has addressed staff concerns related to signage, dumpsters locations
and screening. The applicant has indicated site lighting will be directional,
directed downward and into the site. The applicant has provided staff with the
proposed materials for the building construction. The applicant has also provided
staff with a traffic impact analysis. Staff is continuing to work with the applicant
on the potential for modification to area streets and the potential impact these
modifications will have on traffic accessing the site.
The site is located within the Mid-Town Design Overlay District. The Overlay
outlines specific development criteria for redevelopment of properties within the
District boundaries. The Overlay states for all new construction, at least sixty
percent of the ground floor level facing internal pedestrian public circulation areas
or streets are to be glass-windows, entry features or displays. The primary
façade of the building is to be oriented parallel to the street, or to the principal
vehicular or pedestrian routes of travel whether public or private. Buildings are to
maintain a distinction between upper and lower levels. Wall projections or
recesses a minimum of three feet deep and a minimum of twenty contiguous feet
not to extend over twenty percent of the façade is required. Arcades, display
windows, entry areas or awnings is required to exist along at least sixty percent
of the façade.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8610
6
The primary entrance is to be oriented to the street or to the principal vehicular or
pedestrian routes of travel within the development. Buildings are to have a
clearly defined and visible customer entrance featuring elements such as
overhangs, arcades, arches, canopies, peaked roof forms, display windows. All
sides of the building that face abutting public or private rights of way, except
alleys, shall feature at least one customer entrance. The small building
development criteria requires buildings under five thousand square feet (5,000)
to not allow parking to wrap the building but limited to the side and rear areas
and the maximum building height allowed is thirty-five (35) feet.
Exterior building materials are to be of high quality materials, such as brick,
wood, stone, stucco, EIFS and are to be low reflectant, subtle, neutral or earth
tone with trim and accents of brighter colors. Smooth faced concrete block, tilt-
up concrete panels or prefabricated steel panels construction materials are not
allowed within the DOD boundaries.
The DOD states the front yard setback may be zero (0) but will not be more than
twenty (20) feet. The side and rear yard setbacks may be zero (0) except where
adjacent to lots containing single-family detached structures. Where adjacent to
detached single-family residential the side yard setback must be not less than
four (4) feet and the rear yard setback must be not less than twenty-five (25) feet.
Sidewalks and pedestrian walkways fronting buildings with ground floor retail are
to be at least ten (10) feet in width. Protected pedestrian walkways are to be
provided through parking lots. All development must include as part of their site
plan pedestrian linkages through parking areas and to adjacent buildings or
developments.
Surface parking areas are to be broken up or distributed around larger structures
so as to shorten the distance to other buildings and public sidewalks. The
parking requirement for developments within the DOD area are to be at least fifty
percent (50%) of that required by the zoning ordinance. The maximum parking
allowed within a development is to be the minimum parking established by the
zoning ordinance. No parking is allowed in the front yard setback area.
Signage must comply with Article X of the Little Rock Code of Ordinances. No
off-site advertising signs are permitted. No pole-mounted signs are permitted.
Monument signs identifying the developments less than one acre are limited to
monument signs up to twenty-four (24) square feet in area and six (6) feet in
height.
No street buffer or landscaping is required along streets classified less than an
arterial. When the structure is not built to the property line, landscaping is
required in the area between the building and property line up to that required in
the Landscape Ordinance.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8610
7
The site plan differs from the DOD in the following areas:
• The DOD requires 60% openings on all public facades - the non-drive thru
facade (south) does not appear to meet this requirement.
• The DOD requires the front setback be not more than 20 feet – the site
plan indicates a front setback of approximately 40 feet.
• The DOD requires that internal drives be ten (10) to twelve (12) feet in
width – the site plan indicates the front drive at eighteen (18) feet in width.
• The DOD requires all crosswalks be raised, scored etc – it appears the
cross walks end at the property line not allowing connectivity to the
adjacent property.
• The DOD requires sidewalks along building facades with windows be ten
(10) feet – the site plan indicates a sidewalk along the windowed façade at
5.5 feet.
• The DOD requires landscape along University Avenue (street buffer) at a
minimum of nine (9) feet – the plan as presented appears to be a
minimum of nine (9) feet in the southern most area but within the
landscape strip is a five (5) foot sidewalk.
• The DOD requires internal and site landscape of vehicular areas as
required per the Landscape Ordinance – the site plan does not provide the
minimum nine (9) foot landscape strip along the northern perimeter.
• The DOD allows one-half of the normal parking requirement of the zoning
ordinance. The maximum parking allowed is the minimum established by
the zoning ordinance. With the proposed development 24 spaces would
typically be required - the site plan indicates 22 spaces. The DOD states
that a project may elect to use shared parking determining the total
parking requirement by submitting a parking demand analysis prepared by
a qualified professional. There is a shared parking agreement in place
between the property owner to the north and McDonald’s.
• The DOD does not allow off-site advertising signs – the development is
proposed with a monument sign located on West Markham Street which is
off site.
• The DOD requires all building signage meet the City sign ordinance
requirements – the signage along north, south and rear are proposed as
signage which do not have street frontage, thus are not allowed.
• The DOD requires all surface parking areas to comply with the Landscape
Ordinance – the site plan as presented will not provide the required
number of on-site trees, the required number of shrubs, building
landscaping and interior landscaping at a minimum of eight (8) percent.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8610
8
The previous deferral allowed the City Traffic Engineer and the applicant’s traffic
engineer to determine the impact of traffic generated by the development on the
area City streets. Staff has met with the applicant’s traffic engineer to review the
revised modeling and potential on-site and off-site improvements. In addition
staff had a conference call with McDonald's concerning site traffic and modeling
of traffic on West Markham Street and University Avenue. The current model of
traffic still shows insufficient capacity for the drive thru traffic and left turning
traffic on West Markham Street is shown blocking the through lanes for
westbound traffic on West Markham Street. McDonald’s representatives have
indicated that their new store design will address the capacity issues with the site
traffic. However, the major issue of blocking the intersection of West Markham
Street and University Avenue due to insufficient left turn lane capacity for
westbound left turning vehicles into the site still exists. Improvements being
recommended by the applicant does not solve the left turning traffic capacity
issue on West Markham Street. The plan as submitted still has significant traffic
problems associated with it, which can not be ignored.
Based on concerns of potential impacts of traffic on West Markham and
University Avenue and the areas of non-compliance with the Mid-town Design
Overlay District staff is not supportive of the request as filed.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial.
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,
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.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8610
9
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.
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.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8610
10
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 21, 2011)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the item with a recommendation of deferral of the item to the May 19, 2011,
public hearing. Staff stated the deferral was necessary to allow staff additional time to
review the revised traffic study.
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 10 ayes,
0 noes and 1 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 19, 2011)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the item with a recommendation of deferral of the item to the June 30, 2011,
public hearing. Staff stated the deferral was necessary to allow staff additional time to
review additional information submitted 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 10 ayes,
0 noes and 1 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on June 10, 2011. The revised plan
indicates an increased building setback, modifications to the landscape areas and the
addition of a second stacking lane for the drive-through window.
The applicant has indicated the building will provide glass on the northern and eastern
facades at seventy nine (79) percent. The Mid-town DOD requires a minimum of
sixty (60) percent of the public facades to be glass.
The revised plan indicates the building setback along South University Avenue, the
front, at sixty-seven (67) feet. The DOD states buildings should be set at zero but no
more than twenty (20) feet. The previous site plan indicated a front building setback of
forty (40) feet.
The DOD states internal drives are to be ten (10) to twelve (12) feet in width. The
revised plan indicates driveway the northern driveway as seventeen (17) feet with
two drive-through lanes each ten (10) feet wide. The western drive has been reduced
from thirty (30) feet to eighteen (18) feet.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8610
11
As with the previous plan the sidewalks located along the northern and eastern facades
of the building are 5.5 feet and 6.5 feet respectively. The DOD states sidewalks are to
be a minimum of ten (10) feet in width.
The street buffer along South University Avenue has not changed significantly. The
buffer is indicated with a two (2) foot grass strip adjacent to the right of way on South
University Avenue, a five (5) foot sidewalk, a retaining wall and a two (2) foot grass strip
adjacent to the drive-through exit drive on the site. The DOD states street buffers are to
comply with City Ordinance. This would typically require a minimum street buffer width
of nine (9) feet.
The revised plan has included a five (5) foot landscape strip between the proposed
parking along the northern perimeter. The ordinance would typically require the
placement of a nine (9) foot landscape strip between properties. The front building
landscape area has been increased from a depth of ten (10) feet to thirty (30) feet. The
southern landscape strip has been reduced from twelve (12) feet to four (4) feet. The
western landscape strip has been reduced from fourteen (14) feet to seven (7) feet.
The landscape strip around the trash enclosure and storage has not changed and
remains at four (4) feet.
The previous plan indicated twenty-two (22) parking spaces. The revised plan indicates
a total of twenty-one (21) parking spaces. The DOD states the minimum parking
required per the zoning ordinance shall be the maximum parking allowed for a
development. The minimum parking per the zoning ordinance for this site is
twenty-four (24) parking spaces. The parking complies with the typical DOD standards.
The site plan continues to indicate the placement of a sign on West Markham Street
which is located off-premise. The City Sign Ordinance prohibits the placement of
off-premise with the exception of bill-boards or outdoor advertising as specifically
permitted in Section 36-556 of the Code of Ordinances for the City of Little Rock. There
is not a mechanism in place to allow the City to approve the sign as requested.
It does not appear there has been any change of the on-site signage, the building
signage or the ground sign located along South University Avenue. As previously
indicated the building signage along the northern, western and southern facades are
located without public street frontage which does not comply with the City’s Sign
Ordinance. The ground sign is indicated with a maximum height of six (6) feet and a
maximum sign area of thirty-six (36) square feet.
The applicant has provided an updated traffic study regarding the revised site plan. The
original report was dated February 10, 2011. The applicant states since the
presentation of the original study there have been many discussions with the City of
Little Rock staff and McDonald’s. Discussions have included consideration for a variety
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8610
12
of design and operational measures to offer refinement of the site plan. The amended
traffic study states changes to the site plan include design features that allow improved
traffic operations and access including the following:
• Building design to improve efficiency of serving customers. – These measures
include accommodation of a double, side-by-side on-site vehicle stacking for
vehicles awaiting access to the double order board stations. The building design
also now incorporates three service windows which follow the order board stations to
permit payment at one window and pick-up of customer orders at two windows, one
of which is intended to primarily serve customer orders requiring longer time to be
present, located at a forward location, which will not impede progress of customer
orders-behind. This results in improved overall service times.
• West Markham Street joint access with the Baker Building – Agreement has been
reached with owners of the Baker Building to permit shared access to West
Markham Street.
• West Markham Street left turn lane widening – A plan to widen West Markham
Street in the vicinity of the site has been proposed to provide a bi-directional
center left-turn lane from University Avenue to the access drive serving
Park Plaza/Chick-fil-A. This street improvements will provide left turn lane storage at
the joint access drive (to be shared with the Baker Building), plus drives serving
Plaza Towers.
According to the applicant revised traffic operational calculations and simulation
modeling was preformed as a part of the study update for projected traffic operating
conditions for the study intersections based on the revised site design. According to the
applicant critical to the assessment of traffic operations is an assessment of site ingress
and egress at the two proposed access drives and circulation through the drive-through
facility. The drive locations are along the south side of West Markham Street and
on the west side of University Avenue. The two drives are existing and serve the
Baker Building. The existing north access drive intersects West Markham Street
approximately 285 feet west of University Avenue. The eastern existing drive intersects
University Avenue approximately 150 feet south of West Markham Street and serves
right-in/right-out vehicle movements only.
According to the applicant the operation of the drive-through facility and the queuing of
vehicles in that portion of the site are of particular interest. TSIS –CORSIM (Traffic
Software Integrated System, Version 6.2) traffic modeling software was used for
assessment of traffic operation at the proposed site. The operations simulation
modeling for projected traffic conditions analysis results show traffic operations to be
favorable. The model demonstrates that vehicle queuing can be fully contained within
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8610
13
the site. Also according to the applicant the widening of West Markham Street and
provision of a westbound left turn lane to greatly improve access at the West Markham
Street driveway while allowing uninterrupted east-west through vehicle movements on
West Markham Street at the access driveway.
Staff has completed the review of the consultant’s traffic modeling and analysis for the
revised McDonald’s site plan. Based on their latest site plan and the widening of West
Markham Street, staff’s analysis of the consultant’s traffic study indicates that the
proposed plan does not indicate a negative impact on the adjacent street system. Staff
has conducted field investigations to verify the modeling and to ensure the modeling
was calibrated to the existing traffic conditions at this location. The proposed
modification to West Markham Street provides just enough left turn storage for the
proposed traffic shown in the trip generation report based on today’s traffic volumes.
However, staff is concerned that with increasing traffic volumes on these two major
arterials, problems will be generated in the near future. During observations of the
AM peak hour, traffic stacked up past the proposed entrance on Markham Street
numerous times. As traffic increases in the Markham corridor in the future, there will be
fewer and fewer gaps in the eastbound traffic flow that will allow for the left turn
maneuvers into and out of the McDonald’s site. This will result in blocking westbound
traffic as well as blocking vehicles attempting to exit the site on Markham in the near
future.
Based on staff’s continued concerns of potential impacts of traffic on West Markham
Street and University Avenue and the areas of non-compliance with the DOD staff is not
supportive of the request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 30, 2011)
The applicant was present. There was one objector present. Dana Carney, of the
Planning staff, presented the item and a recommendation of denial. He noted the
several variances from the Code and stated it appeared they were trying to do too much
on a small site. Bill Henry, City traffic Engineer, gave a report on the City’s analysis of
the traffic study prepared by the applicant. He spoke of trip generation and traffic
volumes on S. University and W. Markham. Mr. Henry stated he was concerned that
those streets would be blocked by traffic created under this application.
Randy Frazier, representing the application, introduced the item and stated they wanted
to address the Design Overlay District and traffic. Mr. Frazier acknowledged there were
variances from the DOD standards. He surmised that any development of the site
would require variances. He stated there had been seventeen (17) variances approved
for the Park Avenue development; six (6) of which were the same as variances they
were requesting. He stated the proposed McDonald’s was state of the art in design,
service and traffic flow.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8610
14
Andy Halsey, regional construction manager of McDonald’s, described the project. He
stated this would be the third of this new, state of the art design store in the country. He
said there was a third window at the drive-through for customers requesting those items
that were not readily available, which would allow traffic at the other two windows to
move more quickly. He described the proposed window service times. Mr. Halsey
stated they were taking down an old, dilapidated building. He acknowledged there were
landscape variances. He stated there would be more landscaping than currently
existed. He noted the restaurant would have two, side by side drive through lanes,
allowing two orders at a time to be processed. He said some aspects of the building will
be “green” construction.
Ernie Peters, traffic engineer for the applicant, discussed aspects of his traffic study.
He stated he looked at local, high traffic generating sites; not just national numbers.
He noted the proposed widening of W. Markham Street to create a center turn lane.
Mr. Peters stated Mr. Henry’s concerns were based on what might happen in the future.
He said his numbers included a 10% increase and the volume numbers on W. Markham
showed no access problems. He stated he respectfully disagreed with Mr. Henry but he
felt this site would function well.
Mr. Frazier stated the improvements to W. Markham St. would benefit others, not just
McDonald’s. He stated they had the support of other property owners in the area.
Ms. Wilson, representing the ownership of the property, stated her support.
Hank Kelley, representing the owners of the adjacent Baker Building, stated his support
subject to an access agreement being finalized.
Ruth Bell, of the League of Women Voters of Pulaski County, stated the League was
leery of the number of variances. She stated it looked like an intense use for a relatively
small property. She described it as a tight fit. She said everything would have to work
just right for the proposal to work. She commented that Park Avenue would create
increased traffic as it is built out. Ms. Bell stated both traffic engineers had stated the
project would work right now but there were concerns about what would happen in the
future. She asked what the City’s recourse would be if traffic gridlock results from the
project.
Randy Frazier commented that the Midtown Advisory Board seemed supportive.
Peter Boyd, of McDonald’s, stated this was not “yesterday’s McDonald’s.” He stated the
project was built for speed in service with three pick up windows and dual stacking
lanes. He said there would not be traffic issues.
In response to a question from Chairman Ferstl, Hank Kelley said there had not been a
discussion of McDonald’s compensating the owners of the Baker Building if the
driveway of W. Markham was a right-in/right-out drive only.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8610
15
Chairman Ferstl commented to Ernie Peters that he was concerned that west bound
traffic on W. Markham, stacked in the left turn lane to access McDonald’s, would back
up to the W. Markham/University intersection. He said he would prefer that the drive
onto W. Markham be a right-in/right/out drive. He asked about the possibility of
accessing the site through the properties to the south. Mr. Peters responded that there
were physical constraints, such as grade differences, that rendered that option
unfeasible. He then presented a video depicting graphically the traffic movements in
the area based on the development.
Commissioner Nunnley asked if the model took into consideration holiday shopping
season or razorback game day traffic. Mr. Peters responded that it did not.
Commissioner Nunnley voiced concern about traffic impact. At his request, Mr. Peters
shared AHTD’s traffic count numbers at the Markham/University intersection.
In response to questions from Commissioners Fountain and Pierce, Mr. Peters stated
constructing a median on W. Markham would be safer but a turn lane would provide
more benefits for the property owners and traffic flow on Markham.
Commissioner Changose noted Mr. Peters’ traffic model had a traffic count of 180 when
Mr. Henry’s suggested numbers were 200-220. In response to a question, Mr. Peters
stated he did not run his model using the 200-220 numbers.
Mr. Henry stated the a.m.- p .m. peak numbers at the Rodney Parham McDonald’s were
in the range of 232. He expressed concern about the promised window times not
working in every situation. He stated he saw a potential for real traffic issues.
Mr. Peters responded that the window times at the Rodney Parham store were different
because it was an older store with a single stacking lane and parking conflicts. He
stated the new store had three service windows, no parking conflict, new and improved
service times and internal improvements.
There was a discussion of the traffic modeling depicted on the video.
Mr. Peters estimated 72% of the traffic at the new store being drive through with the
remainder being dine-in.
Commissioners Finney and Nunnley expressed concerns about traffic.
Hank Kelley stated the improved access on W. Markham St. would benefit his client’s
property.
Chairman Ferstl stated he felt McDonald’s could control the window times as they
proposed.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8610
16
A McDonald’s representative stated they were achieving those times at a model store
they built in Oakbrook Illinois. He introduced the local licencee who stated he was
committed to achieving the proposed window times. In response to a question from
Commissioner Fountain, he explained how having the third service window would move
traffic more quickly through the site.
Chairman Ferstl asked Mr. Henry is he thought the project would work if they achieved
the proposed window times. Mr. Henry responded the site may be able to handle traffic
if they do. He stated he felt traffic numbers on the streets would continue to grow and
the intersection was at capacity now.
Commissioner Dillon stated she thought Chic-fil-a “blows up” Markham already and it
might help to have a second choice.
Commissioner Rector commented to Mr. Peters that the model doesn’t show much
stacking. He asked Mr. Peters is he was confident in his model. Mr. Peters responded
that he was.
Commissioner Nunnley asked Mr. Peters if his model would work using the trip numbers
used by the City’s traffic engineer. Mr. Peters responded that the difference was about
one vehicle per minute, not a noticeable difference.
There was further discussion of traffic and access.
In response to a question from the Commission, Mr. Frazier stated he was amending
the application to remove the requested off-premises sign on Markham.
Dana Carney, of the Planning staff reiterated staff’s concerns. He stated the only way
the site could be developed as proposed was at the expense of elements such as
landscaping. He stated it appeared the applicant was trying to do too much on a small
site. He expressed support for the position of the City’s traffic engineer and the
concerns raised by Mr. Henry.
Commissioner Nunnley asked if staff felt there was any circumstance under which this
proposal would work at this site. Mr. Carney responded that drive-through restaurants,
particularly one that generates the volume of a McDonald’s, were unique and created
their own issues. He stated he did not feel the site could accommodate a drive through
type restaurant.
A motion was made to approve the application, as amended, including all staff
comments and conditions, excluding that of denial. The vote was 5 ayes, 5 noes and
1 absent. The motion failed.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: LU11-11-01
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment – I-430 Planning District
Location: 11900 Colonel Glenn Road
Request: Public Institutional to Commercial
Source: Todd Hart, White-Daters & Associates
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
A Land Use Plan amendment in the I-430 Planning District from Public
Institutional to Commercial. The commercial category includes a broad range of
retail and wholesale sales of products, personal and professional services, and
general business activities. Commercial activities vary in type and scale,
depending on the trade area that they serve. The applicant is also requesting a
separate application for rezoning for this site from C-2 to C-3 General
Commercial.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is currently zoned C-2 Shopping Center and is 1.6 acres in size. It
is currently used for a parking lot. The amendment area is surrounded by C-2
zoning to the north and east for a nursing school. The areas south of this
amendment area and south of Colonel Glenn Road are zoned C-3 General
Comemrcial for a gas station and convenience store. To the southeast is zoned
C-4 for car sales. West of the amendment site and west of Bowman Road is
zoned Planned Office Development for an office/showroom/warehouse
development. To the northwest is zoned R-2 Single Family for a mobile home
park.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
The amendment area is currently shown as Public Insittutional for the Baptist
Health nursing school located northeast of the site. To the west and east is
shown as Mixed Office Commercial. To the south is shown as Commercial.
Ordinance 19,308 was approved on April 19, 2005 to amend the southeast
corner of David O. Dodd Road and Bowman Plaza Drive from Office to
Commercial with a Park/Open Space buffer for future commercial development
and buffering.
Ordinance 18,799 was approved on January 7, 2003 to amend the Office west of
the intersection of Colonel Glenn and Lawson Roads to Commercial for a
construction company office development.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU11-11-01
2
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Colonel Glenn 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 Colonel Glenn since it is a
Principal Arterial. Bowman Road 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 Bowman Road
since it is a Minor Arterial. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way
and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site.
BICYCLE PLAN:
A Class II is shown along Bowman Road. A Class II bikeway is located on the
street as either a 5’ shoulder or six foot marked bike lane. Additional paving and
right of way may be required.
PARKS:
According to the Master Parks Plan, this area is within eight blocks of a park or
open space. Just south of this amendment area is JA Fair Junior High School
which offers some recreational opportunities.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this
amendment.
ANALYSIS:
This area has been developing rapidly in the past twenty years. There is a
growing demand for more commercial land in this area as it is all quickly being
developed. In 1997, the Future Land Use Plan was amended at the corner of
Colonel Glenn Road and I-430 from Community Shopping, Suburban Office and
Office to Commercial for the development of the Rave movie theater and a car
dealership. That amendment provided nearly 66 acres of Commercial land in the
area. In 2003, 50 more acres of Office were amended to Commercial with
Ordinance 18964. This land has since been developed into a luxury car
dealership.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU11-11-01
3
The proposed amendment is located at the intersection of two arterials.
Commercial is most ideal at the intersection of two arterials like at Colonel Glenn
Road and Bowman Road. The amendment area is already zoned for commercial
uses (C-2), but the applicant is requesting C-3 uses instead. This rezoning
application triggered a land use plan amendment to change the area from Public
Instiutional to Commercial. This area has been shown as Public Institutional
since 1993 when it was changed to represent the Baptist Health school uses.
The two corners on the south side of the Colonel Glenn/Bowman Road
intersection are both zoned and shown on the Future Land Use Plan as
Commercial.
The amendment area is already developed as a parking lot with one curb cut on
Colonel Glenn and two on Bowman. If no additional curb cuts are made while
sharing entries, negative effects can be minimized concerning traffic and
pedestrians on Bowman Road and Colonel Glenn Road. Because this area is
located at the intersection of two arterials and is surrounded by existing
commercial uses, staff believes this change to the Future Land Use Plan is
appropriate.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: John Barrow and
Southwest Little Rock United for Progress. Staff has received no comments from
area residents.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is appropriate.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 30, 2011)
This item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. A motion was
made to approve the consent agenda and the motion was passed with a vote
of 10 ayes and 1 absent.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 1.1 FILE NO.: Z-3371-FF
Owner: Baptist Medical Systems
Applicant: Tim Daters, White-Daters and Associates
Location: Northeast corner of Colonel Glenn Road and
Bowman Road
Area: 1.6 Acres
Request: Rezone from C-2 to C-3
Purpose: Future commercial development
Existing Use: Paved parking
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Baptist Health Center Schools and Support Center facility; zoned C-2
South – Mixed commercial uses (across Colonel Glenn road); zoned C-3 and C-4
East – Baptist Health Center Schools and Support Center facility; zoned C-2
West – Office/warehouse development (across Bowman Road); zoned POD
A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Bowman 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.
2. Per the Master Street Plan, a dedication of right-of-way of 10 ft. should be
dedicated for the future installation of an additional left turn lane.
B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The site is not located on a CATA bus route.
C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents within
300 feet who could be identified, and the John Barrow and SWLR United for
Progress Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 1.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3371-FF
2
D. LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the I-430 Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows
Public Institutional for this property. Public Institutional is designed for public and
quasi-public facilities that provide a variety of services to the community such as
schools, libraries, fire stations, etc. The applicant has applied for a rezoning from
C-2 Shopping Center District to C-3 General Commercial District, and a Land
Use Plan amendment is a separate item on this agenda.
Master Street Plan:
Colonel Glenn 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 Colonel Glenn since it is a
Principal Arterial. Bowman Road 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 Bowman Road
since it is a Minor Arterial. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way
and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site.
Bicycle Plan:
A Class II is shown along Bowman Road. A Class II bikeway is located on the
street as either a 5’ shoulder or six foot marked bike lane. Additional paving and
right-of-way may be required.
E. STAFF ANALYSIS:
Baptist Medical Systems, owner of the 1.6 acre property located at the northeast
corner of Colonel Glenn and Bowman Roads, is requesting to rezone the
property from “C-2” Shopping Center District to “C-3” General Commercial
District. The rezoning is proposed to allow future commercial development of the
site.
The property is part of a paved parking area, which serves the Baptist Health
Center Schools and Support Center facilities located within the building
immediately north of the proposed area of rezoning. The applicant has filed a
site plan review application for the overall Baptist Health property, to add a large
parking area north of the existing facility. This will compensate for the loss of
parking when the subject 1.6-acre property is redeveloped. The site plan review
application (Z-3371-GG) is on the July 14, 2011 Planning Commission agenda.
At that time, the Commission will be able to address issues related to access
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 1.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3371-FF
3
drives and parking for both the subject 1.6 acres and the remainder of the Baptist
Health property. Additionally, prior to a building permit being issued for
redevelopment of the proposed C-3 area of rezoning, a replat must be completed
to establish the subject 1.6 acre property as a separate lot.
The general area contains a mixture of zoning and uses. The Baptist Health
Center Schools and Support Center facilities and located north and east of the
proposed area of rezoning. A mixture of uses including convenience store, bank
and auto sales are located on the C-3/C-4 zoned property across Colonel Glenn
Road to the south. A large office/warehouse development is located across
Bowman Road to the west. A mobile home park is located on the R-2 zoned
property to the northwest.
The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Public Institutional
to recognize the existing Baptist Health facilities. A proposed Land Use Plan
amendment from Public Institutional to Commercial for the proposed 1.6 acre
area of rezoning is a separate item on this agenda.
Staff is supportive of the requested C-3 rezoning. Staff views the request as
reasonable. The property is located at the intersection of a principal arterial
(Colonel Glenn Road) and a minor arterial (Bowman Road). The proposed C-3
rezoning at the northeast corner of Colonel Glenn and Bowman Roads will mirror
the C-3 zoning at the southeast and southwest corners of the intersection, which
contain branch bank and convenience store developments respectively. Staff
believes the requested C-3 zoning is appropriate and will have no adverse
impact on the adjacent properties or the general area.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested C-3 rezoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 30, 2011)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item
and a recommendation of approval. There was no further discussion. The item was
placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff. The vote was
10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: LU11-18-01
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment – Ellis Mountain Planning District
Location: 12624 Lawson Road
Request: Office to Commercial
Source: Global Surveying Consultants, Inc., Paxton R. Singleton, P.S.
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
The applicant has requested this item be withdrawn from consideration. Staff is
supportive of this request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 30, 2011)
This item was placed on the consent agenda for withdrawal. A motion was
made to approve the consent agenda and the motion was passed with a vote
of 10 ayes and 1 absent.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 2.1 FILE NO.: Z-7978-A
Owner: LWW Properties, LLC
Applicant: Paxton Singleton, Global Surveying Consultants, Inc.
Location: West side of Lawson Road, at Lawson Cut-Off
Area: 1.57 Acres
Request: Rezone from O-3 to C-3
Purpose: Retail store development
Existing Use: Undeveloped
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant submitted a letter to staff on June 7, 2011 requesting this application be
withdrawn. The applicant has filed a PD-C rezoning request for this property, which
will appear on the July 14, 2011 Planning Commission agenda. Staff supports the
withdrawal request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 30, 2011)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter to staff on June 7,
2011 requesting this application be withdrawn. The applicant had filed a PD-C rezoning
request for this property, which was to appear on the July 14, 2011 Planning
Commission agenda. Staff supported the withdrawal request.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and withdrawn. The vote was 10 ayes,
0 noes and 1 absent.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 3 FILE NO.: Z-8669
Owner: Rutilo Gomez Martinez
Applicant: Rutilo Gomez Martinez
Location: East side of Calleghan Road, 1,200 feet
north of West Baseline Road
Area: 4.0 Acres
Request: Rezone from R-2 to R-7A
Purpose: Single-wide manufactured home placement
Existing Use: Undeveloped
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Single family residences and undeveloped property; zoned R-2
South – Single family residences and undeveloped property; zoned R-2
East – Undeveloped property; zoned R-2
West – Church and undeveloped property (across Calleghan Road); zoned R-2
A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No Comments.
B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The site is not located on a CATA bus route.
C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents within
300 feet who could be identified, and the Otter Creek, Crystal Valley and SWLR
United for Progress Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public
hearing.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8669
2
D. LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the Crystal Valley Planning District. The Land Use Plan
shows Residential Low Density for this property. Residential Low Density
provides for single family homes at densities not to exceed six dwelling units per
acre. The applicant has applied for a rezoning from R-2 Single Family to R-7A
Manufactured Home District to allow placement of one single-wide manufactured
home. This density is appropriate for the Residential Low Density category.
Master Street Plan:
Calleghan Road is a Collector. The Master Street Plan shows a proposed
Collector from Calleghan Road east to Colonel Miller Road. The primary function
of a Collector Street is to provide a connection from Local Streets to Arterials.
These streets 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.
E. STAFF ANALYSIS:
Rutilo Gomez Martinez, owner of the four (4) acre property located on the east
side of Calleghan Road, 1,200 feet north of Baseline Road, is requesting to
rezone the property from “R-2” Single Family District to “R-7A” Manufactured
Home District. The rezoning is proposed to allow placement of a 16 foot by 70
foot manufactured home on the property. The property is located outside the
Little Rock city limits, but within the City’s extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction. A
home which previously existed on the site has been removed.
The proposed manufactured home will be located near the southeast corner of
the property. It will be set back approximately 20 feet from the south side
property line and 30 feet from the rear (east) property line. The proposed home
will be located over 300 feet back from the front (west) property line and north
side property line. An 18 foot by 20 foot carport will be constructed on the north
side of the house, maintaining approximately the same rear (east) setback as the
proposed home. A new driveway, 20 feet in width (hard-packed surface), will be
constructed from Calleghan Road to the home, as required by the fire
department. All building setbacks will conform to ordinance requirements.
The proposed manufactured home will only have steps at each entry door.
There will be no porches/decks attached to the house.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8669
3
The applicant has constructed a new wood fence which encloses the property.
The fence along the front (west) property line ranges in height between six (6)
and seven (7) feet tall, with masonry columns. The fence is approximately six (6)
feet in height along the rear (east) and north/south side property lines. The fence
project contains a masonry wall entry area near the southwest corner of the site.
The masonry wall ranges in height from six (6) to eight (8) feet tall. That portion
of the fence within the front (west) twenty-five (25) feet of the property will require
a variance for increased fence height. As per Section 36-516 of the City’s Zoning
Ordinance, the maximum residential fence height within the front yard area (front
twenty-five (25) feet) is four (4) feet. Fences elsewhere on the lot are allowed
with a maximum height of six (6) feet. The applicant is requesting a fence height
variance for that portion of the fence located within the front (west) 25 feet of the
property.
All surrounding properties are zoned R-2. Single family residences, including
manufactured homes, are located to the north. A single family residence and
undeveloped property are located to the south. A church facility and additional
undeveloped property are located across Calleghan Road to the west. The
property to the east is also undeveloped. There are a number of other
manufactured homes in this general area along Calleghan Road, as well as to
the south along West Baseline Road.
The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Residential Low
Density. The requested R-7A zoning does not require a change to the Land Use
Plan.
The R-7A Zone District is a site plan review district. The following are the siting
criteria for manufactured homes in the R-7A District as per Section 36-262(d)(2)
of the City’s Zoning Ordinance:
a. A pitched roof of three (3) in twelve (12) or fourteen (14) degrees or greater.
b. Removal of all transport features.
c. Permanent foundation
d. Exterior wall finished in a manner compatible with the neighborhood.
e. Underpinning with permanent materials.
f. Orientation compatible with placement of adjacent structures.
g. Off-street parking per single-family dwelling structures.
The Central Arkansas Water comments are as follows:
• No objections. A water main extension will be needed to provide water
service to this property.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8669
4
• All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for
water service must be met.
• Contact Central Arkansas Water if fire protection or NEW metered water
service is required.
Staff is supportive of the requested R-7A rezoning. Staff views the request as
reasonable. As noted above, there are several other manufactured homes in
this general area on large lots. Most of these manufactured homes are
nonconforming and have existed as part of the neighborhood for a number of
years. Therefore, the placement of the manufactured home on the four (4)
acres along the east side of Calleghan Road is not out of character with the
neighborhood. The applicant has already made as substantial investment in
the neighborhood with construction of the new perimeter fencing. To staff’s
knowledge the proposed manufactured home will comply with the siting criteria
found in Section 36-262(d)(2) of the City’s Zoning Ordinance. Additionally, the
manufactured home complies with the minimum setback requirements for the
R-7A Zoning District. Staff believes the requested R-7A zoning will have no
adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. The R-7A zoning
will allow only one (1) manufactured home to be placed on the property. No
other residential structures/manufactured homes will be allowed.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested R-7A rezoning, and the variance to
allow the increased fence height.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JUNE 9, 2011)
Rutilo Gomez Martinez was present, representing the application. Staff presented the
rezoning request and explained the proposed manufactured home placement on the
site. Staff noted that the home met all setback requirements. Staff noted that a deck or
porch needed to be shown on the site plan, if desired. Staff also noted the siting criteria
for manufactured homes.
Staff noted that a portion of the existing fence which was recently constructed would
need a variance. This issue was briefly discussed. Staff also noted that the fire
department required a driveway from Calleghan Road to the proposed home.
After the discussion, the Committee forwarded the application to the full Commission for
resolution.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8669
5
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 30, 2011)
Staff informed the Commission that the application needed to be deferred based on the
fact that the applicant failed to complete the notification to surrounding property owners.
Staff supported deferral of the application to the August 11, 2011 Agenda.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the August 11, 2011
agenda. The vote was 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: Z-3826-B
NAME: H. D. Malone Funeral Home – Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 9910 Chicot Road
OWNER/APPLICANT: Summit Bank/Hosea D. Malone
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the
use of this existing O-1 zoned building and site for a
funeral home.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The site is located on the west side of Chicot Road, south of Baseline
Road, across from Ember Lane.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The O-1 zoned properties adjacent to the north and south are occupied by
single family residences. Single family neighborhoods extend to the west,
east and north. A variety of neighborhood scale commercial uses and
office uses are located along Chicot Road to the south. The applicant
proposes to utilize an existing nonresidential building with an existing
paved and screened parking lot for a funeral home business. Business
hours are proposed as Monday through Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. with
most funeral services being on Saturdays. The proposed use appears to
be compatible with the neighborhood.
All owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the SWLR United for Progress,
West Baseline and Chicot Neighborhood Associations were notified of this
request. At their June 6, 2011 meeting, SWLR United for Progress voted
to support the application.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
Parking requirements for funeral homes with chapel services are one (1)
parking space for every three (3) seats in the chapel area. This facility will
contain a small chapel are with about 30 seats, requiring 10 parking
spaces. Most funeral services will be held at other locations, such as at a
church. Only small services will be held at this site. The property contains
a paved parking lot with 29 parking spaces. There are two existing
driveways onto Chicot road and a driveway which circles around the
building.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3826-B
2
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
If the building rehabilitation exceeds fifty percent (50%) of the replacement
costs then the building must comply with the landscape and buffer
ordinances, as follows:
The zoning buffer ordinance requires a nine-foot (9’-0”) wide land use
buffer along the western perimeter of the site next to the residentially
zoned property. Seventy percent of this area must remain
undisturbed. If there is insufficient vegetation in this area, additional
landscaping will be required.
The zoning buffer ordinance requires an average nine-foot (9’-0”) wide
street buffer along Chicot Road. Currently, the site proposes zero.
Asphalt may need to be removed in conjunction with this building
application.
The Landscape Ordinance requires a nine-foot wide (9’-0”) perimeter-
landscaping strip around the site’s entirety. A variance from this
minimal requirement will require approval from the City Beautiful
Commission prior to the issuance of a building permit.
In addition to this minimal landscape area, screening is required to be
a six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face
side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings next to the
residentially zoned properties.
A franchise may be required for any/all landscaping or paving that is
located within the public right-of-way.
The Landscape Ordinance requires a minimum of 8 % of the paved
areas be landscaped with interior islands of at least 7 ½ feet in width
and 150 square feet in area. Proposed plan does not currently reflect
this minimum
The Landscape Ordinance requires a three-foot (3’) wide minimum
landscape strip between the parking lot(s) and the building, or in the
general area.
Curb and gutter or another approved border will be required to protect
landscaped areas from vehicular traffic.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3826-B
3
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Chicot Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal
arterial with alternative design standards. A dedication of right-of-way
forty-five (45) feet from centerline will be required. The centerline of
the Chicot Road right-of-way should be provided.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this project.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Centerpoint Energy: Approved as submitted.
AT&T (SBC): No comments received.
Water: No objections. All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect
at the time of request for water service must be met.
Contact Central Arkansas Water if additional fire protection or metered
water service is required or regarding the size and location of the water
meter.
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 PRZA, 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 (10) 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: Fire hydrants per code, maintain at least twenty (20)
foot wide access.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: Approved as submitted. This site is located on a CATA bus route.
Planning Division: No Comments.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3826-B
4
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JUNE 9, 2011)
The applicant, Hosea Malone, was present. Staff presented the item and noted
additional information was needed regarding signage, any new fencing, site
lighting and dumpster location. Staff asked if any additions to the building were
proposed, such as a canopy. The applicant was advised to provide a copy of the
bill of assurance. It was noted that no crematorium was requested and the
applicant had amended the application to eliminate use of the facility for any
events or meetings.
Public Works and Landscape Comments were discussed. It was noted that the
survey did not indicate the centerline of Chicot Road so it could not be
determined if additional right-of-way was needed. It was also noted that the
landscape requirements would be implemented if the remodeling of the building
exceeded 50% of the building’s replacement cost.
The applicant was advised to respond to submit responses the issues raised by
staff no later than Wednesday June 15, 2011. The Committee determined there
were no other issues and forwarded the item to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The O-1 zoned property located at 9910 Chicot is occupied by a vacant,
one-story, non-residential building and an asphalt-paved parking lot. Two
driveways provide access onto Chicot Road. The applicant is requesting
approval of a conditional use permit to allow use of the property for a funeral
home with grief counseling office.
Minor renovations will be made to accommodate the new use. The applicant
proposes to “spruce-up, clean-up” the site. Any remodeling costs will be below
50% of the building’s replacement value. An existing 4 ft. X 8 ft. X 10 ft. tall
ground sign is located at the front of the property. The applicant will utilize that
sign. Wall signage may be placed on the front façade of the building in the future.
No additional site lighting is proposed. No additions will be made to the building;
including no carport or canopy. No new fencing will be added. An existing 6 ft.
wood privacy fence and a chain-link fence with dense vegetation are located
along the perimeter of the site. No crematorium is proposed. A dumpster may
be placed on the site. If one is located on the site, it will be screened to comply
with ordinance standards and pick-up will be limited to daylight hours. The
business will operate Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. with most
funeral services being conducted on Saturdays. The building will contain only a
small (30± seat) chapel. Most funeral services will be conducted off-site, such as
at area churches.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3826-B
5
To staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues. A revised survey was
provided showing all required right-of-way was previously dedicated. The
applicant has contacted Public Works staff to begin the process of obtaining a
franchise for the existing sign. The 1983 bill of assurance for these lots permits
either residential, commercial or industrial use. The proposed use of this existing
nonresidential building for the indicated, small, quiet business appears to be an
appropriate use.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit, subject to
compliance with the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4, 5 and 6
of the agenda staff report.
2. If a dumpster is placed on the property, the following conditions apply:
a. Dumpster location must be approved by staff.
b. The dumpster must be screened to comply with ordinance standards.
c. Dumpster pick-up is to be limited to daylight hours.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 30, 2011)
The applicant was present. There were two (2) objectors and one (1) supporter
present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval, as outlined
in the “staff recommendation” above.
The applicant, H. D. Malone, addressed the Commission. He stated he would
make improvements to enhance the property and had received comments of
support from persons in the area.
Wanda Hayes, of 9910 Carrie Lane, spoke in opposition. She stated the original
O-1 zoning was supported by the neighbors with the understanding that the use
would be quiet office. She expressed concern that overflow traffic from the
funeral home would end up parking on neighborhood streets. She questioned
where the medical waste and chemicals associated with the business would go.
Commissioner Rector commented that the CUP included only a thirty (30) seat
chapel and any change would have to come back to the Commission as a
revision to the CUP.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3826-B
6
Mr. Malone responded that most of the funerals would be held off-site.
Pat Gee, Vice-president of SWLRUP, stated the organization had voted 29-1 at
its June 6, 2011 meeting to support the application. She stated the building had
been vacant for some time and it would be good to have a use occupy the
building.
In response to a question from Commissioner Brock, Mr. Malone stated all
embalming would be done off-site and he would have an appropriate contract
with Waste Management to properly dispose of any other waste.
Commissioner Nunnley stated he had concerns about the intensity of the use.
He mentioned family hours and questioned if Mr. Malone would be able to control
the number of people who would show up. He asked Mr. Malone if he would
commit to not holding church services in the building.
Mr. Malone responded that he had spoken with several ministers and any family
hours and funeral services that require much parking would be held at their
churches. He stated he had 22 years of experience and was able to determine
when a funeral would be expected to have a large number of attendees. He
committed to not holding church services in the building.
Mr. Santiago Cisneros, of 9909 Carrie Lane, spoke through his daughter and
stated he was opposed. He stated he lived next door to where the funeral home
was proposing to construct the new building and did not want a non-residential
use next door. Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, explained that the proposal
did not include building anything new and did not include the use of the
residential property adjacent to Mr. Cisneros.
Ms. Hayes stated she also had concerns about future use of the residential lot. It
was noted that any use of that lot was not part of this application and the property
could not be used without returning to the Commission.
A motion was made to approve the application, as amended to not allow church
services in the building. The motion was seconded and approved by a vote of
9 ayes, 1 noe and 1 absent.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: Z-4204-A
NAME: Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints –
Revised Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 13901 Quail Run Drive
OWNER/APPLICANT: Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints/
Gaskin Hill Norcross Architects
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
expansion of this existing church site and construction
of a picnic shelter. The property is zoned R-2.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The site is located on the south side of Quail Run Drive, one tract west of
Otter Creek Parkway.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The site is located within an area of mixed zoning and uses located at the
entrance to the Otter Creek Neighborhood. A church is located across
Quail Run to the north. A senior adult apartment development is adjacent
to the east. A large apartment complex is adjacent to the south. A
wooded green-space is adjacent to the west and single-family homes
extend farther west from that point. Other uses in the general area include
more apartments, condominiums, offices, mini-warehouses and small
shopping centers. The proposed picnic shelter will not affect the church’s
continued compatibility with the neighborhood.
Notice was sent to all owners of properties located within 200 feet of the
site, all residents within 300 feet who could be identified and the SWLR
United for Progress and Otter Creek Neighborhood Association. At their
June 6, 2011 meeting, SWLR United for Progress voted to support the
application.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
Access to the site is via two driveways off of Quail Run Drive. The site
contains paved parking for approximately, 221 vehicles. The proposed
picnic shelter does not affect the parking requirement for the church. One
parking space may be lost to provide area for a handicap accessible ramp
to the picnic shelter area. Otherwise, no changes will be made to the
parking lot and driveways.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4204-A
2
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
The zoning buffer ordinance requires a twenty-four (24) foot wide land use
buffer along the western perimeter of the site next to the residentially
zoned property. Seventy percent (70%) of this area is to remain
undisturbed. It appears that grading is being proposed within this area.
Additional evergreen trees maybe required helping screen the new
building from the housing next door.
In addition to this minimal landscape area, screening is required to be a
six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side
directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings next to the
residentially developed area.
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing
trees as feasible on this tree-covered site. Credit toward fulfilling
Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when properly
preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No Comments.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this project.
Entergy: No comments received.
Centerpoint Energy: Approved as submitted.
AT&T (SBC): No comments received.
Water: No objections. All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect
at the time of request for water service must be met.
Contact Central Arkansas Water if additional fire protection or metered
water service is required or regarding the size and location of the water
meter.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4204-A
3
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 PRZA, 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 (10) 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: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: Approved as submitted. This site is not located on a CATA bus
route.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JUNE 9, 2011)
Paul Melgren, of Gaskin Hill Norcross Architects, was present representing the
application. Staff asked the applicant to label on the site plan all trees to be
removed or preserved. The applicant was asked to indicate any new fencing and
to provide a signage plan for any new signage. Staff asked if there would be any
evening or nighttime use of the structure and if there would be any use of
amplified music or voice amplification associated with use of the structure. Staff
informed the applicant that a neighbor had called and expressed concern that the
picnic shelter would turn into a “hangout” that would create problems for the
neighbors. The applicant was asked to provide a response.
Landscape comments were noted.
The applicant was advised to provide responses to staff issues no later than
Wednesday, June 15, 2011. The Committee determined there were no other
issues and forwarded the item to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints occupies the R-2 zoned property
located at 13901 Quail Run Drive, in the Otter Creek Community. The church
site contains a single building; paved parking lots and lawn areas. The Planning
Commission approved the original conditional use permit for the church in 1984.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4204-A
4
The church is now requesting a revision to the original C.U.P. to allow for
construction of an open picnic shelter.
The 30 ft. X 60 ft. open picnic shelter is to be located in a lawn area on the east
side of the church. The structure will have a height of 14± feet to the ridge. A
total of seven (7) trees will be removed to accommodate the picnic structure.
The 24-foot wide zoning buffer on the east perimeter will be maintained. The
proposed grading in the buffer area is minimal work on the existing earthen berm
to divert site water away from adjacent properties. Over 70% of this area will
remain undisturbed. The existing stand of trees between the picnic shelter and
the east property line will remain. All other trees in the lawn area on the east
perimeter of the site will remain. There is an existing 6-foot wood privacy fence
along the east property line.
There will be occasional evening or nighttime use of the structure. It is
anticipated primary use of the structure will be daytime. Occasional amplified
music or voice amplification may be used. This is anticipated to be the exception
rather than the rule and will be kept to a minimum. In all cases sensitivity to the
neighbors will be a consideration. No built in PA system will be installed. No
new signage is proposed.
To staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues. The issue is being
returned to the Planning Commission, not so much because of the picnic shelter,
but because the church site expanded subsequent to the original 1984 approval.
After the C.U.P. was approved, the church acquired a sliver of property that was
located between the original church site and the senior adult residences adjacent
to the east. The picnic shelter is to be located on that portion of the church site
that was not included in the original 1984 approval. There is no bill of assurance
for this acreage tract.
Due to the proximity of residences to the east, the use of any sound amplification
must be done in a sensitive manner. Any speakers should be aimed away from
the residences and sound levels kept such that they do not disturb the neighbors.
A concern was voiced by a neighbor that the picnic shelter could create a
loitering problem. The church has responded that the issue will be monitored
and, if a problem arises, the church will take appropriate action to prevent such
occurrences.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit subject to compliance
with the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4, 5 and 6
of the agenda staff report.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4204-A
5
2. The use of any sound amplification associated with the picnic shelter is to be
done in a manner that is sensitive to abutting residences. Any speakers should
be aimed away from the residences and sound levels kept such that they do
not disturb the neighbors.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 30, 2011)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
item and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the “staff recommendation”
above. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved, including all staff comments and conditions, by a vote of
10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: Z-8416-A
NAME: Liberty Hill Missionary Baptist Church Parking Lot –
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 1215 S. Schiller Street
OWNER/APPLICANT: Liberty Hill Missionary Baptist Church/Patrick McGetrick
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the
expansion of an existing church parking lot onto these
two vacant, R-4 zoned lots.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The church is located on the southeast corner of West 12th and S. Schiller
Streets. The proposed parking lot expansion is located at the south end of
the church property, on the east side of S. Schiller Street.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The church is located in an area of mixed zoning and uses; including a
variety of residential uses, a beauty salon, Central High and the Central
High Visitors Center facilities. The property is outside of the Central High
DOD. Single-family residences are located to the south and east. A few
vacant lots, including these two, are scattered throughout the area. With
attention given to properly screening and landscaping, the proposed
parking lot expansion should be compatible with the neighborhood.
Notice was sent to all owners of properties located within 200 feet of the
site, all residents within 300 feet who could be identified and the Central
High and Capitol Hill Neighborhood Associations.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
An existing parking lot is located directly south of the church. Three (3)
driveways provide access to that parking lot. This proposal is to expand
the parking lot onto two (2) vacant lots adjacent to the south. Each of the
residential lots have a driveway; resulting in a total of five (5) driveways on
the site. The applicant proposes to reconfigure the existing driveways and
create one driveway for the new parking lot; resulting in a total of four (4)
driveways. Access will also be provided onto the alley, which will be
improved by the applicant. Additional parking is located east of the alley.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8416-A
2
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
The zoning buffer ordinance will require a land use buffer along the
southern perimeter of the site. Seventy percent (70%) of the area must
remain undisturbed. If sufficient vegetation is not present then additional
landscaping will be required to be planted within this land use buffer area.
Screening is required due to the residential use along the western
perimeter of the site. This screening is to be a six (6) foot high opaque
screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall,
or dense evergreen plantings. Preserved vegetation may suffice for this
screening requirement thus eliminating the need for an opaque fence.
This area is not to be thinned/cleared out and must provide a year around
screening to suffice.
An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing
trees as feasible on this site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance
requirements can be given when properly preserving trees of six (6) inch
caliper or larger.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and
circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. Only a total of
two (2) driveways can be installed to access the existing parking lot
and the proposed parking lot. The width of driveway must not exceed
thirty-six (36) feet.
2. At time of building permit issuance since the alley is being used for
access to the parking lots, the alley should be repaved providing a
width of twenty (20) feet of asphalt adjacent to the property.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this project.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Centerpoint Energy: Approved as submitted.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8416-A
3
AT&T (SBC): No comments received.
Water: No objections. All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect
at the time of request for water service must be met.
Contact Central Arkansas Water if additional fire protection or metered
water service is required or regarding the size and location of the water
meter.
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 PRZA, 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 (10) 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: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: Approved as submitted. A CATA bus route is located along 12th
Street.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JUNE 9, 2011)
Patrick McGetrick was present, representing the application. Staff presented the
item and noted additional information was needed regarding any future fencing,
site lighting and signage. The applicant was advised to provide a copy of the bill
of assurance. In response to a question, Mr. McGetrick stated he thought the
previously approved charter school was still operating in the church.
Public Works and Landscape Comments were discussed. Mr. McGetrick stated
he would get with Public Works staff to address the driveway issue. The
Committee determined it was appropriate to require a nine (9) foot wide land use
buffer on the south; based on the width of the new parking lot, not the overall
depth of the entire church site. Mr. McGetrick asked if the screening requirement
along the south perimeter could be waived if that neighboring property owner
requested such. Staff responded that the screening requirement could be
waived but the minimum landscaping requirements must be installed.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8416-A
4
The applicant was advised to submit responses to staff issues no later than
Wednesday, June 15, 2011. The Committee forwarded the item to the full
Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Liberty Hill Missionary Baptist Church is located at the southeast corner of West
12th and Schiller Streets. The church building is located on the corner and
parking is located south of the church, along the east side of Schiller Street. On
November 13, 2008, the Commission approved a conditional use permit to allow
a charter school to locate in a portion of the existing church building. The church
is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the extension of the
parking lot onto two (2) vacant residential lots adjacent to the south of the
existing parking lot. The existing parking lot driveways will be reconfigured and a
new driveway will be constructed. When the project is complete, there will
actually be one less driveway than currently exists on the site. For this reason
and due to the light traffic volume on Schiller Street, Public Works staff will
support a driveway spacing variance to allow the driveways as proposed.
The revised plan indicates the required landscape areas, as agreed to at
Subdivision Committee. No signage is proposed. The neighboring property
owner to the south has requested that screening not be installed. Landscaping
will be placed in this area as would typically be required in perimeter planting
strips. Lighting will be installed on existing poles at the corners of the property.
The lighting will be low-level and directed inward to the site. The century-old bill
of assurance for Centennial is handwritten and illegible but likely does not
address use issues.
To staff’s knowledge, there are no issues.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested C.U.P. subject to compliance with
the comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the agenda staff
report.
Staff recommends approval of a driveway spacing variance to allow the
driveways as proposed.
Staff recommends approval of a buffer/screening variance on the south perimeter
subject to that area being landscaped as typically required in a perimeter
landscape strip.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8416-A
5
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 30, 2011)
The applicant was present. There was one objector present. Staff presented the
item and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the “staff
recommendation” above.
Patrick McGetrick, the applicant, stated he would reserve his time to respond to
issues that might be raised by the objector.
Kinyonna Tilmon, of 1318 S. Summit St., spoke in opposition. She stated the
church had existing parking lots that were not being used. She questioned the
loss of green space.
Mr. McGetrick stated the lots were currently vacant. He stated two (2) of the four
(4) existing trees on the site would be saved. Mr. McGetrick stated the existing
parking was being re-striped which would result in the loss of some of the
spaces. He stated the church had expansion plans. He stated the new parking
would be landscaped and the alley would be improved.
In response to a question from Commissioner Nunnley, Mr. McGetrick stated the
expansion plans had not been formalized.
In response to a question from Commissioner Fountain, Mr. McGetrick stated the
alley would be paved and widened.
A motion was made to approve the application, including all staff comments and
conditions. The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: Z-8670
NAME: Sky Broadcasting and Management Event Center -
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 3915 S. University Avenue
OWNER/APPLICANT: Greater Missouri Builders, Inc./
Sky Broadcasting and Management
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the
use of the existing building on this C-3 zoned property
as an event center.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1. SITE LOCATION:
The site, the former Cinema 150 theater, is located on the east side of S.
University, just south of Asher Avenue.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The site is located within the commercial node established around the
Asher/Colonel Glenn/University intersection. Most all surrounding properties are
zoned C-3 and are occupied by a variety of commercial uses. The building was
previously occupied by a theater.
All owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site, all residents within
300 feet who could be identified and the SWLR United for Progress, Curran
Conway, Fair Park Neighborhood Associations and the University District were
notified of this request. At its June 6, 2011 meeting, SWLR United for Progress
voted not to support the application.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The building sits on a lot by itself. The lot is part of the overall Village Shopping
Center development and parking is shared within the development. The parking
is sufficient to accommodate the use.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No Comments on this use-only issue.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8670
2
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No Comments.
6. UTILITY AND FIRE DEPT. COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this project.
Entergy: Easement required of ten (10) feet UG (five (5) feet each side of
existing centerline) and thirty (30) feet OH (fifteen (15) feet each side of
centerline). Contact Entergy.
Centerpoint Energy: Approved as submitted.
AT&T (SBC): No comments received.
Water: No objections. All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the
time of request for water service must be met.
Contact Central Arkansas Water if additional fire protection or metered water
service is required or regarding the size and location of the water meter.
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 PRZA, 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 (10) 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: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: Approved as submitted. This site is located on a CATA bus route.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JUNE 9, 2011)
Amanda Whitaker, of Sky Broadcasting, was present representing the application. Staff
presented the item and noted additional information was needed regarding days and
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8670
3
hours of operation, signage and maximum occupancy of the facility based on different
types of events. Staff requested that the dumpster and other buildings be shown on the
plan. It was noted that the survey was outdated and a new survey was needed.
Ms. Whitaker responded that a new survey had been completed. Staff asked if there
was a cross-parking agreement between this site and the abutting properties within the
shopping center.
The Committee then discussed the use of the site as an event center. Commissioner
Rector informed Ms. Whitaker that the City had issues with other event centers and
most of those issues centered on the use of alcohol. He asked the applicant to provide
additional information on the proposed use of alcohol associated with the event center.
In response to a question from the Committee, Ms. Whitaker stated the facility was not
to be sub-leased to any other individuals.
The applicant was advised to submit responses to staff issues no later than
Wednesday, June 15, 2011. The Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The former Cinema 150 building occupies the .5 acre lot located at 3915 S. University
Avenue. The lot contains the 12,455 square foot theater building and two smaller
buildings that have been added to the site by the applicant. The lot is part of the overall
Village Shopping Center development and parking is shared within the development.
The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow use of the site
for an event center. The applicant submitted the follow description of activities planned
for the site:
The building will not be rented or leased to any outside promoters or third
party groups, nor will it be used to hold high school or college parties of
any type. 3915 S. University will be the location for creating a variety of
productions for future broadcast on KARZ (Comcast channel 9/Dish
channel 42). These productions shall include programs such as wrestling,
gospel and blues shows, talk shows, celebrity music and productions
geared toward high school students with current topics such as stop the
violence, drug use and current event discussions.
Signage consists of space on the former Cinema 150 marquee, which is part of the
Village Shopping Center ground sign adjacent to S. University Avenue. The Fire
Marshal’s office has established a total capacity for the building of 635 persons. The
applicant has requested to operate any of seven days a week, although it is unlikely
events will be staged every day. Seven days a week are requested to permit flexibility
in scheduling. Events will be over no later than 11:30 p.m. with move out to be
completed by 12:00 midnight.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8670
4
The 1994 bill of assurance states use of the structure must comply with City of Little
Rock Zoning Regulations.
The two (2) small buildings placed on the property serve as a ticket office and a
dressing room. There is no dressing room in the large building and the applicant states
use of the small ticket sales building saves heating and cooling the large building during
times no events are occurring.
The applicant states no cooking of foods takes place at the site; only prepared food and
soft drinks are sold. The applicant states “sky television studio has no plans to sell beer
or to apply for a liquor license.”
On February 15, 2011, the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No. 20,407 which
among other things, created a definition for event centers and established separation
requirements for such uses. Chapter 36, Section 36-107.(15). of the Code of
Ordinances reads as follows:
(15) Separation requirements for event centers shall be
determined by the planning commission so as not to adversely impact
the neighborhood. Event center review shall consider the following
additional requirement:
(a) An event center shall not be located within 750 feet of
the following:
(1) A church or other religious facility.
(2) A sexually-oriented business as defined by
Chapter 17 of the Code of Ordinances.
(3) A public or private elementary, secondary or
post-secondary school, a day care center or any
facility that operates programs for children or
youth.
(4) Any single-family or multifamily 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.
(b) For the purposes of Subsection (a) of this section,
measurement shall be made in a straight line, without
regard to intervening structures or objects, from the
nearest portion of a building or structure proposed for
occupancy as an event center to the nearest property
line of any use listed in subsection (a).
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8670
5
Although the site is located within what is primarily a commercial area, there are
apparently uses from subsection (a) above within 750 feet of the site. Coleman Place
Apartments are located approximately 500 feet to the east, behind the shopping center.
Chateau DeVille Apartments are located approximately 740 feet to the northwest,
across the Colonel Glenn/University intersection. UALR property is located
approximately 600 feet to the north, across Asher Avenue.
Staff believes the proposed use, as described by the applicant, could be an appropriate
use for the site. The business varies from the way other event centers which have, in
some cases, created issues, operate. The building will not be rented or leased to
outside promoters or third party groups, nor will it be used to hold high school or college
parties of any type. Events will be over no later than 11:30 p.m. with move-out to be
completed by 12:00 midnight. No beer or alcohol will be sold or distributed on the site.
As proposed, the facility will operate much as a theater, the previous occupant of the
building.
Staff believes it is appropriate to approve the C.U.P. with a report to be made to the
Planning Commission in six (6) months to assure that the use is in compliance with all
conditions and to determine if any issues have arisen that might cause the use to no
longer be considered appropriate for the site.
Although there are residential uses within 750 feet of the site, those uses are sufficiently
separated from this site by other commercial uses and distance so as not to be
impacted by this use, as proposed.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested C.U.P. subject to compliance with the
following conditions:
1. Compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4, 5 and 6 of
the agenda staff report.
2. The facility is to be operated as described by the applicant in the “staff analysis”
above.
3. The building is not to be rented or leased to any outside promoters or third parties.
4. The C.U.P. is limited to this applicant, sky broadcasting and management.
5. No beer or other alcohol are to be sold or distributed on site and no alcohol or
liquor license are to be applied for.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8670
6
6. In six (6) months. A report is to be made by staff to the Planning Commission, so
that the Commission may determine if the use is in compliance with all conditions
and if any issues have arisen that might cause the use to no longer be appropriate
for the site.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 30, 2011)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item
and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the “staff recommendation” above.
There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and
approved, including all staff comments and conditions, by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes
and 1 absent.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: Z-8671
NAME: Cosse Car Wash – Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 11400 West Markham Street
OWNER/APPLICANT: David and Pauline Charten/Kurt Cosse
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
construction of a car wash on this C-3 zoned lot.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The site is located on the north side of West Markham Street, one lot west
of Shackleford Drive.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The property is located in an area of mixed zoning and uses. A liquor
store, auto repair garage and auto sales business are located on the C-4
zoned property adjacent to the east. A utility substation and auto service
mall are located across Markham to the south. A large shopping center
with multiple tenants and outlots is located to the west. The C-3 zoned
property to the east contains office and restaurant uses. Several
multifamily developments are located to the north. The proposed use is
compatible with uses in the area.
Notice was sent to all owners of properties located within 200 feet of the
site, all residents within 300 feet who could be identified and the Beverly
Hills and Birchwood Neighborhood Associations.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
Access off of Markham will be via an access easement shared between
this lot and the lot adjacent to the east. A single driveway will access the
car wash lot off of the shared easement. There will be no direct driveway
access to Markham Street. A circular driveway will serve the car wash
tunnel. Three (3) vacuum islands will provide space for six (6) vehicles.
Two (2) employees will be on the site during hours of operation. There is
sufficient paved area to accommodate the customers and employees.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8671
2
The zoning buffer ordinance requires an average nine foot 9’) wide street
buffer along Markham Street.
The Landscape Ordinance requires a nine-foot (9’) wide perimeter
landscape strip around the sites entirety. A variance from this minimal
amount will require approval from the City Beautiful Commission prior to
the issuance of a building permit.
The Landscape Ordinance requires a three-foot (3’) wide minimum
landscape strip between the parking lot(s) and the building, or in the
general area.
In conjunction with this new project all asphalt and/or concrete that is not
necessary for the onsite flow of traffic should be removed as a part of this
application.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. The driveway access directions should be reversed due to the distance
of the south driveway to the curb line of Markham Street.
2. At the time of building permit, Markham Street will be required to be
widened to provide a left turn lane as required by the Master Street
Plan for minor arterial streets.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this project.
Entergy: Entergy will obtain easements to install necessary facilities for
service. Contact Entergy with any questions.
Centerpoint Energy: Approved as submitted.
AT&T (SBC): No comments received.
Water: No objections. All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect
at the time of request for water service must be met.
Contact Central Arkansas Water if additional fire protection or metered
water service is required or regarding the size and location of the water
meter.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8671
3
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 PRZA, 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 (10) 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: Fire hydrants per code, maintain at least twenty (20)
foot wide access.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: Approved as submitted. This site is located on a CATA bus route.
Planning Division: No Comments.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JUNE 9, 2011)
Patrick McGetrick was present, representing the application. Staff presented the
item and noted additional information was needed regarding signage, days and
hours of operation and site lighting. Mr. McGetrick was asked to locate the order
board, fencing and dumpster on the plan. Staff requested details on the
proposed vacuum islands. Staff asked that the plan more clearly indicate the
proposed curbing, paved areas and landscaped areas. Staff asked if the site
would be staffed. Staff asked who owned the property; that there were
conflicting names in the application.
Public Works and Landscape Comments were discussed. Mr. McGetrick stated
he would look at reversing the driveway directions and would meet with the
applicant and staff to discuss the street widening requirement. He stated this
would address the landscape issues.
Mr. McGetrick was advised to submit responses to staff issues no later than
Wednesday, June 15, 2011. The Committee forwarded the item to the full
Commission.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8671
4
STAFF ANALYSIS:
A conditional use permit is requested to allow for construction of an automatic car
wash facility on the vacant, C-3 zoned lot located at 11400 West Markham. The
lot is asphalt-paved from property line to property line and apparently; the lot was
at one time used in conjunction with an automobile sales business that was
located on the adjacent C-4 zoned property. Access to this lot is via a shared
driveway within an access easement. There is no separate, direct access to
Markham Street. A billboard is located on the southeast corner of the lot. The
billboard will remain.
The proposed development will consist of a 1,700 square foot, one-story,
“tunnel-type”, automatic car wash building and three (3), two-sided vacuum
islands. Existing asphalt will be removed in several areas to accommodate
landscape improvements. Signage will comply with that allowed in commercial
zones; a single ground-mounted sign on the Markham frontage and possible wall
signage on the south façade of the building, facing Markham Street. The site will
be open 7 days a week, from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. The site will be staffed by
one hourly attendant and one manager during all hours of operation. No new
fencing is indicated.
The applicant did submit a revised site plan and responses to issues raised at
Subdivision Committee. Lighting locations have been indicated. Areas of
asphalt to be removed and driveway curbing are now shown. The single access
point is near the north perimeter of the site, away from Markham Street. An
affidavit has been provided from the current property owners. The landscape
strip indicated along the north perimeter of the site is five (5) feet in width. It
needs to be widened to nine (9) feet to comply with Landscape Ordinance
requirements. There is sufficient space on the site to make this change. The
applicant has indicated he will make the required improvements to West
Markham Street.
To staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues. The use appears
appropriate for this site. The bill of assurance for the subdivision does not
address use issues.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit subject to
compliance with the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4, 5 and 6
of the agenda staff report.
June 30, 2011
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8671
5
2. Any site lighting is to be low-level and directional, aimed downward and into
the site.
3. Three (3) copies of a final plan are to be submitted to staff prior to a building
permit being requested.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 30, 2011)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff
presented the item and a recommendation of deferral as the applicant did not
complete the required notification. There was no further discussion. The item
was placed on the consent agenda and deferred to the August 11, 2011 meeting
by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
a
W
w
!1!
0
�0
V+
0
CD
J
t1.
�Q
ri
QJ
W
-0
Q)
c
L�J
50
m
W
U)
U
W
C3'
r
it
�j
1�
O
9.1
I
W
0
W
�Q
�I
-0
Q)
c
L�J
50
m
W
U)
U
W
C3'
r
it
�j
1�
O
9.1
I
W
0
W
�Q
M
L.lJ
0
D - .z
Lu
LLJ
�y� J 1 =
� r ' LL LL
{}'
--a
m
Q Lu
f ''� �^' °� 1..1..1
LL - a - L 0—
Lu
Of
-0
Q)
c
L�J
50
m
W
U)
U
W
C3'
r
it
�j
1�
O
9.1
I
W
0
W
�Q
June 30, 2011
There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting
was adjourned at 0:40 p.m.
Date f