Loading...
pc_10 15 2009sub LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION SUBDIVISION HEARING SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD OCTOBER 15, 2009 4:00 P.M. I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present there being nine (9) members present. II. Members Present: Pam Adcock “Goose” W. Changose Troy Laha Jerry Meyer Obray Nunnley, Jr. William Rector Billy Rouse Candice Smith Jeff Yates Members Absent: J. T. Ferstl Chauncey Taylor City Attorney: Cindy Dawson III. Approval of the Minutes of the September 3, 2009 Meeting of the Little Rock Planning Commission. The Minutes were approved as presented. LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION SUBDIVISION AGENDA OCTOBER 15, 2009 OLD BUSINESS: Item Number: File Number: Title: A. Z-8470 Ramirez Short-form PCD, located at 3723 West 98th Street. B. Z-7119-A USA Drug - the Ranch - Short-form PD-C, located on the Northeast corner of Cantrell Road and Ranch Drive. C. S-46-JJ Lot 134R Overlook Park Addition Replat, located at 27 Overlook Circle. D. Z-6323-M Lot 7 the Village at Rahling Road Revised Short-form PCD, located on the Southeast corner of Rahling Road and Chenal Parkway. E. Z-4343-W Lot 1 Tract A The Ranch Subdivision Revised Short-form PCD, located at 16900 Cantrell Road. F. Z-6532-E The Enclave at Chenal Heights Long-form PD-R, located on the Northeast corner of Chenal Heights Drive and Chenal Valley Drive. G. LU09-09-02 A Land Use Plan amendment at 3517 West 25th Street from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential. G.1. Z-8486 3517 West 25th Street Short-form POD, located at 3517 West 25th Street. H. Z-8487 Diversions Short-form PCD and Alley Abandonment, located at 2611 Kavanaugh Boulevard. Agenda, Page Two NEW BUSINESS: I. SITE PLAN REVIEW: Item Number: File Number: Title: 1. S-1640 Supreme Fixture Company Subdivision Site Plan Review, located at 11900 Vimy Ridge Road. 2. Z-5936-I The Promenade at Chenal Revised Zoning Site Plan Review, located on the Northwest corner of LaGrande Drive and Chenal Parkway. II. PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS: Item Number: File Number: Title: 3. Z-4411-H Pleasant Ridge Towne Center Lot 3B Revised Long-form PCD, located at 11525 Cantrell Road. 4. Z-5967-C Boykens Revised Short-form POD, located at 5819 Young Road. 5. Z-6446-C Robertson Short-form POD, located at 14116 Taylor Loop Road. 6. Z-4565-B Lot 2 Kanis/Shackleford Subdivision Short-form PCD, located West of Kaufman Road in the 10700 Block of Kanis Road. 7. Z-8115-B 1422 Townhomes Short-form PD-R Time Extension, located on the Northwest corner of 15th and Rock Streets. October 15, 2009 ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: Z-8470 NAME: Ramirez Short-form PCD LOCATION: 3723 West 98th Street DEVELOPER: Jose Able Ramirez 3723 West 98th Street Little Rock, AR 72209 ENGINEER: Hope Engineering 322 North Market Street Benton, AR 72015 AREA: 2.45 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family and Non-conforming Commercial Automotive Repair ALLOWED USES: Single-family and Automotive Repair PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: Single-family – Manufactured Homes, Automotive Body Repair VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a rezoning of the property located at 3723 West 98th Street to recognize existing uses. The property has a non-conforming status to allow the uses as exist today. The property currently contains eight (8) mobile homes fronting 98th Street, a pre-existing commercial building and a storage building. The commercial building sits on the property facing Hilaro Springs Road and is operating as an automotive body repair shop. The building is 30-feet by 57-feet containing 1,710 square feet. The storage building is located along the southern perimeter of the site and is approximately 50-feet by 30-feet and will be used to store building materials from the owner’s job sites. A 15-feet October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8470 2 by 30-feet addition was recently added to the storage building resulting in an additional 450 square feet of space. The owner did not secure permits to allow the addition. The site is currently under enforcement for the addition. The automotive body repair shop will operate from 8:00 am to 5:30 pm Monday through Friday and from 8:00 am to 3:00 pm on Saturday. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains eight (8) mobile homes, an auto body repair shop and a new building constructed along the southern property line constructed with overhead garage doors. There are a number of vehicles located outside the auto body repair shop in various states of disrepair. There is a gated entrance and a screening fence located along Hilaro Springs Road adjacent to the auto repair activity. West of the site are a number of manufactured homes. North of the site are site built single-family homes. East, across Hilaro Springs Road, are single-family homes and an undeveloped wooded area. Hilaro Springs Road is a two lane road with no sidewalk and open ditches for drainage. West 98th Street is a substandard chip-seal roadway with no sidewalk and open ditches for drainage. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area property owners. All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site, Southwest Little Rock United for Progress and the Upper Baseline Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Hilaro Springs 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. Due to the proposed use of the property, the Master Street Plan specifies that West 98th Street for the frontage of this property must meet commercial street standards. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 3. A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of Hilaro Springs Road and West 98th Street. 4. With site development, provide the design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to Hilaro October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8470 3 Springs Road including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. The new back of curb should be located 29.5 feet from centerline. 5. With site development, provide the design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to W. 98th Street including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. The new back of curb should be located 15.5 feet from centerline. 6. With site development, provide the design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct improvements to the Hilaro Springs Rd and West 98th Street intersection with the planned development. West 98th Street should be realigned to connect with Hilaro Springs Road at a 90 degree angle. 7. 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). 8. If the building on the south property line is new, the stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan. 9. Street Improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction. 10. Streetlights are required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Provide plans for approval to Traffic Engineering. Streetlights must be installed prior to platting/certificate of occupancy. Contact Traffic Engineering 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information. 11. Obtain a franchise agreement from Public Works (Bennie Nicolo, 371-4818) for the private improvements located in the right-of-way. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements for this project. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8470 4 hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the Developer's expense. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Geyer Springs East Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Residential Low Density for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial Development to recognize an existing mobile home and commercial development. Since the request is to recognize an existing condition and does not propose to add or change use, no change to the Land Use Plan is proposed. Master Street Plan: Hilaro Springs 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 Hilaro Springs since it is a Minor Arterial. West 98th Street is a Local Street. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Local Streets which are abutted by non-residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes are considered as “Commercial Streets”. These streets have a design standard the same as a Collector. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes planned for the immediate vicinity. Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the Upper Baseline Neighborhood Plan. The Neighborhood and Housing Revitalization Goal states: “Preserve residential quality of neighborhood--no daycares, cottage industries, etc.” Landscape: 1. All vehicular use areas will require landscaping at the time a building permit is issued to rehabilitate the site if the rehabilitation on the property exceeding October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8470 5 fifty (50) percent of the current replacement cost. At such time fifty (50) percent of the existing vehicular use area must be brought into compliance with the landscape ordinance requirements and must continue to full compliance on a graduated scale based upon the percentage of rehabilitation cost. Any new paved area and/or vehicular use areas are required to comply with the typical landscape ordinance requirements. 2. Commercial uses must provide buffers where abutting any use or zoning except office, commercial or industrial. All sites developed, modified or enlarged must provide a land use buffer(s) as follows: Side property lines at six (6) percent of the average width of the lot on both sides; Rear property lines at six (6) percent of the average depth of the lot; The minimum dimension is nine (9) feet in all instances; The maximum dimension required is fifty (50) feet in all instances. 3. Street buffers are required in all instances. All sites developed, modified or enlarged must provide street buffers as follows: All street property lines at six (6) percent of the average depth of the lot; The minimum dimension must be one-half (1/2) the full width requirement but in no case less than nine (9) feet. The maximum dimension required is fifty (50) feet. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 2, 2009) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the request stating there were a few outstanding technical issues in need of addressing prior to the item being forwarded to the full Commission for final action. Staff questioned the length of time the auto repair business had been operating from the site. Mr. Ramirez stated he purchased the property a year ago and the business was in operation at that time. Staff questioned the improvements completed to the existing building. Mr. Ramirez stated he had increased the southern building with a very small addition approximately 25 feet wide and the length of the building. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated street improvements to Hilaro Springs Road and West 98th Street were required with the approval of the rezoning request. Staff stated it was possible for the City to grant a hardship if the cost of street construction exceeded the cost of the improvements. Staff stated a cost estimate prepared by an engineer for the street construction was required to allow the City to determine if the hardship was applicable. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated all new vehicular use areas would require landscaping in compliance with Chapter 15 or the City’s landscape ordinance. Staff also stated land use and street buffers were required with any redevelopment of the site. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8470 6 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 has provided staff with additional information addressing concerns raised at the July 2, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The additional information includes an engineering analysis outlining the street construction cost as requested by staff to determine if a financial hardship exist regarding the required street improvements. Section 30-284 regarding financial hardship states projects other than subdivisions may require off-street improvements that constitute a substantial portion of total project cost. The public works department may determine that a project involves a financial hardship and require an in-lieu cash contribution not to exceed fifteen (15) percent of the estimated total development cost. The engineers estimate indicates the boundary street improvements are in excess of $179,500.000. The allowance of the fifteen percent cash contribution based on the engineers estimate is $26,968.50. The site is currently zoned R-2, Single-family and was developed prior to the City annexing the site. The site has a history of residential and non-residential uses and was allowed a non-conforming status as it existed at the time of annexation. Section 36-151 outlines the purpose of nonconformities and exceptions to allow nonconformities. The ordinance states the section is to establish regulations and limitations for exceptions to the continued existence of uses, lots and structures which were established prior to the effective date of the zoning ordinance which do not conform to the provisions of Chapter 36. Such nonconformities may continue, but the provisions of the division are designed to curtail enlargement or expansion of such nonconformities and to encourage their eventual elimination in order to preserve the integrity of the zoning districts and the regulations by Chapter 36. The ordinance states any nonconforming use, structure or lot which legally existed prior to the adoption of this section of the zoning ordinance or any use, structure or lot which has been rendered nonconforming by the provisions of Chapter 36 may continue to be utilized in the same fashion as existed prior to the adoption of the ordinance. Any conforming use, structure or lot legally existing under the provisions shall not be rendered nonconforming by action of the city, county, or state of Arkansas in the acquisition of property for street or drainage right-of-way. The ordinance also states if an application is made for rezoning, the applicant must submit a planned development unless agreeing to satisfy building setbacks October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8470 7 and needed right-of-way to current City ordinance and the Master Street Plan standards. The ordinance states a nonconforming use shall not be extended, expanded, enlarged or increased in intensity to any structure or land area other than that occupied by such nonconforming use on the effective date of the ordinance, or any amendment which causes such use to become nonconforming and any nonconforming structure may be enlarged, maintained, repaired or altered; provided, however, that no such enlargement, maintenance, repair or alteration shall either create an additional nonconformity or increase the degree of the existing nonconformity of all or any part of such structure. The site is not proposed with signage but staff would recommend if signage is proposed and allowed signage be limited to signage allowed in office and institutional zones. Staff feels the allowance of a ground sign six (6) feet in height and sixty-four (64) square feet in area for the commercial aspect of the development is sufficient to identify the uses. There is to be no signage on West 98th Street on the portion of the site occupied by the manufactured homes. The request is to recognize the existing uses on the site and allow the building expansion made to the southern building to remain. The property currently contains eight (8) mobile homes fronting West 98th Street, a pre-existing commercial building and a storage building used by the owner as storage for materials related to his contracting business. There are no changes proposed to the manufactured homes. The applicant requests in the future upgrades to the manufactured homes be allowed. The storage building is located along the southern perimeter of the site and is approximately 50-feet by 30-feet and will be used to store building materials from the owner’s job sites. A 15-feet by 30-feet addition was recently added to the storage building resulting in an additional 450 square feet of space. The owner did not secure permits to allow the addition. The site is currently under enforcement for the addition. The commercial building sits facing Hilaro Springs Road and is operating as an automotive body repair shop. The building is 30-feet by 57-feet containing 1,710 square feet. The automotive body repair shop will operate from 8:00 am to 5:30 pm Monday through Friday and from 8:00 am to 3:00 pm on Saturday. Staff is supportive of allowing the site to continue to operate with the hours of operation indicated above and limiting the approved uses to those identified in this write-up. Staff supports the expansion of the storage building as currently constructed and the allowance of the issuance of the final certificate of October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8470 8 occupancy for the building subject to the applicant receiving all necessary permits from the City and payment of all filing fees associated with the building permit to the City. Based on the construction cost estimates staff is supportive of allowing the payment of an in-lieu contribution of fifteen (15) percent for the required street development cost. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding technical issues associated with the request. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined is paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. 2. There is to be no storage of inoperable or wrecked vehicles on the site. 3. There is to be no outside storage of vehicle parts, materials or equipment. 4. All uses must take place within the enclosed building. 5. A six foot opaque screen must be installed along the western perimeter of the entire site, where adjacent to residentially zoned or used property Staff recommends payment of an in-lieu contribution for the required street construction at a rate of fifteen percent of the total development cost. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 23, 2009) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had failed to respond to comment raised at the July 2, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred to the September 3, 2009, public hearing. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for deferral as recommended by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 3, 2009) The applicant was not present. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating they had concerns with portions of the application request and requested the item be deferred to the October 15, 2009, public hearing. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8470 9 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: In the staff write-up dated September 3, 2009, staff indicated the applicant’s cash contribution for the street construction would be $26,968.50. This amount is incorrect. The cash contribution should have been calculated on the actual cost of construction of the building and not the cost of street construction. The applicant indicated approximately $4,000.00 was spent on the building construction resulting in a contribution of $600.00. The City Attorney’s office has reviewed Public Works request for right of way dedication and the in-lieu contribution and determined since only a portion of the site is being used as a non-residential use this is the only portion of the property the City should consider rezoning. There are five (5) buildings located on the site currently being used for non-residential purposes. There are three (3) buildings associated with the automobile repair business and two (2) buildings being used by the owner as storage. The southern most building will be used to house the owners personal RV. There will be no commercial activity allowed within this building. Within the area proposed for rezoning the right of way for Hilaro Springs Road is in place. Based on the current request and no additional activity on the site the applicant will not be required to provide an in-lieu contribution or any additional right of way dedication for Hilaro Springs Road or for West 98th Street. This will nullify Public Works comments within the review with the exception of comments 4, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11. Staff continues to support the request to rezone the property to recognize the existing non-residential use on the site. The automotive repair is limited to the three (3) buildings located along the western perimeter with the automotive repair activity being limited to the center building and storage being in the northern and southern buildings. All staff comments and conditions continue to apply as indicated in the above staff write-up and recommendation. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 15, 2009) The applicant was not present. There were registered objectors present. Chairman Yates requested the applicant come to the podium to determine if the applicant wanted to pursue the application request based on the number of Commissioners present. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8470 10 Mr. Ramirez was not present. There was a spirited discussion by the Commission as to the options available. Deputy City Attorney Cindy Dawson stated the Commission’s By-laws allowed a deferral if the applicant was not present. She stated her concerns were with due process. She stated without the applicant present to respond to comments made there was a potential for the City to be sued for lack of due process. She stated fairness and equity were also concerns. She stated the Citizens which had come to the previous two meetings had been impositioned and she did understand the Commission’s frustration. Commissioner Adcock questioned if the citizens were unable to attend the next meeting where was there fairness and equity. Ms. Dawson stated the Commission could defer the item at the next public hearing if there were circumstances that warranted a deferral of the item including if the citizens were unable to attend the meeting if the Commission chose to do so. A motion was made to defer the item to the December 3, 2009, public hearing. The motion carried by a vote of 6 ayes, 2 noes and 3 absent. October 15, 2009 ITEM NO.: B FILE NO.: Z-7119-A NAME: USA Drug - the Ranch - Short-form PD-C LOCATION: Located on the Northeast corner of Cantrell Road and Ranch Drive DEVELOPER: USA Drug 2100 Brookhaven Drive Little Rock, AR 72202 SURVEYOR: White Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 1.67 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: PD-O ALLOWED USES: Bank PROPOSED ZONING: PD-C PROPOSED USE: Drug Store – C-2 uses as alternative uses VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 18,635 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on February 5, 2002, rezoned the site from C-2, Shopping Center District to PD-O. The site contained 1.67-acres and was approved to allow the construction of a bank. A common access easement and drive shown on the northern and eastern boundaries of the lot allowed access to the site. The access easements were proposed as right-turn movement only from and onto Cantrell Road. A deceleration lane and acceleration taper was proposed on Cantrell Road. A variance from the minimum driveway spacing criteria was approved with the request for Ranch Drive. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7119-A 2 A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The property located at the northeast corner of Cantrell Road and Ranch Drive is proposed for rezoning from PD-O to PD-C to allow construction of a new USA Drug Store. The lot is an existing platted lot containing 1.67 acres. The site is proposed developed with a building containing 14,974 square feet and 64 parking spaces. The hours of operation are proposed from 6 am to 11 pm daily. The request includes the allowance of C-2, Shopping Center District uses as allowable alternative uses for the property subject to the parking matching the proposed use. The site is located within the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The site exists with less than the typically two-acre minimum lot size development standard established by the Overlay. The site plan also indicates the building constructed with less than the 40 foot typical rear building setback also established by the Overlay. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant and cleared. Other uses in the area include two large office buildings, Leisure Arts to the north and AT & T to the west; a Texaco Quick Shop to the east; and single-family residential south of Cantrell Road. South of the site at the intersection with Drew Drive a formerly single-family structure has been converted to a veterinary clinic. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. All property owners located within 200 feet, all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site, the Coalition of West Little Rock Neighborhoods, the Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association, the Chevaux Property Owners Association, the Johnson Ranch Neighborhood Association and the Tulley Cove Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Cantrell Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial. Dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline will be required. 2. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. Sidewalks are required to be installed adjacent to Cantrell Road and Ranch Drive. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7119-A 3 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). 5. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. 6. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. 7. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES stormwater permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 8. On site striping and signage plans should be forwarded to Public Works, Traffic Engineering for approval with the site development package. 9. Streetlights are required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Provide plans for approval to Traffic Engineering. Streetlights must be installed prior to platting/certificate of occupancy. Contact Traffic Engineering 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information. 10. Obtain a franchise agreement from Public Works (Bennie Nicolo, 371-4818) for the private improvements located in the right-of-way. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available to this project. Entergy: A ten-foot overhead or a thirty-foot under ground easement is required along Ranch Drive and Cantrell Road. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered connections off the private fire system. Due to the nature of this facility, installation of an approved reduced pressure zone backflow preventer assembly (RPZ) is required on the domestic water service. This assembly must be installed prior to the first point of use. Central Arkansas Water (CAW) requires that upon installation of the RPZA, successful tests of the assembly must be completed by a Certified Assembly Tester licensed by the State of Arkansas and approved by October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7119-A 4 CAW. The test results must be sent to CAW's Cross Connection Section within ten days of installation and annually thereafter. Contact the Cross Connection Section at 377-1226 if you would like to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this project. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the Developer's expense. Please submit plans for water facilities 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. Fire sprinkler systems, which do not contain additives such as antifreeze, shall be isolated with a double detector check valve assembly. If additives are used, a reduced pressure zone backflow preventer shall be required. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #25 – the Highway 10 Express Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Pinnacle Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Development-Commercial to allow construction of a pharmacy. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is a Principal Arterial. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Cantrell Road since it is a Principal Arterial. Ranch Road is a Local Street. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Local Streets, which are abutted by non-residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes, are considered as “Commercial Streets”. These streets have a design standard the same as a Collector. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7119-A 5 Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes shown in the immediate vicinity. Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is not covered by a Neighborhood Action Plan. Landscape: 1. The site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 2. The landscape ordinance requires a nine-foot (9’) wide landscape strip along the northern property line. The City Beautiful Commission must approve a variance for any lesser amount prior to the issuance of a building permit. 3. The landscape ordinance requires a minimum of eight percent (8%) of the paved areas be landscaped with interior islands of at least seven and one-half feet (7 ½’) in width and 150 square feet in area. These interior islands are to evenly distributed throughout the site. 4. A small amount of building landscaping will be required in conjunction with this request. 5. This site is located along Arkansas Highway 10; therefore, related to development standards of the Overlay the following are required: a. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. b. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. 6. 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 preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (May 21, 2009) Mr. Tim Daters of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request. Staff presented the item stating the lot was an existing platted lot and the final plat for the lot was executed in 2002. Staff stated the property was located within the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. Staff requested the site plan include the total sign height and sign area allowed per the Overlay. Staff also questioned if electronic signage would be used within the development. Staff stated a minimum rear yard landscape strip of nine feet was required along October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7119-A 6 the northern perimeter. Staff also stated the Overlay required the placement of a forty foot landscape strip along Cantrell Road. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the Stormwater Detention Ordinance would apply to the future development of the site. Staff also stated streetlights were required to be installed prior to the issuance of the final certificate of occupancy for the new construction. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated a minimum landscape strip of nine feet was required along the common access drive to the north. Staff stated a small amount of building landscaping was required. Staff stated the site would require the placement of an automatic irrigation system and a landscape plan stamped with the seal of a registered landscape architect would be required at the time of development. 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 few of the issues raised at the May 28, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised plan indicates a minimum landscape strip of fifteen (15) feet along the northern perimeter, where adjacent to the access easement, and the placement of a forty (40) foot landscape strip along Cantrell Road. The plan indicates a single ground mounted monument sign will be located within the front yard landscape area. The sign is proposed with a maximum height of six (6) feet and a maximum sign area of seventy-two (72) square feet. Electronic signage is proposed incorporated into the ground-mounted sign. Building signage will comply with the typical standards allowed in commercial zones or a maximum of ten (10) percent of the façade area abutting a public right of way. The development is proposed on an existing 1.67-acre lot. The lot was final platted in February 2002. Access easements and drives have been constructed on the property’s eastern and northern perimeters. Public streets abut the western and southern perimeters not allowing for additional land area to be secured to increase the lot size. The site plan indicates the construction of a 14,974 square foot building and 62 parking spaces. The ordinance would typically require the placement of 49 parking spaces to serve the retail use. The applicant is requesting alternative uses as allowed in the C-2, Shopping Center Zoning District subject to the use October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7119-A 7 matching the available parking on the site per Section 36-502 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance. The site plan indicates a building area of 20.6 percent and paved area of 42.6 percent. A minimum of 36.8 percent of the site will be landscaped. The landscaping provided is more than adequate to address Section 36-460 (h)(7) of the City’s Zoning Ordinance which requires a minimum of ten (10) percent of the gross planned commercial mixed use district, planned commercial district (PDC) or planned office district (POD) area to be designated as landscaped open space not to be used for streets or parking. The development is indicated with a front yard-building setback of one hundred (100) plus feet and a side yard setback of fifty-five (55) feet along the eastern perimeter and eighty (80) plus feet along the western perimeter. The rear yard building setback is located fifteen (15) feet from the property line adjacent to a common access easement. The Highway 10 Design Overlay District states a minimum rear yard setback of forty (40) feet is typically required. The Overlay further states for commercial developments and multiple building sites, whether on one (1) or more platted lots, the regulations apply to the development as an entire tract rather than to each platted lot. Commercial developments and multiple building sites are to be reviewed by the City through a site plan review process to illustrate compliance with the ordinance. The site is located within the Ranch Subdivision which has developed over the years with a unified development plan through previous zoning of the property. Staff feels the site plan is indicated complying with the spirit of the Overlay ordinance. Staff feels with the placement of the rear yard setback the minimum landscape strip can be achieved and the building location allows for visual separation between the structure and the adjacent access easement. Landscaping and landscaping treatment will comply with the typical standards of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. A water sprinkler system will be provided to water landscaped areas and maintain planted materials. Trees to be planted will be consistent with species in the area. A tree will be planted as required by the Overlay or will be planted a minimum of twenty (20) feet apart and be a minimum of two (2) inches in diameter from the ground at the time of planting. The site plan includes a note concerning parking lot lighting stating parking lot lighting will be designed and located in such a manner so as to not disturb the scenic appearance of the roadway and preserve the corridor. Lighting will be directed to the parking areas and not reflect into the adjacent neighborhoods. The following list the Highway 10 Design Overlay standards and the applicant’s proposal related to each item: October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7119-A 8 Highway 10 DOD Requirements: Applicant’s proposal: Lot size. There shall be a minimum development tract size of not less than two (2) acres. The lot exists containing 1.67 acres. The final plat for the lot was executed on February 20, 2002. Front yard. All principal and accessory buildings or structures are required to have a one-hundred-foot building setback from the property line abutting Highway 10. The building is proposed with a front yard setback of 100-feet. Rear yard. Rear yard shall not be less than forty (40) feet. The building is proposed within a commercial development with the rear of the building abutting an access easement. The rear yard of the building is proposed with a fifteen (15) foot rear yard setback. Side yard. Side yard shall not be less than thirty (30) feet. The side yard setbacks are proposed in excess of the typically thirty (30) foot requirement. Landscaping treatment. Landscaped areas shall attempt to incorporate existing on-site trees and shrubbery into the landscaping scheme and the plans shall indicate such incorporation. There are no existing trees or shrubs located on the site. Landscaped areas shall have water sprinkler systems to maintain plant materials. The development will provide a water sprinkler system to maintain plant materials. Erosion retardant vegetation shall be used on all cuts and fills. The site will not require any cuts or fills. Tree species to be planted within this corridor should be consistent with other species present. Tree species to be planted will be consistent with other species present. The Highway 10 frontage (front yard) shall consist of a minimum of forty (40) feet of landscaped area exclusive of right-of-way. The landscaped area shall contain organic and/or combined man-made/organic features as berms, brick walls and dense The site will maintain a forty (40) foot landscape area exclusive of the right of way. The screening of the parking area will be consistent with screening requirements of the Overlay. A berm, wall or dense plantings will be provided within October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7119-A 9 plantings such that vehicular use areas are screened when viewed from an elevation of forty-two (42) inches above the elevation of the adjacent street. Alternative screening methods and designs must be approved by the plans review specialist. Appeals from the staff will be directed to the planning commission. Within the landscaped area trees shall be planted or be existing at least every twenty (20) feet and have a minimum of two (2) inches in diameter when measured twelve (12) inches from the ground at time of planting. Where a developer demonstrates that this requirement will constitute an undue hardship, a landscaped area exclusive of right-of-way may consist of a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet. In those instances only, a half-berm shall be constructed which is a minimum of three (3) feet in height with tree plantings as required herein; provided however, that this provision may only be applied to a maximum of twenty (20) percent of the highway frontage affected in the plans submitted. the front yard landscape area. Rear and side yards shall have a landscaped buffer averaging a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet from the property line. Where such yards abut a street right-of- way, a fifteen-foot landscaped strip shall be required adjacent to land zoned office and residential. A seven-foot landscaped strip shall be required when adjacent to lands zoned commercial. The rear yard shall have a minimum landscape strip adjacent to the access easement of nine (9) feet, consistent with landscaping strips provided in similar type situations. Along the western perimeter, where adjacent to a street right of way, a minimum fifteen (15) foot landscape strip will be provided due to the office zoning located across the right of way of Ranch Drive. Signage. Signage shall comply with the provisions of Article X of Chapter 36 of the Little Rock Code of Ordinances, except as follows: Building signage will comply with signage allowed in Chapter 36 of the Little Rock Code of Ordinances. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7119-A 10 Commercial development signage. Signage identifying the commercial development shall not exceed ten (10) feet in height and one hundred (100) square feet in area. All signs that are ground- mounted shall be of a monument type design. These signs may be installed in the landscaped area of the front and side yards. Commercial building signage. Each separate commercial building will be allowed a single monument ground- mounted sign located on the building site or in the landscaped front yard of the commercial development. The sign shall be a maximum of six (6) feet in height and seventy-two (72) square feet in area. The development is proposed with a single ground mounted monument style sign located within the front yard landscape area. The sign will be a maximum of six feet in height and a maximum sign area of seventy-two square feet. The development will utilize electronic signage. Curb cuts. Maximum, one (1) curb cut per three hundred (300) feet and no curb cut closer to an intersection than one hundred (100) feet. The development will utilize an existing curb cut from Cantrell Road. This curb cut is a service and access easement serving additional lots within this commercial development. Lighting. Parking lot lighting shall be designed and located in such manner so as not to disturb the scenic appearance preserved in this corridor. Lighting should be directed to the parking areas and not reflected into the adjacent neighborhoods. Lighting shall comply with the DOD standards. Lighting will be directed to the parking areas and not reflect into the adjacent neighborhoods. Building sites. The maximum number of buildings per commercial development shall be measured both by minimum tract size and minimum frontage as follows: One (1) building every two (2) acres. The site contains 1.67 acres. There is one building proposed on this tract. Commercial developments and multiple building sites. In the case of a commercial development or other development involving multiple building sites, whether on one (1) or more platted lots, the above described regulations shall apply to the A single building is proposed on this site. The Ranch Development has been developing with commercial and office uses through a unified development plan established by the previous zoning. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7119-A 11 development as an entire tract rather than to each platted lot. Developments of this type shall be reviewed by the City through a site plan review process which illustrates compliance with this article. Property, due to topography, size, irregular shapes or other constraints, such as adjacent structures or features which significantly affect visibility, and thus cannot be developed without violating the standards of this article shall be reviewed through the planned unit development (PUD) section of the zoning ordinance, with the intent to devise a workable development plan which is consistent with the purpose and intent of the overlay standards. The request is to rezone the property from PD-O to PD-C to allow the construction of a new USA Drug Store. The development is proposed as a PD-C due to the existing lot size. Staff is generally supportive of the request. The development of the site is indicated as meeting the spirit and intent of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. Staff feels the developers have done an adequate job in addressing the items regulated within the Overlay. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding technical issues associated with the request in need of addressing. Staff is not however supportive of allowing the development to utilize electronic signage. Although there have been a number of electronic signs approved along the Corridor, staff does not feel the placement of electronic signage on the Corridor preserves the scenic beauty as intended in the Highway 10 DOD. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 11, 2009) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had requested on June 4, 2009, the item be deferred to the July 23, 2009, public hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7119-A 12 There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. STAFF UPDATE: There has been no change to the application request since the previous staff write-up. Staff continues to not support the applicant’s request to allow electronic signage for this development. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 23, 2009) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating on July 20, 2009, the applicant had requested the item be deferred to the September 3, 2009, public hearing. Staff stated the deferral request would require a waiver of the Commission’s By-laws with regard to the late deferral request. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for a waiver of the By-laws with regard to the late deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for deferral as recommended by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. STAFF UPDATE: There has been no change to the application request since the previous staff write-up. Staff continues to not support the applicant’s request to allow electronic signage for this development. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 3, 2009) Mr. Joe White of White Daters and Associates was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request dated August 25, 2009, requesting a deferral of the item to the October 15, 2009, public hearing. Staff stated the Commission’s By-laws typically allowed for two (2) deferrals without a waiver of the Commission’s By-laws to October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7119-A 13 allow for an additional deferral. Staff stated the deferral request would require a waiver of the Commission’s By-laws with regard to the number of deferrals previously approved. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the By-law waiver regarding the number of previously approved deferrals. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. 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 requesting a development sign for the Dogwood Crossing shopping center in addition to the ground sign proposed for the USA Drug store. The sign is proposed within a sign easement located near the intersection of Cantrell Road and Ranch Drive. The sign is proposed consistent with Commercial Development signage allowed per the Highway 10 Design Overlay District or a maximum of ten feet in height and one hundred square feet in area. The development sign is not proposed with an electronic reader board. Staff is supportive of the development sign as proposed. Staff continues to not support the entire application as filed. The remaining issue associated with the request and staff’s non-support of the application is USA Drug’s request to be allowed an electronic reader board on the proposed USA Drug sign. The sign is proposed with a maximum height of six feet and a maximum sign area of seventy-two square feet as allowed per the Overlay. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 15, 2009) The applicant was present. There was a registered objector present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a revised site plan to staff requesting a development sign for the Dogwood Crossing Shopping Center in addition to the ground sign proposed for the USA Drug store. Staff stated the Dogwood Crossing Shopping Center development sign was proposed within a sign easement located near the intersection of Cantrell Road and Ranch Drive. Staff stated the sign was proposed consistent with commercial development signage allowed per the Highway 10 Design Overlay District or a maximum of ten feet in height and one hundred square feet in area. Staff stated the development sign was not proposed with an electronic reader board. Staff stated they were supportive of the Dogwood Crossing Shopping Center development sign as proposed. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7119-A 14 Staff stated they continued to not support the entire application as filed. Staff stated the issue associated with the request which had not gained staff’s support was the request to allow USA Drug to have an electronic reader board on their proposed sign. Staff stated the sign was proposed with a maximum height of six feet and a maximum sign area of seventy-two square feet as allowed per the Overlay. Mr. Joe Courtright, CEO of USA Drug, was present representing the request. He stated USA Drug was located in several states and in 50 cities. He stated in Arkansas USA Drug employed approximately 1,500 persons. He stated the request for the reader board was one of fairness. He stated his chief competitor was Wal-Greens. He stated Wal-greens store was located just blocks from the proposed USA Drug and was developed with a reader sign. He stated all USA Drug was asking for was equal ground. He stated the sign proposed for USA Drug was a six foot by twelve foot sign with the reader incorporated into the sign area. He stated the need for the electronic sign was to allow USA Drug to compete with the neighboring business. Ms. Ruth Bell, League of Women Voters, addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated the League felt the Highway 10 Corridor was important to preserve. She stated the DOD was specific on signage and the purpose and intent of the DOD was to limit inappropriate signs. She stated electronic signs were also a hazard to drivers. Ms. Bell requested the Commission support staff and deny the request. Commissioner Nunnley questioned Mr. Courtright as to the company’s future plans for constructing a store in the inner City. Mr. Courtright stated there was a store on 12th Street and the company was exploring options for construction of a store on South Main Street. There was a general discussion by the Commission as to whether the DOD regulated and/or prohibited electronic signage. Staff stated the DOD did not prohibit electronic signage. Staff stated the sign regulations referenced in the DOD related to style of signs and maximum sign area. Staff stated the remaining signage was to comply with the City’s Sign Ordinance. Staff stated in the City’s Sign Ordinance there were provisions for allowing electronic signage. Staff stated their reason for non-support of the electronic sign was that they did not feel electronic signage met the character and intent section of the Highway 10 DOD. Staff stated the purpose of establishing the district was to protect and enhance the aesthetic and visual character of lands surrounding Highway 10. Staff stated they did not feel electronic signage met this goal. There was a general discussion by the Commission as to fairness and equity. A Commissioner stated at what point do you no longer allow electronic signs. Commissioner Nunnley stated he understood staff’s position but also understood the applicant’s position. A Commissioner stated with the previous approval of ten to fifteen October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7119-A 15 signs precedent had been set. Deputy City Attorney Cindy Dawson stated the Commission by its actions did not set precedent but was to review each item on its owns merits on a case by case basis. A motion was made to approve the request. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 1 noes and 2 absent. October 15, 2009 ITEM NO.: C FILE NO.: S-46-JJ NAME: Lot 134R Overlook Park Addition Replat LOCATION: Located at 27 Overlook Circle DEVELOPER: Jerry and Stephanie Atchley 27 Overlook Circle Little Rock, AR ENGINEER: Laha Engineers, Inc. 6602 Baseline Road, Suite E Little Rock, AR 72209 ARCHTECT: HOMS, Inc. 409 Main Street North Little Rock, AR 72114 AREA: 1.73 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT: 3 – West Little Rock CENSUS TRACT: 22.01 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is seeking approval of a lot split for this 1.73-acre (75,420 square foot) lot located in the Overlook Park Subdivision. The first lot will contain the existing residence and drive access from Overlook Circle. This lot will have 38,420 square feet of land from the original 75,420 square feet. The second lot will have the remaining 37,000 square feet of the original lot. The drive access is proposed from Overlook Drive along the north property line. This area is currently platted with a 10 foot no vehicle access along Overlook Drive. The October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-46-JJ 2 applicant is requesting the removal of the restrictive access easement to allow a 25-foot single drive within the area. The remainder of the restrictive access easement will remain in place. The applicant has provided the Bill of Assurance for Lots 134 and 135 of the Overlook Park Addition to the City of Little Rock, which states vehicular access to any lot from Overlook Drive, shall be prohibited. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: Overlook Circle is a two lane street with curb and gutter. There is no sidewalk in place along the property frontage. The area proposed for the second lot is adjacent to Overlook Drive. There are no sidewalks on this portion of Overlook Drive. The area does have curb and gutter in place. This area of the lot slopes upward from Overlook Drive quite significantly. There are single-family homes located in the immediate area to the south, west and east. The Arkansas River, the Lock and Dam and the Big Dam Bridge are located to the north of the property. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from the area property owners. All abutting property owners and the Overlook Property Owners Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Due to the steep running slope of Overlook Drive, the proposed driveway would create unsafe driving conditions. No other driveway accesses the downhill traffic flow lane on Overlook Drive in this area. Compared to being on the north side of Overlook Drive, the downhill traffic flow of the street creates high speeds, excessive vehicle breaking for turn movements, and steep transition from the street to the driveway. 2. A 10 foot wide no vehicle access easement is located along Overlook Drive in this area. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available to this project. Entergy: No comment received. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-46-JJ 3 Center-Point Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 2, 2009) Mr. Troy Laha and Mr. Andrew McCaley were present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed plat stating there was a concern with the placement of a drive on Overlook Drive. Staff stated there were no drives located on the south side of Overlook Drive. Staff stated the traffic flow was downhill which typically increased speeds of motorist and could created safety issues. Staff requested Mr. Laha provide distances for the drive and provide a drawing of the driveway design to staff to review to determine if their concerns could be addressed. 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 plat to staff addressing the issues and concerns raised at the July 2, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has provided a sketch of the proposed driveway as requested by staff. Staff is agreeable to allowing access and the removal of the 10-foot restrictive access easement along Overlook Drive provided the drive is constructed with the first 20 feet from the curb having a centerline grade of near 0 percent and the October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-46-JJ 4 remainder to the right-of-way line not exceeding 14 percent. The driveway will be constructed with a 20 foot curb radius. Trees within the right-of-way may be required to be removed by applicant if sight distance is not sufficient. The applicant must contact Public Works prior to the removal of any trees in the public right-of-way. The request is to allow a lot split for this 1.73-acre (75,420 square foot) lot located in the Overlook Park Subdivision. The first lot will contain the existing residence and drive access from Overlook Circle. The lot will contain 38,420 square feet. The second lot will have the remaining 37,000 square feet of the original lot with the drive access from Overlook Drive along the north property line. This area is currently platted with a 10 foot no vehicle access along Overlook Drive. The applicant is requesting the removal of the restrictive access easement to allow a 25-foot single drive within the area. The remainder of the restrictive access easement will remain in place. The applicant has provided the Bill of Assurance for Lots 134 and 135 of the Overlook Park Addition to the City of Little Rock, which states vehicular access to any lot from Overlook Drive, shall be prohibited. Section 4 of the Bill of Assurance states no lot shall be subdivided without the written consent of the Allotter and the Little Rock Planning Commission. Section 27 of the Bill of Assurance states any and all of the covenants, provisions or restrictions set forth in the Bill of Assurance may be amended, modified, extended, changed or canceled in whole or in part by a written instrument signed and acknowledged by the owner or owners of over 50 percent in area of the land in this addition, including lands adjacent to any platted parts of this addition, owned by the Allotter, and included in the overall preliminary plat of the addition filed with the Little Rock Planning Commission; provided, any such amendment shall be subject to approval by the Little Rock Planning Commission and Arkansas Power and Light Company Although there are issues with the Bill of Assurance concerning the proposed replatting of the property the City typically does not get involved in Bill of Assurance issues. The replat as proposed allows lot areas sufficient to meet the typical standards of the City’s Subdivision Ordinance. Public Works staff has indicated they are supportive of allow a drive to access the second lot from Overlook Drive. To staff’s knowledge there are no remaining outstanding technical issues associated with the request. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-46-JJ 5 Staff recommends approval of allowing access and the removal of the 10-foot restrictive access easement along Overlook Drive provided the drive is constructed with the first 20 feet from the curb having a centerline grade of near 0 percent and the remainder to the right-of-way line not exceeding 14 percent. The driveway must be constructed with a 20 foot curb radius. Trees within the right-of-way may require removal by applicant if sight distance is not sufficient. The applicant must contact Public Works prior to the removal of any trees in the public right-of-way. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 23, 2009) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had failed to provide proper notification to the abutting property owners as required by the Commission’s By-laws. Staff presented a recommendation of deferred to the September 3, 2009, public hearing. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for deferral as recommended by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 recusal (Commissioner Troy Laha). STAFF UPDATE: There has been no change to this application request since the previous staff write-up. Staff continues to support the request subject to the comments and conditions noted above. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 3, 2009) The applicant was present. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating there were issues related to the Bill of Assurance which had been raised and staff needed additional time to review the issues raised. Staff requested the item be deferred to the October 15, 2009, public hearing. 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. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-46-JJ 6 STAFF UPDATE: The City Attorney’s office is continuing to review the issue raised concerning the proposed plat and the violation of the Bill of Assurance. Staff will provide the Commission with the findings at the October 15, 2009, public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 15, 2009) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating based on the City Attorney’s opinion the City did not have the right to remove, in whole or in part, the existing no vehicular access easement on the north side of Lot 134 in the Overlook Park Subdivision the applicant had requested a deferral of the item to review various options for re-submittal of the plat removing the request to eliminate the no vehicular access easement. Staff stated the applicant had indicated based on the timing of the opinion they had not had time to review the various options for accessing the new lot and requested a deferral to the December 3, 2009, public hearing to determine if a different access was feasible. Staff stated the deferral request would require a waiver of the Commission’s By-laws with regard to the late deferral request. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of a waiver of the Commission’s By-laws with regard to the late deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 noes, 3 absent and 1 recusal (Commissioner Laha). The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 noes, 3 absent and 1 recusal (Commissioner Laha). October 15, 2009 ITEM NO.: D FILE NO.: Z-6323-M NAME: Lot 7 the Village at Rahling Road Revised Short-form PCD LOCATION: Located on the Southeast corner of Rahling Road and Chenal Parkway DEVELOPER: Deltic Timber Corporation #7 Chenal Club Boulevard Little Rock, AR 72223 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 1.7 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: PCD ALLOWED USES: C-2, Shopping Center District Uses PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD PROPOSED USE: C-2, Shopping Center District Uses VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On August 5, 1997, the Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,542 which established The Village at Rahling Road Long-form PCD. The PCD established a 14-lot development with C-2, Shopping Center District uses being permitted. The initial action approved a site plan for Lots 1 and 2 of the development with the intent being that each of the remaining lots would be brought to the Commission and Board of Directors for a revision to the PCD on an individual lot basis as a particular development was proposed. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6323-M 2 A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The project contains approximately 1.7 acres and is located near the southeast corner of Rahling Road and Chenal Parkway. The developer is proposing to construct a small strip center utilizing C-2, Shopping Center District uses as allowable uses. The site plan includes the placement of an outdoor deck for dining. The building is proposed containing 16,140 square feet and the deck is proposed containing 1,760 square feet. 77 parking spaces are indicated on the site plan. The hours of operation are proposed from 6:00 am to 2:00 am seven days per week. Signage is proposed to meet the City of Little Rock ordinances and the Architectural Design Elements of the Village at Rahling Road Subdivision. The maximum building height proposed is 35-feet. The applicant is proposing a new drive from Rahling Circle to Chenal Parkway. The drive is proposed with 36-feet of pavement and is proposed to connect Chenal Parkway at an existing traffic signal serving the Promenade at Chenal Shopping Center. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a cleared flat site with street improvements in place. The property was cleared and graded with initial development of the conceptual PCD for the Village at Rahling Road. Access to the lot proposed for development is via Rahling Circle, off of Rahling Road. Smaller office buildings are located adjacent to the site proposed for development situated around Rahling Circle. There is a larger building located near Rahling Road constructed as a multiuse building through the original approval of the PCD. The Promenade at Chenal, a new shopping mall, has recently been constructed across Chenal Parkway. Rahling Circle has been constructed as a private drive. There are sidewalks in place along the property frontage. Chenal Parkway is constructed as a four-lane median divided roadway. There are no sidewalks in place along the frontage of this property on the parkway. There is a traffic light located at Chenal Parkway and the proposed new drive extending from Rahling Circle. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from the area property owners. All property owners located within 200 feet, all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site, the Coalition of West Little Rock Neighborhoods, the Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association, the Bascom Place Property Owners Association, the Bayonne Place Property Owners October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6323-M 3 Association, the Margeaux Property Owners Association and the Witry Court Property Owners Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. The proposed south driveway should be removed. In the subdivision, every two (2) lots share one (1) driveway. This particular lot has 2 driveways proposed. The existing driveways spacing in the subdivision is 240 feet and 120 feet. The proposed south driveway is only 55 feet from the closest driveway to the south. 2. In accordance with Section 31-210 (h)(12), access driveways running parallel to the street shall not create a four-way intersection within 75 feet of the curb line of the street. When Lot 6 develops, a four-way intersection will be created similar to the other lots in the subdivision. 3. The stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. 4. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required along Chenal Parkway to the existing sidewalk in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. 5. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required along both sides of the driveway in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. 6. A left turn in from Chenal Parkway cannot be allowed into the proposed driveway. A left turn out of the driveway cannot be allowed onto Chenal Parkway. Contact Nat Banihatti, Traffic Engineering, for additional information at 379-1818. 7. Coordinate design of traffic signal upgrade with proposed street improvements. Plans to be forwarded to Traffic Engineering for approval. 8. On site striping and signage plans should be forwarded to Public Works, Traffic Engineering for approval with the site development package. 9. Streetlights are required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Provide plans for approval to Traffic Engineering. Streetlights must be installed prior to platting/certificate of occupancy. Contact Traffic Engineering 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information. 10. Provide the proposed centerline grades periodically of the access easement drive. 11. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6323-M 4 12. 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). 13. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other than residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 14. The access easement should have a width of 60 feet and the drive constructed with the minimum width of 31 feet from back of curb to back of curb. The maximum allowed centerline grade is twelve (12) percent. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available to this project. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. If there are facilities that need to be adjusted and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. That work would be done at the expense of the developer. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Community Shopping for this property. The applicant has applied for a rezoning to Planned Commercial Development. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6323-M 5 Master Street Plan: Chenal Parkway 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 Chenal Parkway since it is a Principal Arterial. Rahling 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. Rahling Circle is a Local Street. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Local Streets which are abutted by non- residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes are considered as “Commercial Streets”. These streets have a design standard the same as a Collector. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. Bicycle Plan: A Class I bike route is planned along Chenal Parkway. A Class I bikeway is built separate from or alongside a road. Additional paving and right of way may be required. Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is not covered by a City of Little Rock Neighborhood Action Plan. Landscape: 1. Before a landscape permit is issued a landscape plan must be submitted to the City. Developments of two (2) acres or more require the landscape plan be affixed with the seal of a registered landscape architect. 2. An irrigation system is required for developments of one (1) acre or larger. 3. Dumpsters, loading docks, heating and air conditioning units, external storage of materials, communications equipment and similar outside activities and appurtenances must be screened from abutting properties and streets. The screen must exceed the height of the dumpster or trash containment areas by at least two (2) feet not to exceed eight (8) feet total height. 4. A perimeter planting strip is required along any side of a vehicular use area that abuts adjoining property or the right-of-way of any street, highway or freeway. This strip must be at least nine (9) feet wide. 5. Interior landscape areas must comprise at least eight (8) percent of any vehicular use area containing twelve (12) or more parking spaces. In order to apply toward the required eight (8) percent landscape area, the minimum size of an interior landscape area must be one hundred fifty (150) square feet for developments with one hundred fifty (150) or fewer parking spaces. Trees must be included in the interior landscape areas at the rate of one (1) tree for every twelve (12) parking spaces. Flexibility is permitted with placement of October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6323-M 6 interior landscape islands, however, interior landscaping should be generally distributed throughout the vehicular use areas. 6. Interior planting island width must be not less than seven and one-half (7 1/2) feet in order to receive credit. 7. Street buffers are required in all instances. The street buffer along Rahling Circle and Chenal Parkway must average 23.22 feet in width and in no case less than one-half or 11.6 feet. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 2, 2009) Mr. Tim Daters was present representing the development. Staff presented the item stating there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff stated the basic infrastructure was in place with the development of the Villages at Rahling Road. Staff stated the site plan indicated the placement of the proposed dumpster within the front yard setback along Rahling Circle. Staff requested Mr. Daters provide a detailed sketch of the proposed dumpster screening mechanism. Staff questioned if the building proposed would have two fronts. Staff stated the Village at Rahling Road development plan indicated buildings were to be constructed with a 13-foot setback from the curb and a minimum of fifty percent of the buildings were to front the loop drive. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated in the existing development the developments shared drives and the drives were placed approximately 120 and 240 feet apart. Staff stated the drive indicated was 55 feet from the closest driveway to the south. Staff stated drives running parallel to the street could not create a four-way intersection within 75-feet of the curb line of the street. Staff stated the driveway extending from Chenal Parkway to Rahling Road would not be allowed left turns out or left turn in from southbound Chenal Parkway. Mr. Daters stated Mr. Ernie Peters had prepared a traffic assessment for the intersection and would meet with Traffic Engineering to address their concerns. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the development would require the submission of a landscape plan stamped with the seal of a registered landscape architect. Staff stated an automatic irrigation system would be required to water landscaped areas. 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. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6323-M 7 H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing a number of the issues raised at the July 2, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised site plan has relocated the dumpster away from the front building setback and has removed the driveway located on Rahling Circle. The development is proposed with the front facing Rahling Circle with parking located within the front yard area. According to the development plan provided to staff with the filing of the original conceptual PCD all buildings are to be constructed within 13 feet of the back of curb of the loop street and at least 50% of the buildings are to face the loop street. The development is proposed as a strip center containing 16,140 square feet of building area and 1,760 square feet of covered deck area. The proposed uses of the building are C-2, Shopping Center District uses. The parking indicated on the plan is 78 spaces. Based on the typical parking required for a mixed use development a total of 79 spaces would typically be required. The development has been constructed with parallel spaces on the street and a centralized parking area to serve the users. Staff feels with the available parking the parking indicated is adequate to serve the proposed use and will not impact the remainder of the development. The hours of operation are from 6:00 am to 2:00 pm seven days per week. All signage is to comply with the Chenal Architectural Design Elements for the Village at Rahling Road and City ordinance. The site plan indicates a maximum ground mounted sign height of six feet and a total sign area not to exceed forty square feet. Building signage will not exceed signage allowed in commercial zones or a maximum of ten percent of the façade area. The building is proposed with a maximum height of thirty-five (35) feet. All site lighting will be low level and directed downward and into the site and away from adjacent properties. The developers have indicated the placement of a 60-foot driveway and utility easement extending from Rahling Circle to Chenal Parkway. The easement is proposed to be recorded in conjunction with the final platting of Lot 7 referencing the drive as shared. The drive is proposed to connect on Chenal Parkway at an existing traffic light serving the Promenade at Chenal Shopping Center. Lot 7 is indicated with two access points on the shared drive. The drive has not been redesigned as requested by Public Works staff to eliminate the potential future traffic conflicting traffic movements. Staff also has concerns with the drive proposed extending from Rahling Circle to Chenal Parkway. The developers have indicated a traffic analysis has been completed but the information has not October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6323-M 8 been provided to the City’s Traffic Engineering Department. Staff feels there are too many outstanding issues for the item to move forward as proposed. Staff feels the issues concerning the placement of parking within the front yard area and the driveway locations and configurations should be addressed prior to staff providing a positive recommendation. Based on the development as currently presented staff cannot support the development. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 23, 2009) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating on July 17, 2009, the applicant had requested the item be deferred to the September 3, 2009, public hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for deferral as recommended by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. STAFF UPDATE: There has not been any additional information provided concerning this request since the previous staff write-up. Staff continues to recommend denial of this request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 3, 2009) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request dated August 28, 2009, requesting a deferral of the item to the October 15, 2009, public hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6323-M 9 STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing the previously raised concerns. The applicant has removed the left turn in and left turn out of the drive at the Chenal Parkway intersection as requested by Public Works staff. Staff has reconsidered the two (2) driveway locations on Lot 7 near Rahling Circle and now feels the drives as proposed will not cause previously raised concerns of conflicting traffic movements. A traffic analysis was prepared for the applicant and staff agrees the proposed drive from Rahling Circle to Chenal Parkway will not generate traffic numbers which will cause congestion or backing out onto any public street. As a part of the PCD request the developers are requesting to remove from the originally approved PCD the requirement that all buildings are to be constructed within 13 feet of the back of curb of the loop street for the remaining undeveloped lots. Staff is supportive of the request. The development has developed with a mixture of office and retail uses. The retail uses located along Rahling Road have parking located within the front yard setback and do not appear to have negatively impacted the development. Staff is now supportive of the request and recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 15, 2009) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating they were now supportive of the application request based on the comments as noted in the staff update. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs, D, E and F of the agenda staff report. 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 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent. October 15, 2009 ITEM NO.: E FILE NO.: Z-4343-W NAME: Lot 1 Tract A The Ranch Subdivision Revised Short-form PCD LOCATION: Located at 16900 Cantrell Road DEVELOPER: Brooke N. Malmstrom 114 Trelon Way Little Rock, AR 72223 SURVEYOR: Donald Brooks Surveying 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 1.36 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: PCD ALLOWED USES: Convenience store with gas pumps, carwash, air and water station PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD PROPOSED USE: Convenience store with gas pumps, carwash, air and water station – add a 6’ x 12’ trailer to seasonally sell shaved ice VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 16,005 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on February 5, 1991, rezoned the property from C-2, Shopping Center District to PCD and established the Convenience Store-Ranch Short-form PCD. The approval allowed the construction of a convenience store with gas pumps and an automatic carwash. The store was approved with 2,200 square feet of retail space. There were four (4) free standing gas pumps also approved. The canopy over the gas pumps was approved with a lesser setback than typically required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The canopy was located 75 feet from Cantrell Road (the DOD typically requires a 100 foot building setback). The front yard landscape strip along Cantrell Road was approved at eleven October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-W 2 and one-half (11 ½) feet as opposed to the typical forty (40) foot front yard landscape strip. Two (2) driveways were approved to serve the site. A driveway on Cantrell Road was approved 116.37 feet from the intersection of North Katillus Road and a driveway was approved on North Katillus Road 259.46 feet from the intersection with Cantrell Road. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is requesting to amend the previously approved PCD for the Ranch Shell Station, Lot 1 Tract A, The Ranch Subdivision located at 16900 Cantrell Road. The rezoning is proposed to allow the placement of a shaved ice business, “U Need A Shave” to operate on the site during the months of March through September. The hours of operation are from 4 pm to 8 pm during the school year and during the summer season, noon to 9 pm, Monday through Saturday. The business is proposed annually as permitted by the owner of the property. The shaved ice business will be placed in a six (6) foot by twelve (12) foot trailer on the property. The site includes two (2) picnic tables near the trailer. The request also includes the allowance of a four (4) foot by two (2) foot banner type sign located on the lawn in front of the trailer. The sign will be displayed during operating hours only. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The property is developed with a convenience store, gas pumps and carwash located on the rear of the property. The shaved ice trailer is located on the site near Highway 10 on the western perimeter of the property. The development has driveway access from Cantrell Road and North Katillus Road. West of the property adjacent to Highway 10 is a vacant site. Northwest of this site is developed with retail, restaurants and office uses. East of the site, across North Katillus Road, is property containing a number of homes on a single tract. South of the site are residential and office uses. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area property owners. All property owners located within 200 feet, all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site, the Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association, the Chevaux Property Owners Association, the Johnson Ranch Neighborhood Association, the Tulley Cove Neighborhood Association and the Coalition of West Little Rock Neighborhoods were notified of the public hearing. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-W 3 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: No comment. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available to the project. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route # 25 – the Highway 10 Express Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Pinnacle Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant has applied for a revised Planned Commercial Development. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is a Principal Arterial. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Cantrell Road since it is a Principal Arterial. Katillus Road is a Local Street. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Local Streets which are abutted by non-residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes are considered as “Commercial Streets”. These streets have a design standard the same as a Collector. These streets may require dedication October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-W 4 of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes in the immediate vicinity. Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is not covered by a Neighborhood Action Plan. Landscape: Any dead, diseased or missing landscaping must be replaced. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 13, 2009) Ms. Brooke Malmstrom and Mr. Rick Malmstorm were present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the request stating there were few outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff requested information concerning the proposed signage. Staff also requested the site plan be revised to show the location of the outdoor seating located on the site. Staff stated there were no Public Works issues. Staff stated any dead, diseased or missing landscaping was required to be replaced. 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 locating the outdoor seating and indicated the outdoor seating would not exceed the existing two (2) tables. The applicant has also provided a sketch of the banner proposed for the site. The sign is proposed as a two (2) foot by four (4) foot banner which will only be displayed during the operational hours of the business. The hours of operation are March through September from 4 pm to 8 pm during the school year and during the summer season, noon to 9 pm, Monday through Saturday. The sign is proposed within the landscape area along Cantrell Road. The request is a revision to an existing PCD to allow a shaved ice business to be placed within a six (6) foot by twelve (12) foot trailer on the property. The business is proposed annually as permitted by the owner of the property with the above hours of operation. The site is developed with a convenience store, gas pumps and an automatic carwash. The site contains air and water as a service to the customers along Cantrell Road. The site was developed a number of years ago with development standards less than the typical Highway 10 Design Overlay District requirements for the front yard landscape strip, front yard building setback and a driveway October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-W 5 spacing less than the typical standard established by the Overlay. Although the shaved ice trailer is located nearer Highway 10 than the typical one hundred (100) foot building setback staff is not considering the trailer a structure. The trailer is temporary and will only be located on the site during the summer season. Staff is supportive of the request. Staff feels the placement of the trailer on the site for this limited period of time should not significantly impact the area. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 3, 2009) The applicant was present. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating there were issues related to the Bill of Assurance which had been raised and staff needed additional time to review the issues raised. Staff requested the item be deferred to the October 15, 2009, public hearing. 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 previous concerns related to the Bill of Assurance have been resolved. It has been determined since the building is a temporary building and will not be set on the site permanently, the business can operate from this site as proposed. The applicant has amended the request to limit the operation of the business to the Malmstrom family. Staff continues to support the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as noted above. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 15, 2009) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the previous concerns related to the Bill of Assurance had been resolved. Staff stated it had been determined since the building was a temporary building and would not be set on the site permanently, the business could operate from the site as proposed. Staff stated the applicant had amended the request to limit the operation of the business to October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-W 6 the Malmstrom family. Staff stated they continued to support the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as noted in the agenda staff report. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent. October 15, 2009 ITEM NO.: F FILE NO.: Z-6532-E NAME: The Enclave at Chenal Heights Long-form PD-R LOCATION: Located on the Northeast corner of Chenal Heights Drive and Chenal Valley Drive DEVELOPER: Boomer Consumer, LLC P.O. Box 242146 Little Rock, AR 72223 ENGINEER: Thomas Engineering Company 3810 Lookout Road North Little Rock, AR 72116 AREA: 14.12 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 68 FT. NEW STREET: 2,060 LF CURRENT ZONING: PD-R ALLOWED USES: Retirement village PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD-R PROPOSED USE: Attached and detached single-family VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from the City’s Land Alteration Ordinance to allow grading of the future lots with the placement of the basic infrastructure within the proposed subdivision. The applicant submitted a request dated August 20, 2009, requesting a deferral of this item to the October 15, 2009, public hearing. Staff is supportive of the deferral request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 3, 2009) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request dated August 20, 2009, requesting a deferral of the item to the October 15, 2009, public hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-E 2 There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted a request dated September 30, 2009, requesting a deferral of this item to the December 3, 2009, public hearing. The applicant has indicated the additional time is necessary to resolve issues related to the Bill of Assurance. Staff is supportive of the deferral request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 15, 2009) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request dated September 30, 2009, requesting a deferral of the item to the December 3, 2009, public hearing. Staff stated the applicant had indicated the additional time was necessary to resolve issues related to the Bill of Assurance. 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 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent. October 15, 2009 ITEM NO.: G FILE NO.: LU09-09-02 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment – I-630 Planning District Location: 3517 West 25th Street Request: Residential Medium Density to Residential High Density Source: Larry D. Smith PROPOSAL / REQUEST: The applicant has requested this item be deferred until October 15, 2009. Staff is supportive of this request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 3, 2009) The item was placed on consent agenda for deferral to the October 13, 2009 hearing. By a vote of 9 for and 0 against the consent agenda was approved. PROPOSAL / REQUEST: (OCTOBER 15, 2009) The applicant has requested this item be withdrawn from consideration. Staff is supportive of this request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 15, 2009) The item was placed on consent agenda for withdrawal. By a vote of 8 for and 0 against the consent agenda was approved. October 15, 2009 ITEM NO.: G.1 FILE NO.: Z-8486 NAME: 3517 West 25th Street Short-form POD LOCATION: Located at 3517 West 25th Street DEVELOPER: Larry Smith 3517 West 25th Street Little Rock, AR 72204 SURVEYOR: Donald Brooks Surveying 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.366 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 zoning lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-3, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family PROPOSED ZONING: POD PROPOSED USE: 8 Units of Multi-family housing and an office VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. The applicant failed to provide a response to comments raised at the August 13, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff recommends this item be deferred to the October 15, 2009, public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 3, 2009) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had failed to provide a response to comments raised at the August 13, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff presented a recommendation of deferred of the item to the October 15, 2009, public hearing. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: G.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8486 2 There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant requested on September 30, 2009, this item be withdrawn from consideration without prejudice. Staff is supportive of the withdrawal request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 15, 2009) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had requested on September 30, 2009, the item be withdrawn from consideration without prejudice. Staff stated they were supportive of the withdrawal 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 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent. October 15, 2009 ITEM NO.: H FILE NO.: Z-8487 NAME: Diversions Short-form PCD and Alley Abandonment LOCATION: Located at 2611 Kavanaugh Boulevard DEVELOPER: EO Corder, Inc. Attn. Eddie Corder 2611 Kavanaugh Boulevard Little Rock, AR 72205 SURVEYOR: Donald Brooks Surveying 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.0826 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District ALLOWED USES: General Commercial PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: C-3, General Commercial District uses, Allowance of rooftop dining – Reduced Parking per the Hillcrest Design Overlay District VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The request is a rezoning from C-3, General Commercial District to PCD and the abandonment of an alley right of way located at 2611 Kavanaugh Boulevard. The building is located in the Hillcrest neighborhood and is located midway between Walnut and Ash Streets. The building is one-story with a brick exterior and large front windows. The building was originally built in 1926, was rebuilt after a fire in the 1950’s and has been remodeled several times. The building is currently zoned C-3, General Commercial District. The building is finished with two (2) suites. Salon Corde currently occupies approximately one-half October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8487 2 the building and the other suite is lease space, most recently leased to Lemon – a crepe and coffee company. A restaurant tenant is interested in leasing the space and having outdoor seating. The outdoor seating is proposed as rooftop dining with seating for up to 49 persons. All entrances and exits will have emergency exit signs. There will be handicap access to the roof provided by the alley. The existing chain link fence on the roof will be replaced with a wood privacy fence to assist as a sound barrier and increase curb appeal. The rooftop will be an atmosphere that will provide open breeze and a view that overlooks historic Kavanaugh Boulevard. There will be two outdoor speakers to provide ambient sound of water and wind. There will not be live music or a dance club like scene. There will be two pergola shaded areas with fans. Seating will be provided by four outdoor sectional couches and six patio sets that will not include umbrellas. Plants will provide greenery along with exotic flowers, vegetables and herbs. A water feature will be front and center. In general, the rooftop seating will be an extension of the restaurant downstairs that will serve lunch and dinner. Regular access will be via internal stairs from the Kavanaugh Boulevard entrance. Handicap access will be provided via a walkway from the rear of the building. The hours of operation are from 10:00 am to 10:00 pm Sunday and 10:00 am to midnight Monday through Saturday. All lighting on the rooftop will be directed downward or will be tabletop candles. Garbage collection is proposed off-site via sharing of a dumpster across Kavanaugh Boulevard. If an on-site dumpster is required the request is to place the dumpster within the alley, just north of the barricade. The hours of dumpster service will be limited to daylight hours. Deliveries will be limited to Kavanaugh Boulevard or the portion of the alley at the same grade as the restaurant. The outdoor seating creates a parking requirement that is greater than the property can meet as there is no owned parking. The building occupies ninety five percent of the parcel. The requested PCD zoning is intended to allow the addition of the rooftop dining with lesser parking than typically required for a restaurant use per the DOD. The application for right of way abandonment is separate from the PZD application but the two are connected by the desire to provide handicapped parking spaces in a portion of the alley to serve the rooftop dining. The alley is blocked and barricaded. At Kavanaugh Boulevard the alley is the same grade as the street. Approximately thirty feet south of Kavanaugh Boulevard the alley is closed by a rock wall approximately fifteen feet tall. A few feet south of the wall is a guardrail type barricade to prevent vehicles from driving north over the wall. The request for abandonment is the full width of the alley (20 feet) for October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8487 3 approximately ninety-feet. The applicant is requesting the alley abandonment be considered even if the PZD application is denied. According to the applicant at this point the alley is not open to vehicular or pedestrian use, alternative use of the alley for other allowed uses seems to be reasonable as the alley no longer provides public access from Kavanaugh Boulevard. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The building is located on Kavanaugh Boulevard adjacent to an unimproved alley which is barricaded a few feet from Kavanaugh Boulevard. The building proposed for rezoning houses a salon and restaurant. Adjacent to the alley to the West is the Dog House, a pet grooming business, and drycleaners. North of the building is a parking lot with a curb cut from Kavanaugh Boulevard and Walnut Street. Uses in the area are residential and commercial uses. Residential uses include single-family and multi-family. The building is located within the Hillcrest Shopping District. Allsopp Park is located to the Northeast. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received a number of informational phone calls from area residents and property owners. All property owners located within 200 feet, all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site and the Hillcrest Residents were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Drainage easements should be maintained in the alley to convey stormwater from adjacent property. 2. The portion of the alley, where access to the roof is desired, should be repaved. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available to the project. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8487 4 Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #1 – the Pulaski Heights Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights Hillcrest Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant has applied for a rezoning to Planned Commercial Development. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Kavanaugh Boulevard is a Collector. The primary function of a Collector Street is to provide a connection from Local Streets to Arterials. Ash Street is a Local Street. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Local Streets which are abutted by non-residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes are considered as “Commercial Streets”. These streets have a design standard the same as a Collector. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. Bicycle Plan: A Class III is shown along Kavanaugh Boulevard. A Class III bikeway is a signed route on a street shared with traffic. No additional paving or right-of-way is required. Class III bicycle route signage may be required. Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Plan. While the plan does not specifically address this issue, it does state a need for “more mixed-use opportunities should be provided within the commercial areas, including parts of Kavanaugh, Markham Street, and Stifft Station. Mixed-use means more opportunities for residential over commercial in existing commercial areas.” Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 13, 2009) The applicants were present. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development stating there were a number of questions related to the proposed PCD request in need of addressing prior to the Commission acting on the October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8487 5 request. Staff questioned the handicap access and the location of restroom facilities for handicap persons. Staff also questioned parking and the location of the handicap parking areas. The applicant stated details for restroom facilities had not been completely addressed but the owners were reviewing options. The developers stated the request for the PCD was to not require parking. He stated negotiations were taking place with the offices located north of the Ice House to allow parking within this area. Staff requested letters from the various utility companies stating their position of the abandonment request and the letter was to include their desire for the retention of easements. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the alley should be retained as a drainage easement to convey stormwater from the adjacent property. Staff also stated the portion of the alley where access to the roof was desired should be repaved. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing the comments raised at the August 13, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised cover letter states a chemical ADA compliant portable toilet will be placed on the roof top to serve the ADA requirements for restroom facilities. The site plan indicates the placement of paving within the abandoned alley and the placement of a handicap space within this area. The applicant has indicated an agreement with the adjoining property owner will be reached to provide sufficient area for the required space. The applicant is working to secure letters from the various utility companies regarding the alley abandonment. Public Works has indicated the entirety of the alley must be retained as a drainage easement. The floor area for the salon and restaurant is 1,600 square feet each. The proposed roof top dining is 1,300 square feet. The site is located within the Hillcrest Design Overlay District which allows for a reduction of the required parking by fifty (50) percent. A salon outside the DOD would typically be required eight (8) parking spaces and with the fifty percent reduction four (4) spaces would be required. The restaurant and the roof top dining area would typically be required 29 parking spaces. With the fifty percent (50%) October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8487 6 reduction, fourteen (14) spaces are required. The DOD also allows for street parking to count towards the parking requirement. The DOD states where on-street parking is allowed it shall be credited toward the parking requirements at a rate of one (1) space per ten (10) linear feet of street frontage. Parking spaces within a common parking facility may be counted toward the parking requirements of any development. The total number of parking spaces within the common parking facility shall not be less than the sum of requirements for the various individual uses utilizing the facility. There are no common parking facilities associated with this property. The site contains 40 feet of street frontage allowing for four (4) parking spaces. The proposal also allows the placement of one (1) handicap parking space within the abandoned alley. The plan as presented provides four (4) parking spaces. The development would typically be required the placement of eighteen (18) parking spaces. Permitted signage per the Hillcrest Design Overlay District is limited to signage permitted in Institutional and Office Zones or on the street level, the maximum area of signage may be doubled if at least fifty (50) percent of the street-level office and retail space has direct access to the street. The highest point on any commercial sign attached to the building shall not exceed the corresponding building's height. Freestanding commercial signs may not exceed eighteen (18) feet in height, neon-lit signs greater than thirty (30) square feet are prohibited and off-premises signs are prohibited. The applicant is requesting to maintain the existing signage located on the site. All future signage will comply with the Hillcrest DOD. As stated, the request includes an abandonment of an existing alley located along the western perimeter of the property. The abandonment includes a 20-foot alley for the length of the applicant’s property. The portion of the alley located adjacent to Kavanaugh Boulevard has been constructed. There is an eight foot rock wall located 35-feet from the property line which disconnects the alley. The upper portion of the alley has not been paved and is barricaded with a guardrail approximately 55 feet from Kavanaugh Boulevard. The Public Works Department has requested the entirety of the alley be retained as a drainage easement. The building was originally constructed as a two-story building. The building was previously damaged by fire and the second story was not reconstructed. The center stair accessing the second floor remains and is proposed to access the roof top dining. The site plan indicates handicap access will be provided from the abandoned alley as well as a handicap parking space. Wood decking will be placed on the existing roof. A portion of the deck will be covered. A new wood fence will be added along the western façade to screen the deck from the adjoining properties. A forty-two inch knee rail will be added to the front parapet on Kavanaugh Boulevard. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8487 7 Staff has concerns with allowing the rezoning request to add the additional activity to the roof of this existing building. Staff’s concerns are primarily noise, the late hours, insufficient parking and the placement of the portable toilet on the roof to meet the ADA requirements. Staff feels there is a strong potential of a negative impact on the adjoining residential uses. The evening activities are currently located along Kavanaugh Boulevard and by placing the handicap access and handicap parking within the abandoned alley this will add an activity to the rear of the building that is currently not in place. The site as exists today does not provide the typical parking required per the Hillcrest Design Overlay District and with the addition of the roof top dining this compounds the lack of parking available for the use. The applicant has requested use of the outdoor dining area until midnight six nights per week. Although the applicant is proposing the placement of a screening fence and a sound barrier to aid in blocking noise from the rooftop diners staff feels the noise will still travel and impact the adjoining homes. Staff also has concerns with the placement of a portable toilet on the rooftop to meet ADA requirements. Staff feels although facilities are being provided for handicap persons by the placement of the portable toilet on the roof, staff does not feel the portable toilet is adequate. Although staff is not supportive of the rezoning request staff is supportive of the requested alley abandonment. According to Public Works staff, the entirety of the alley is to be retained as an easement. Staff supports the alley abandonment request as long as the easement rights are retained. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the requested PCD application request. Staff recommends approval of the alley abandonment request subject to the entirety of the abandonment being retained as a utility and drainage easement. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 3, 2009) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request dated August 31, 2009, requesting a deferral of this item to the October 15, 2009, public hearing. Staff stated the applicant had indicated the deferral was necessary to meet with the Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood Association at their September 14th meeting. Staff stated the deferral request would require a waiver of the Commission’s By-laws with regard to the late deferral request. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8487 8 There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the By-law waiver request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. The chair entertained a motion of 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’s attorney submitted a revised cover letter outlining modifications to the applicant’s request. The hours of operation for the roof top dining have been limited to 10 am to 10 pm Monday through Wednesday and 10 am to midnight Thursday through Saturday. There will be no outdoor speakers located on the roof top deck. There will be no outdoor music, live or recorded. Lexan glass walls six (6) feet high will be installed on the north (front) and west side walls. The rooftop deck will occupy the north 40 feet of the structure. A six (6) foot high wood privacy fence across the rear (south side) of the deck will be installed. The fence will have an additional two (2) foot long section placed at the top of the fence that is angled in towards the deck to further deflect noise. The wall will be covered with a curtain or special materials that will further dampen the sound. The east wall is the party wall with the Icehouse that extends all the way up to the second floor roof of the Icehouse. The existing chain link fence located along the southern perimeter of the building will be removed and replaced with a five (5) foot tall wood fence. The upstairs deck is additional seating only. There will not be a separate service area on the roof. All services will originate downstairs. The applicant has an arrangement with an adjacent property owner (the drycleaners to the west) to provide additional parking spaces. The applicant has forty (40) feet of frontage of Kavanaugh Boulevard, which will allows credit for four (4) on-street parking spaces. The arrangement with the neighboring property owner will allow Diversions to employ valet parking after the hours of operation of the drycleaners to park an additional fourteen (14) automobiles by stacking the automobiles within the drycleaners parking area and under the canopy. With the existing parking and the off-site available parking this will allow the applicant to meet the eighteen (18) parking spaces to comply with the Hillcrest Design Overlay District. The placement of the handicap parking spaces located in the alley (requested for abandonment with the current application) has not been removed from the application request. Even with the modifications staff continues to have concerns with the application request. Staff continues to feel the noise of the roof top dining will potential overspill into the neighborhood and negatively impact the adjoining residential homes. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8487 9 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 15, 2009) The applicant was present. There were a number of registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. Staff stated the applicant’s attorney had submitted a revised cover letter outlining modifications to the applicant’s request. Staff stated the hours of operation for the roof top dining had been limited to 10 am to 10 pm Monday through Wednesday and 10 am to midnight Thursday through Saturday. Staff stated there were to be no outdoor speakers located on the rooftop deck. Staff stated there would be no outdoor music, live or recorded. Staff stated Lexan glass walls six (6) feet high would be installed on the north (front) and west side walls. Staff stated the rooftop deck would occupy the north 40 feet of the structure and a six (6) foot high wood privacy fence would be placed across the rear (south side) of the deck. Staff stated the fence would have an additional two (2) foot long section placed at the top of the fence that was angled in towards the deck to further deflect noise. Staff stated the wall would be covered with a curtain or special materials that would further dampen the sound. Staff stated the east wall was the party wall with the Icehouse that extended all the way up to the second floor roof of the Icehouse. Staff stated the existing chain link fence located along the southern perimeter of the building would be removed and replaced with a five (5) foot tall wood fence. Staff stated the upstairs deck was additional seating only and there will not be a separate service area on the roof with all services originating downstairs. Staff stated the applicant had indicated an arrangement with an adjacent property owner (the drycleaners to the west) to provide additional parking spaces. Staff stated the applicant had forty (40) feet of frontage of Kavanaugh Boulevard, which would allow credit for four (4) on-street parking spaces. Staff stated the arrangement with the neighboring property owner would allow Diversions to employ valet parking after the hours of operation of the drycleaners to park an additional fourteen (14) automobiles by stacking the automobiles within the drycleaners parking area and under the canopy. Staff stated with the existing parking and the off-site available parking this would allow the applicant to meet the eighteen (18) parking spaces to comply with the Hillcrest Design Overlay District. Staff stated the placement of the handicap parking spaces located in the alley had not been removed from the application request. Staff stated even with the modifications they continued to have concerns with the application request. Staff stated they continued to feel the noise of the rooftop dining would potential overspill into the neighborhood and negatively impact the adjoining residential homes. Mr. Andy Francis addressed the Commission on behalf of the owner. He stated he felt a theme of fairness was emerging from the Commission’s previous discussions. He stated this issue was of fairness. He stated along Kavanaugh Boulevard there were a number of businesses which had outdoor dining. He stated in many cases the outdoor October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8487 10 dining was in close proximity to residential uses. He stated the use was a restaurant and wine bar. He stated the property was located within the Hillcrest Commercial District on property zoned C-3. He stated the deck would occupy the front 40 feet of the building. He stated the deck was approximately 45 feet for the rear of the property. He stated there would be a full service restroom facility constructed on the roof. He stated the upper alley would be landscaped and only used for emergency exit. He stated there would be no parking located within the upper portion of the alley. Mr. Francis stated his client had secured a parking agreement with the adjoining property owner. He stated the clients had a valet company review the site and had determined fifteen (15) parking spaces were available on the adjacent site. He stated with the street credit of four (4) parking spaces this allowed nineteen (19) parking spaces to serve the restaurant use. Mr. Francis stated his clients had conducted an informal survey of the area at various times and on various days and determined in close proximity additional street parking was available on Kavanaugh Boulevard. Mr. Francis stated measures were being taken to control noise. He stated there was sufficient buffering through trees, walls and adjacent buildings. He stated in addition to the existing vegetation fencing would be placed around the roof area to aid in sound proofing the site. He stated a six foot Lexan wall would be installed on the north and west sides of the deck to allow for sight but would dampen the noise. Mr. Francis stated no amplified music or speakers of any kind would be on the roof. He stated no outdoor music would be allowed. He stated all services would originate downstairs. He stated the clients were researching materials which would aid in reducing the sound such as special materials or screening walls. Mr. Francis stated out of fourteen (14) restaurants and bars in the Hillcrest Commercial District nine (9) had outdoor seating. He stated some decks included separate serving areas and/or speakers. He stated most decks had only some wooden fencing for screening or existed with no screening at all. He stated the So Restaurant was located within 94 feet of the nearest residences. He stated Ferneau was located 55 feet to the nearest house. He stated the House was located within 45 feet of the nearest home. He stated Diversions deck would be located 53 feet from the nearest accessory building and 110 feet for the nearest home. Mr. Francis addressed the alley abandonment request. He stated the alley did not connect to Kavanaugh Boulevard and with the elevation change in the middle of the applicant’s property there was no connectivity for vehicular or pedestrian traffic. He stated the upper alley would not be used for parking. He stated the lower alley would be used for dumpster placement if a dumpster became necessary in the future. Mr. Jason Young did not wish to address the Commission but did fill out a card in support of the request. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8487 11 Mr. Joseph Borak addressed the Commission in support of the request. He stated his home was located at 518 Beechwood Street. He stated he felt the traffic, noise, parking and activity were a trade-off for the area. He stated he enjoyed the safety of the Hillcrest Neighborhood and enjoyed having the commercial areas just down the street. Mr. Michael Keddie addressed the Commission in opposition. He stated his home was located at 617 Ash Street, just behind the proposed rooftop dining area. He stated the request was unenforceable in nature. He questioned if the City was going to check to see if the sound deadening material was in place and if the City had a person qualified to check for decibel levels. He stated there was only 21 feet separating the proposed dining area from the adjoining accessory building which was a home. He stated his concern was people and noise. He stated as the night went on the noise would grow louder and would interfere with the residents in the area. He stated the alley should not be abandoned. He stated the alley acted as a buffer between the residents and the commercial area. He stated the applicant had indicated the alley abandonment was necessary to allow drainage work to take place. He stated it was his understanding work could take place in the public alley if approved by City staff. Mr. Taylor Marshall addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated he was an attorney representing the Backs who owned property within 45 feet of the proposed rooftop dining. He stated there were concerns with parking and the use of the alley located behind his clients home to access the site. He questioned how an adjacent business could provide the parking requirement when the business would be open until 7:00 pm. He stated the spaces would only be available for a limited time. He stated he felt the approval would cause a nuisance to the neighborhood and impact the residents who lived in the area. Ms. Rose Back addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated her concerns were crime, safety and sanitation. She stated all the business activity was currently located along Kavanaugh Boulevard. She stated with the placement of the rooftop dining the business activity would then be located adjacent to the neighborhood. Mr. Ed Back addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated he had lived in Hillcrest for 28 years and had seen the positive change in the Hillcrest neighborhood. He stated he had to move from the area because of the noise of the barking dogs from the adjacent Dog House commercial business and because of the increase of commercial activity on Kavanaugh Boulevard. He stated with the addition of the rooftop dining this would impact the adjoining homes in such a manner that the remainder of the area would request commercial zoning. He stated this would further deteriorate the neighborhood. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8487 12 Mr. Bryan Adams addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated he had reviewed the City code and did not feel the PCD was in keeping with the purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance. He stated according to the ordinance the approval was to not be for the sole benefit of one owner. He stated the parking regulations were not being adhered to and the placement of the outdoor dining area did not comply with the regulations of the commercial zoning district. He stated he was an architect and did not feel from an architectural standpoint the proposed addition would be very appealing. He stated he felt the site would have the appearance of an outdoor toilet with a sneeze guard. Mr. Robin Borne addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated his family had lived in Hillcrest for 24 years and had enjoyed the benefits from the prosperity of the neighborhood. He stated he had enjoyed a positive balance of residential and commercial uses in the area. He stated he felt there should be a boundary between residential and commercial properties in the Hillcrest neighborhood and this balance was to be maintained at the current level. He stated it was important to look to the future and not for just this one restaurant user. He stated the Hillcrest Historic Overlay District was evidence the residents wanted to manage development while maintaining the lifestyle and character that had made Hillcrest prosper. He stated if a rooftop restaurant was added to the neighborhood the viability of single-family residential occupancy in historic housing stock on Ash Street would be diminished. He stated should even one of the seven residences on Ash become commercial that soon after others would follow. Catherine and Carroll Spann did not which to address the Commission. Tait Arnold addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated his home was located very near a local restaurant with an outdoor seating area and his four year old daughter had been awaken on a number of occasions by loud patrons of the restaurant. He stated the developer had provided a number of letters of support from area transient business owners. He stated the Spanns have lived in the area 26 years and it was the residents who had brought back the neighborhood. He stated he did not want the neighborhood to experience the same nuisance he had experienced with the placement of a restaurant so near their home. Ms. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated noise was not a new thing to the Commission reminding the Commission of the application requests on West Markham and Rebesman Park Road to allow outdoor dining and the citizens concerns regarding noise. She stated both cases a number of neighborhoods came down to speak against allowing outdoor activity in close proximity to residential areas. She stated noise traveled and with the addition of the rooftop dining the noise would travel to the adjoining homes. She stated without an acoustical engineer it would be difficult for the City to enforce any commitments made by the applicant. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8487 13 Mr. Francis stated his clients had an agreement to address the parking concern. He stated safety was less of an issue in a vibrant neighborhood with commercial and residential activities taking place. He stated there were other businesses in close proximity that allowed outdoor dining within a lesser distance than proposed by the applicant. There was a general discussion by the Commission on the application request and the need for the alley closure. Staff stated the alley closure was not critical to the application request but they felt since the alley was not providing a connection the abandonment made sense. Staff stated if the alley remained public drainage improvements within the alley would be allowed if the applicant submitted engineered plans for review and approval by staff. There was a general discussion concerning the parking agreement and available parking within the neighborhood. A Commissioner stated the property was private property and the owner could regulate who could park on the property during any hours of the day or night. The Commission questioned if the rooftop dining was the issue or the restaurant. Staff stated the downstairs restaurant was not an issue and could locate on the site without any review by the City with the exception of a building permit. There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to approve the request as amended by the applicant to eliminate the parking spaces within the upper portion of the alley. The motion failed by a vote of 0 ayes, 7 noes, 3 absent and 1 recusal (Commissioner Yates). A motion was made to approve the alley abandonment request. The motion carried by a vote of 6 ayes, 1 noes, 3 absent and 1 recusal (Commissioner Jeff Yates). October 15, 2009 ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: S-1640 NAME: Supreme Fixture Company Subdivision Site Plan Review LOCATION: Located at 11900 Vimy Ridge Road DEVELOPER: Supreme Fixture Company, Inc. 11900 Vimy Ridge Road Little Rock, AR 72219 ENGINEER: Mehlburger Brawley, Inc. 10 N. Shackleford Plaza, Suite 100 Little Rock, AR 72211 AREA: 5.69 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: I-2, Light Industrial PLANNING DISTRICT: 16 – Otter Creek CENSUS TRACT: 41.04 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 1. A variance from Section 36-502 to allow a lesser number of required parking spaces 2. A variance from Section 36-320(e)(1) and (2) to allow reduced building setbacks. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Supreme Fixture Company, Inc. is requesting a multiple building site plan review for this 5.69 acre site located at 11900 Vimy Ridge Road. The existing facility is developed with office, warehouse and assembly space. The business supplies and installs commercial kitchen appliances and appurtenances. The number of employees at this facility is twenty-four (24). The owners have expanded the site with new buildings and site improvements which were not permitted in accordance with the City of Little Rock requirements. The request, although after site construction, is being made in an effort to October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1640 2 retroactively satisfy the City’s permitting requirements. One-half street improvements will be completed to Vimy Ridge Road per the Master Street Plan and Boundary Street Ordinance requirements. The engineers are also confirming that the on-site drainage and detention storage are adequate and in accordance with the City of Little Rock requirements. The request includes the following variances be considered: 1. Building setback lines (shown and dimensioned on site plan). a. Requirements call for a 50-foot front building setback. The actual dimension when measured from the new right of way line after dedicating right of way will be 19.9 feet. b. Requirements call for a 15 foot side building setback. Along the northern property line, the actual measurements from property line to building range from 9.7 feet to 10.6 feet. Along the southernmost property line, the actual measurements from property line to building range from 7.9 feet to 14 feet. c. Requirements call for a 25 foot rear building setback. The rear setback complies with dimensioning ranging from 27.0 feet to 28.2 feet. 2. Parking: the site contains 7,098 square feet of office space, 40,671 square feet of plant space and 42,973 square feet of warehouse space. Based on these areas, the calculated parking space requirement is 105 parking spaces. The site currently provides 95 standard parking spaces plus 2 handicap spaces for a total of 97 parking spaces. With the right of way dedication and removal of parking associated with the required landscape strip 35 parking spaces will be removed from the site resulting in 62 total parking spaces available. The parking provided is less than the typical ordinance requirement. According to the applicant, although the parking provided does not meet the calculated number of spaces required, the number of parking spaces have proven to be adequate throughout several months of actual working conditions. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The area contains a mixture of uses including industrial, residential and commercial uses. There is a church located immediately north of this site and further north and northeast are industrial uses. South of the site on Vimy Ridge Road and Alexander Road are single-family residences. On the northwest corner of Alexander Road and Vimy Ridge Road is a convenience store located on C-3, General Commercial District zoned property. On the southeast corner of the intersection is a vacant property also zoned C-3, General Commercial District October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1640 3 and I-2, Light Industrial zoned property. On the northeast corner of Alexander and Vimy Ridge Roads is vacant I-3 zoned property. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received a few informational phone calls from the area property owners. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site, the Alexander Road Neighborhood Association and Southwest Little Rock United for Progress were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Vimy Ridge 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 as shown on site plan. 2. With site development, provide the design of the street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to Vimy Ridge Road including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development as shown on site plan. 3. 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). 4. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 5. Street Improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction. 6. Streetlights are required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Provide plans for approval to Traffic Engineering. Streetlights must be installed prior to platting/certificate of occupancy. Contact Traffic Engineering 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information. 7. Obtain permits prior to doing any street cuts or curb cuts. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way. Contact Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner) for more information. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available to this project. Entergy: Easement must maintain right of way for 3-phase circuit, 30 feet. Any relocation cost and right of way cost are to be reimbursed to Entergy by the October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1640 4 Customer. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. If there are facilities that need to be adjusted and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. That work would be done at the expense of the developer. Contact Central Arkansas Water if additional fire protection or metered water service is required. 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. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: 1. Site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 2. The zoning buffer ordinance requires an average street buffer of thirty-nine feet (39’) along Vimy Ridge Road and in no case less than half. Currently, both parking lots encroach within this minimal buffer. Asphalt will need to be removed from both parking lots to meet this minimal City ordinance requirement. 3. The landscape ordinance requires a nine foot (9’) landscape around the sites entirety. Currently both parking lots encroach into this minimal perimeter landscape strip. A variance must be obtained from the City Beautiful Commission. 4. The property to the north and south is zoned residential, therefore, a six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1640 5 outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the northern and southern perimeters of the site where abutting residentially zoned or used property. 5. The zoning buffer ordinance requires a fifteen foot (15’) land use buffer along the southern perimeter of the site. Recently, a parking lot was added that encroaches into this area. Seventy percent (70%) of this area was to remain undisturbed. Currently, this area has been disturbed almost in its entirety. A row of parking should be removed along this property next to the residential property. The vegetative buffer should also be re-established in this area. 6. Interior islands must be a minimum of one hundred and fifty square foot (150) in area to qualify towards the minimal landscape ordinance requirements. 7. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. 8. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. 9. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on tree covered sites. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 24, 2009) Mr. Alan Smith of Mehlburger-Brawley was present representing the owner. Staff presented an overview of the request stating the site was currently under enforcement due to the building and parking expansion without proper permits. Staff stated there were a few outstanding technical issues in need of addressing prior to the Commission acting on the request. Staff requested Mr. Smith provide in the general notes section of the site plan the building coverage and the parcel size. Staff also requested the total height of the building be included in the general notes section of the site plan. Staff stated there were a number of variances being requested to allow the building and parking to remain as constructed. Staff stated the variances included building setbacks, landscape strips, land use buffers and parking. Staff stated the front and side yards did not meet the typical setbacks for industrial zoning. Staff stated the landscape strip around the parking areas did not fully comply with the Landscape Ordinance and the land use buffer on the north and south did not comply with the typical buffer ordinance standards. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated dedication of right of way and street construction would be required per the Boundary Street Ordinance and the Master Street Plan. Staff stated the City’s Storm Water Detention October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1640 6 Ordinance requirements would apply to the development of the property. Staff stated streetlights were required in conjunction with the new development. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the buffers along the northern and southern perimeters did not comply with the typical ordinance standards. Staff stated the landscape strip located along the southern perimeter of the parking area did not comply with the typical ordinance standards. Staff also stated the street buffers indicated did not comply with the typical ordinance standards. Staff stated variances from the City Beautiful Commission and the Planning Commission were required to allow the encroachments as currently existed. 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: Mr. Smith submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing the issues raised at the September 24, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised plan indicates the removal of the parking located along the southern perimeter which encroaches into the landscape strip required by both the zoning buffer ordinance and the landscape ordinance. A note has been included stating a six foot wood fence will be placed along the northern perimeter to provide the required screening along this perimeter. There is an existing wood fence located along the southern perimeter. The request is a Subdivision Site Plan Review of multiple buildings on this site. The owners have expanded the site with new buildings and site improvements which were not permitted in accordance with the City of Little Rock requirements and is currently under enforcement for both building construction and landscaping requirements. The site contains 90,742 square feet of building space. Of the total square footage, 7,098 square feet is office space, 40,671 square feet is plant area and 42,973 square feet is warehouse area. The site presently contains 97 parking spaces. The site plan indicates six (6) parking spaces will be removed due to right of way dedication and 29 parking spaces removed to allow for the proper landscape strip and buffering along the southern perimeter. This leaves 62 on-site parking spaces. The zoning ordinance would typically require 105 parking spaces to serve this industrial development thus necessitating a parking variance request. According to the applicant the parking as typically October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1640 7 required by the ordinance exceeds their actual needs for parking. Staff is supportive of the parking variance as requested. As stated the buildings were constructed without permit review and have been constructed over the typical building setbacks for the current zoning. The front building setback is indicated at 19.9 feet, the northern side yard building setback is indicated at 14.0 feet and the southern side yard building setback is indicated at 7.9 feet. The property is zoned I-2, Light Industrial District which requires a front building setback of 50 feet and a side yard setback of 15 feet. The rear building setback was set at 27.0 feet which meets the 25-foot setback typically required. The development composition includes a total site area of 248,018 square feet or 5.694 acres. The building contains 90,742 square feet resulting in a building coverage of 36.5 percent. The buildings are one story with a maximum building height is 24.2 feet. The site contains an existing sign which is to be relocated during the construction of the required street improvements. The sign is proposed with a maximum height of fourteen feet and a maximum sign area of 40 square feet. The signage complies with signage allowed in industrial zones or a maximum of 30 feet in height and a maximum sign area of 72 square feet. Building signage will also comply with the zoning ordinance or a maximum of ten percent of the façade area abutting the public street. Staff is supportive of the request. Although there are variances associated with the request staff feels the applicant has provided a good faith effort in removing a row of parking to allow for proper land use buffering and landscape strip along the southern perimeter. The building setback and land use buffer are not as typically required by the zoning ordinance along the northern perimeter but the applicant has indicated a six (6) foot wood fence will be placed along this perimeter to screen the abutting use which is a church on R-2, Single-family zoned property. The parking as indicated is somewhat less than the typical ordinance standard for a manufacturing business but according to the applicant the parking as indicated will adequately serve the businesses current needs and for the foreseeable future. To staff’s knowledge there are no remaining outstanding technical issues in need of addressing. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as noted in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1640 8 Staff recommends approval of the parking variance request. Staff recommends approval of the building setback and buffer variances as requested. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 15, 2009) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as noted in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the parking variance request and the building setback and buffer variances as requested. 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 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent. October 15, 2009 ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: Z-5936-I NAME: The Promenade at Chenal Revised Zoning Site Plan Review LOCATION: Located on the Northwest corner of LaGrande Drive and Chenal Parkway DEVELOPER: Red Development Company 4717 Central Kansas City, MO 64112 ENGINEER: White Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 47.88 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 11 Lots & 3 Tract FT. NEW STREET: 3200 LF CURRENT ZONING: C-2, Shopping Center District PLANNING DISTRICT: 19 – Chenal Planning District CENSUS TRACT: 42.11 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 1. A variance to allow a reduced lot width for the proposed out parcels. BACKGROUND: On October 7, 2004, the Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed a request for the Promenade at Chenal, a 531,981 square foot open-air, life-style center, which was proposed to be located in Chenal Valley. The shopping center was to be home to a variety of upscale national, regional and local retailers, restaurants and entertainment venues. The development was proposed to be anchored by a 155,000 square foot Dillard’s department store. The open-air design of the center replicated a nostalgic Main Street Shopping district. Vehicular access to the Main Street allowed convenient parking in front of the store or restaurant. Extensive sidewalks, landscaping and hardscape were to create a pedestrian-friendly environment ideal for shopping, entertainment and socializing. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5936-I 2 The proposal included the development of the site with four lots. The shopping center was to be contained on a single lot and three out parcels were proposed along Chenal Parkway and LaGrande Drive. On November 10, 2005, the Little Rock Planning Commission approved a revision to the previously approved preliminary plat for the site. The request was to split the previously proposed large lot into two (2) individual lots and five (5) out parcels resulting in a total of seven (7) lots. Lots 1 and 2 were proposed for the main shopping center development and Lots 3 – 7 were proposed as out parcels. The approval allowed reduced building setback along the common lot line of the proposed lots (Lots 1 and 2). A reduced setback for each of the proposed out parcels was also approved. A cross access parking and utility easement would be recorded as a part of the platting process according to the applicant. No changes were proposed to the applicant’s site plan. On June 22, 2006, the Little Rock Planning Commission approved a revision to the site plan to allow the construction of 289,483 square feet of retail space contained in ten (10) buildings. Seven (7) out parcels were proposed totaling 45,408 square feet. The total square footage of the development proposed was 334,889 square feet. A total of 1,961 parking stalls were indicated on the site plan. Access points were proposed from the abutting roadways with a single access point to Chenal Parkway (a traffic light was proposed at this location), LaGrande Drive and Rahling Road. The applicant indicated the construction materials and design of the center would remain as was previously approved. The materials proposed were warm and earthly tones and materials such as brick stone, precise stone, simulated stucco and simulated slate roofs. With its refreshing openness and strong, vertical lines, the shopping center would reflect the heavily timbered landscape of the Chenal Valley area. On September 14, 2006, the Little Rock Planning Commission approved a revision to the previously approved site plan to allow the placement of two additional buildings located along Rahling Road. The site plan indicated the placement of a restaurant with drive-through facilities located along Rahling Road/Chenal Parkway intersection. The site plan indicated the placement of 338,948 square feet of retail space and 1,876 parking spaces. The shopping center area was proposed with 290,341 square feet and the out parcel area was proposed with 71,406 square feet. A revised preliminary plat was approved as a part of the review process to allow the creation of out parcels for the site. A total of 12 lots were indicated nine (9) of which were proposed as out parcel lots for the development of stand alone retail activities including restaurants and one lot containing the shopping center. The development was proposed in multiple phases. The applicant was approved a variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow advanced grading of the site with the first phase of construction. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a revision to the previously approved site plan to allow the creation of two (2) additional out parcel lots, Lots 10 and 11, with a single building proposed on each of the new lots. The shopping center will contain three (3) tracts and eleven (11) out-parcels. The buildings proposed on October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5936-I 3 the new lots are indicated each containing 7,664 square feet. The parking is indicated with a cross parking agreement to allow shared parking within the shopping center. The request includes a variance from the C-2, Shopping Center Zoning District to allow lot widths with less than 300 feet of street frontage. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is developed with a shopping center and several vacant out-parcels. All the abutting streets are developed with curb, gutter and sidewalk in place. Chenal Parkway and LaGrande Drive abutting the site are constructed as four lane median divided roadways. LaGrande Drive is a commercial street constructed with two lanes. Other uses in the area included office and commercial uses and vacant commercially and office zoned property. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received a few informational phone calls from the area property owners. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site, the Bascom Place Property Owners Association, the Witry Court Property Owners Association and the Coalition of West Little Rock Neighborhoods were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available to this project. Any cost to relocate existing sewer services or sewer mains will be at the Owner’s Expense. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all meter connections including any October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5936-I 4 metered connections off the private fire system. A water main extension and on-site fire protection will be required in order to provide service to this property. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). 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: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: 1. Site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 2. All previous comments apply to the future development of the out-parcels. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 24, 2009) Mr. Tim Daters was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the development stating there were no outstanding technical issues associated with the request. Staff stated the request was to allow two additional out-parcels on the site and add an additional 15,000 square feet of retail space. Staff stated the signage and lighting were to comply with the DOD. Staff stated all building signage and dumpster screening was to comply with the previously approved plan. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated any broken curb, gutter or sidewalk would require repair and replacement prior to the issues of a certificate of occupancy for any future development. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the new development was to comply with the previously approved plans for the overall development. Staff stated the development was to also comply with the minimum requirements of the City’s landscape and buffer ordinances. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5936-I 5 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: There were no outstanding issues associated with the request in need of addressing raised at the September 24, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The request is to allow additional out-parcels to be created and the addition of approximately 15,000 square feet of commercial space on the new lots within the previously approved shopping center. The development currently contains three (3) tracts and nine (9) out-parcels. The request is to add two additional out-parcels bringing the total number of out-parcels to eleven (11). The property is zoned C-2, Shopping Center District and is proposed containing 310,749 square feet of retail space. The square footage of the shopping center contains 244,284 square feet and the out-parcels containing 66,465.44 square feet. The site contains 1,901 parking spaces with a parking ratio of 6.46 per one-thousand. The ordinance would typically require the placement of twenty-eight (28) handicap spaces and thirty-one (31) will be provided at the time of full development. The request includes a variance from the C-2, Shopping Center District zoning classification to allow the creation of the new lots with less than 300 feet of street frontage. The zoning ordinance states the minimum site area for the C-2 zoning district shall be five (5) acres, except in those instances where a subdivision site plan and plat proposing peripheral lots and multiple ownership is approved by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission shall establish the size, orientation and access to multiple lot C-2 developments with special emphasis on interior circulation, curb cuts and siting of physical improvements. In addition, there shall be not less than three hundred (300) feet of district frontage on at least one (1) abutting street, whether for single or multiple building/lot development. The two (2) new lots are proposed with 239 feet and 203 feet of street frontage along Chenal Parkway. Staff is supportive of the variance request. A number of the other out-parcel lots have been created with less than the 300 feet of street frontage and do not appear to have impacted the development. Staff is supportive of the request. The developers have indicated all signage and dumpster screening will comply with the previously approved site plan. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5936-I 6 does not feel the addition of the two (2) out-parcels and the additional square footage of retail space will adversely impact the development or the area. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Staff recommends approval of the variance request to allow the creation of two (2) lots with less than the 300 feet of street frontage as typically required by the C-2, Shopping Center Zoning District. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 15, 2009) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as noted in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the variance request to allow the creation of two (2) lots with less than the 300 feet of street frontage as typically required by the C-2, Shopping Center Zoning District. 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 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent. October 15, 2009 ITEM NO.: 3 FILE NO.: Z-4411-H NAME: Pleasant Ridge Towne Center Lot 3B Revised Long-form PCD LOCATION: Located at 11525 Cantrell Road DEVELOPER: Chick-fil-A c/o Clayton Sign Company 5198 North Lake Drive Lake City, GA 30230 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 1.68 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: PCD ALLOWED USES: Retail Shopping Center PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD PROPOSED USE: Revision to the previously approved signage plan VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On December 20, 1994, through Ordinance No. 16,808, the City Board of Directors approved a PCD that would allow the development of a mixed use “Neighborhood Commercial” shopping center and an accompanying office development. The site was a 12.83 acre-tract and of the area, 11.48 acres was proposed to be developed as the shopping center. The proposed structure was 97,680 square feet, and 463 parking spaces were indicated. A 1.35-acre tract was to have 10,000 square feet of office building space with an additional 50 parking spaces. The uses proposed for the shopping center were all by-right C-2 and C-3 zoning district, except that there were to be no service stations, auto glass or muffler shops, convenience stores, or car washes October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-H 2 within the scope of the PCD. The uses proposed for the office building were all uses by right in the O-2 and O-3 zoning district. On January 9, 1997, the Commission reviewed a request for a change in the right-of- way dedication and street improvement requirement to Fairview Road. The developer requested all right-of-way dedication and street improvements be taken from the property located to the east of Fairview Road. The Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,331 on December 3, 1996, which allowed a five-year deferral of street improvements (or until development of the Pleasant Ridge Square PCD) to Fairview Road. The Little Rock Planning Commission granted a three-year time extension for the proposed submission of the final development plan at their December 22, 1997, Public Hearing. The applicant submitted a Final Development Plan for the Pleasant Ridge Square Long-form PCD, which was approved on February 1, 2002. The Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 19,233 on November 9, 2004, establishing a revision to the Pleasant Ridge Town Center PCD. The development was proposed as a 300,000 square foot retail center with restaurant space developed as a “Life-style Center”. The approval allowed the creation of three lots. Ordinance No. 19,281 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on February 15, 2005, revised the previously approved PCD to allow Coulson Oil to add an additional driveway to their site and adjust the southern property line. The site plan indicated the drive would be added to the southwestern corner of the property to adjoin to the proposed driveway for Pleasant Ridge Town Center. The applicant indicated with the adjustment, the existing Coulson PCD would function more appropriately with the approved Pleasant Ridge Town Center site plan. Coulson Oil also proposed the sale of a portion of their lot to the Pleasant Ridge Town Center along the southern perimeter. The sale of the property resulted in a rear yard buffer and landscape strip that was less than the typical minimum required per the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 19,633 on November 21, 2006, revising the previously approved PCD for the shopping center to allow the creation of two (2) additional lots for the Pleasant Ridge Town Center. The previous approval allowed for the creation of three (3) lots which had been final platted. The developer proposed the placement of the two (2) additional lots along Cantrell Road within the area identified as future restaurant sites. According to the applicant the restaurant out-parcels were needed to allow the transfer of property to prospective tenants. The approval brought the total available lots on the site to five (5). There were no other modifications proposed to the previous approval. On December 7, 2006, the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request to allow the western-most drive located along Cantrell Road to become a full service October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-H 3 intersection. The denial of the request was appealed to the Board of Directors and was scheduled to be heard on February 20, 2006. The item was withdrawn from the Board of Directors agenda prior to action by the Board of Directors. Ordinance No. 19,730 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on April 3, 2007, allowed a revision to the previously approved PCD to allow additional sign locations within the development. The approval allowed building signage located on the portion of the flat wall located on the northeast corner and northwest corner of the center shopping center building. No other modifications to the approved site plan were proposed with the revision to the PCD. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The site located at 11525 Cantrell Road is currently under construction with a Chick-fil-A. The previously approved signage plan allowed for the placement of a ground mounted monument sign within the front yard area not to exceed six feet in height and seventy-two square feet in area and building signage on the front façade abutting Cantrell Road not to exceed ten percent of the total façade area. The developers are requesting the allowance of additional signage on the building to include signage on the eastern and western facades. The western façade abuts an access drive entering the shopping center. The eastern façade abuts an unplatted and undeveloped out-parcel lot. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is developed with a shopping center with two out-parcels located along Cantrell Road. The western most out-parcel is currently under construction for a Chick-fil-A and the eastern most out-parcel remains vacant. Also located in the immediate area are a number of restaurants, two convenience stores, banks and office buildings, a drycleaners, a liquor store and a City of Little Rock Fire station. North of the site, across Cantrell Road, is the Walton Heights Subdivision. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received a few informational phone calls from the area property owners. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site, all residents who could be identified located within 300 feet of the site and the Walton Heights Property Owners Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: No comment. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-H 4 E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: No comment. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: No comment. Fire Department: No comment. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #25 – the Highway 10 Express Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant has applied for a rezoning for a revised PCD. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is a Principal Arterial. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Cantrell Road since it is a Principal Arterial. Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes planned for this section of Cantrell Road. Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan, but it does not address this issue. Landscape: No comment. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-H 5 G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 24, 2009) The applicant was not present. Staff stated there were no technical issues outstanding in need of addressing associated with the request. Staff stated the request was to allow additional signage on the currently under construction Chick-fil-A restaurant. Staff stated the applicant was seeking signage on the western and eastern facades which did not have street frontage. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: There were no outstanding issues associated with the request in need of addressing raised at the September 24, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant’s request is to allow signage without public street frontage on the buildings eastern and western facades. The property is located within the Highway 10 Design Overlay District which states signage shall comply with the provisions of Article X of the zoning ordinance, except for a development sign which is allowed as a ten foot high one hundred square feet in area and the allowance of a ground mounted monument sign for each commercial building not to exceed six feet in height and seventy-two square feet in area. The zoning ordinance typically does not allow signage without public street frontage except in complexes where a sign without street frontage is the only means of identification for a tenant. Building signage is to not exceed ten (10) percent of the total façade area of the façade abutting a public street. The signage along the western façade abuts the western entrance drive to the Pleasant Ridge Shopping Center and the sign proposed along the eastern façade abuts an unplatted out-parcel. Staff is not supportive of the request. The Highway 10 DOD is specific on the allowance of signage. In areas covered by DOD’s staff has not typically supported the allowance of signage inconsistent with the overlay district. Staff feels the approved ground sign and the sign on the front façade of the building are sufficient to identify the business. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-H 6 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 15, 2009) The applicant was present. There was one registered objector present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial to allow the placement of building signage on the eastern and western facades which were located without public street frontage. Ms. Ben Holliday addressed the Commission on behalf of Chick-fil-A. He stated he was with Clayton Sign Company which was the sign company employed by Chick-fil-A for sign placement and permitting. He stated the site plan indicated three building sign locations and one ground sign location. He stated the previous approval allowed a building sign on the front façade and the ground sign complying with the Overlay standards. He stated his request was to add additional signage. He stated with the existing vegetation and the angle of the building the front building sign was not visible. He stated the signage on the eastern façade was necessary to provide a presence to customers accessing the entrance drive to the shopping center. He stated the western sign would allow visibility for customers entering the shopping center along the western access drive. He stated eighty percent of the customers were received as impulse customers. He stated most of the time a person did not say he was going to Chick-fil-A and then Target. He stated most of the customers would go to Target and then see the Chick-fil-A and stop for a meal. Ms. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated the League of Women Voters supported staff and the denial request. She stated the Pleasant Ridge Town Center was previously approved additional signage and with the current request it was felt the developers were nibbling away at the previous approval and the allowances of additional signage with the approval. Ms. Bell stated after a certain point signage became a visual problem and no longer served the intended purpose. Mr. Holliday stated Chick-fil-A signage was tastefully constructed. He stated the signage proposed was thirty-six square feet and twenty-five square feet. He stated the signage as proposed was not offensive. He stated the signage as proposed was quite minimal. There was a general discussion by the Commissioners concerning the need for additional signage and the existing electronic sign located on the site. Commissioner Nunnley stated he felt the signage on the east side of the building was more critical then the sign on the west side of the building. Mr. Holliday stated both signs were important to identify the business. Mr. Holliday requested the Commission vote on the sign request separately. A motion was made to approve the sign request for the sign located on the east wall. The motion failed by a vote of 5 ayes, 3 noes and 3 absent. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-H 7 A motion was made to approve the sign request for the sign located on the west wall. The motion carried by a vote of 6 ayes, 2 noes and 3 absent. There was a general discussion by the Commission as to the need for the signs and the location the sign would have the most impact. Mr. Holliday stated if only one sign was approved he desired the sign on the eastern façade. A motion was made to expunge the vote. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent. Mr. Holliday addressed the Commission and amended his request to eliminate the signage request on the western façade. A motion was made to approve the amended request and to allow signage without public street frontage on the eastern façade. The motion carried by a vote of 7 ayes, 1 noes and 3 absent. October 15, 2009 ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: Z-5967-C NAME: Boykens Revised Short-form POD LOCATION: Located at 5819 Young Road DEVELOPER: Demeeka Boykins 2410 Booker Street Little Rock, AR 72204 SURVEYOR: James Farris, PLS P.O. Box 10384 Conway, AR 72034 AREA: 0.21 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: POD ALLOWED USES: Barber/Beauty Shop and General and Professional Office PROPOSED ZONING: Revised POD PROPOSED USE: Add daycare as an allowable use VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Prior to annexation, the structure at 5819 Young Road housed a day care center. The property was brought into the City of Little Rock with a nonconforming O-1 zoning status. At some point, the structure was remodeled into a four-unit apartment building, which was a violation of the property’s zoning. On April 18, 1995, the Planning Commission approved a rezoning of the property to R-5 to allow the use of the structure as a four-unit apartment. However, on May 16, 1995, the Board of Directors denied the rezoning request. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5967-C 2 On March 28, 1996, the Planning Commission approved a rezoning of the property to C-1, again to allow the four-unit apartment building. As before, the Board of Directors denied the rezoning request on July 16, 1996. Ordinance No. 17,931 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on February 16, 1999, rezoned the property from R-2, Single-family to POD. The approval allowed the use of the existing building as an office and barber/beauty shop. The approval allowed the utilization of 1,820 square feet of the structure as a law office and the remaining 980 square feet as a three (3) chair barber/beauty shop. One of the two existing drives was to be closed and a new area of parking was to be added on the south side of the building which would contain nine (9) parking spaces. The front 12-foot by 21-foot canopy was to be removed in order to accommodate two (2) additional parking spaces. The hours of operation were approved from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm Monday through Friday. Wall signage was approved not to exceed ten (10) percent of the façade area of the front of the building. The canopy was not removed and the new parking areas were not developed. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing a revision to the previously approved POD to add a daycare as an allowable use for the property. The applicant intends to serve up to thirty (30) children ranging from six (6) weeks to twelve (12) years of age. The daycare center will provide all day care and after school care. The hours of operation are proposed from 6 am to 6 pm Monday through Friday. One van is proposed for the daycare center to provide transportation to and from area schools. The center will employ four (4) staff persons. The development is proposed with a single ground mounted sign three (3) feet by eight (8) feet or 24 square feet in area. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an existing one story brick and frame building which has 2,800 square feet of floor area. There is a small partially paved parking area located in the front of the building. Interstate 30 is located immediately south of and adjacent to the property. Single-family and multi-family residences are located to the north across Young Road. There is one single-family residence located to the west, with commercial uses further west along Geyer Springs Road. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5967-C 3 C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received a few informational phone calls from the area property owners. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site, all residents who could be identified located within 300 feet of the site, the Wakefield Neighborhood Association and Southwest Little Rock United for Progress were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Young Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a collector street. A dedication of right-of-way 30 feet from centerline will be required. 2. Obtain a franchise agreement for parking in the public right-of-way from Public Works (Bennie Nicolo, 371-4818). 3. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available to this project. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: 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. Fire Department: Fire hydrants may be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5967-C 4 F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the 65th Street East Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use for this property. The applicant has applied for a rezoning for a revised POD. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Young Road is a Collector. The primary function of a Collector Street is to provide a connection from Local Streets to Arterials. This street may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. Bicycle Plan: A Class III bike route is shown along Young Road. A Class III bikeway is a signed route on a street shared with traffic. No additional paving or right-of-way is required. Class III bicycle route signage may be required. Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the Geyer Springs/Wakefield Neighborhood Plan. Their Zoning and Future Land Use goal states: “Encourage developers to use the Planned Zoning Development (PZD) form of zoning rather than straight zoning to ensure appropriate businesses are brought into the neighborhood.” Landscape: 1. Site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 2. Landscaping will be required in conjunction of any newly paved parking areas. 3. This site is located along Interstate 30; a thirty foot (30’) greenspace/landscaping is required along the southern perimeter of this site. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 24, 2009) Ms. Boykens was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the request stating the applicant was seeking a revision to a previously approved Planned Office Development to add a daycare as an allowable use for the property. Staff stated the current approval allow for general and professional office uses and a barber/beauty salon. Staff requested Ms. Boykens provide the number of employees, details of any proposed signage and questioned if there would be Saturday hours. Staff also stated the previous approval allowed for the removal of the front canopy to allow two additional parking spaces and questioned if the canopy would be removed with this request. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5967-C 5 Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated Young Road was classified on the Master Street Plan as a collector street and would require dedication of right of way 30 feet from centerline. Staff stated a franchise agreement to allow parking within the right of way would be required and provided Ms. Boykens the contact person with Public Works. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated landscaping would be required in conjunction with any new paving on the site. Staff stated the rear of the site abutted I-30 which required the placement of a 30-foot landscape strip. 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 cover letter to staff addressing the issues raised at the September 24, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. A total of four (4) persons will be employed by the daycare center. The revised cover letter details the proposed signage and states no Saturday service will be provided. The applicant is proposing a revision to the previously approved POD to add a daycare as an allowable use for the property. A maximum of thirty (30) children ranging from six (6) weeks to twelve (12) years of age are proposed to be served. The business will also provide after school care with the hours of operation from 6 am to 6 pm Monday through Friday. The business will provide transportation to and from area schools via a single van. The business will employ four (4) staff. The parking requirements for a daycare center based on the number of employees, the number of children and the business vehicle is typically a total of eight (8) parking spaces. The site is currently paved without striping. It appears six parking spaces are available on the site. The adjoining lot is also paved and provides parking for the adjacent salon. The applicant has indicated agreements will be reached with a neighboring property owner should additional parking be required to allow employees to park off-site. The depth of the property is such that the customers will be required to back into the right of way. Staff is supportive of allowing the backing this to occur. Although customers will back into the right of way they will not be backing into the travel lanes of Young Road. This activity will require a franchise agreement with the City at the time of building permit application for renovations to the building. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5967-C 6 The applicant has indicated a playground area will be added to the rear yard area. The playground will be constructed in compliance with all State and City code requirements. A single ground mounted sign three (3) feet by eight (8) feet or 24 square feet in area is proposed along Young Road. No building signage is proposed. Staff recommends building signage be allowed as allowed in the office zoning district should the applicant desire to add building signage in the future. Staff is supportive of the request. Although the development does not provide the typically required number of parking spaces staff does not feel the lesser number will adversely impact the development or the area. The applicant has indicated should parking become an issue a parking arrangement off site will be sought to provide employee parking at a near-by location. Also the current depth of the property does not allow for maneuvering on-site without the utilization of the right of way for backing. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff feels the use of the site as a daycare center is an appropriate use for the property. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 15, 2009) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as noted in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent. October 15, 2009 ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: Z-6446-C NAME: Robertson Short-form POD LOCATION: Located at 14116 Taylor Loop Road DEVELOPER: Chad Robertson 30 Orle Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 ENGINEER: BTE - Blaylock Threet Engineers, Inc. 1501 Market Street Little Rock, AR 72211 AREA: 0.66 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PD-C ALLOWED USES: Single-family and a single chair beauty salon PROPOSED ZONING: POD PROPOSED USE: Single-family, General and Professional Office and Chiropractor office with residences VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: The Little Rock Board of Directors approved Ordinance No. 17,696 on March 17, 1998, establishing Miller Short-form PD-C located at 14116 Taylor Loop Road. The approval allowed the 700 square foot basement to become a beauty shop with a single chair stylist and one manicurist. The applicant proposed to maintain the residential character of the site and to remain living in the home. The applicant proposed a single ground mounted sign to identify the beauty shop business. The sign was to be a maximum of three feet in height and six square feet in area (2’ x 3’). The Planning Commission voted to approve the requested revision to the PD-C by a vote of 7 ayes, 4 noes and 0 absent at its July 24, 2003, Public Hearing to allow the site October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6446-C 2 to convert to a cosmetology school. There were four parking spaces located in the front yard area and the applicant proposed the placement of 23 parking spaces in the rear of the structure. The hours of operation were proposed as Tuesday through Saturday from 8:00 am to 4:30 pm. The Saturday hours of operation were to be bi-weekly only. The request included a reduced landscape strip along the northern perimeter. The City Beautiful Commission, at their September 4, 2003 public hearing, denied the reduced landscape strip along the northern property line. The item was withdrawn at the Board of Directors meeting prior to final action. An application was filed for the August 26, 2004, Planning Commission public hearing to allow a revision to the PD-C to allow the site to contain a two family residence and a photography studio. The owner of the photography studio would be one of the residents of the site with an apartment over the garage area as the second residential structure. No exterior modifications to the site or any additional parking were proposed. The applicant proposed the placement of a single ground mounted sign in the front yard area not to exceed six (6) feet in height and sixty-four (64) square feet in area. The applicant withdrew this request prior to the public hearing. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: A new owner of the property is now requesting to rezone the site from PD-C to POD to allow the use of the property as general and professional office uses, a chiropractor clinic and a residence. The applicant has indicated the property will be marketed as a residence, an office use with a residential component or an office use without a residential component. The hours of operation are indicated 8 am to 6 pm Monday through Friday. The applicant is requesting the placement of a ground mounted monument sign within the front yard area. The sign is proposed as a four (4) foot by six (6) foot sign. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an existing single-family structure and is currently vacant. The site adjoins a PCD, which was originally approved for the former Harvest Foods Store and is currently vacant but the most recent use was by David Claiborne Antique Mall. There was a 100-foot land use buffer approved as a part of the development to separate the commercial use from the single-family homes located to the south. There is a POD located north of the site approved for a dental office and further north is a PD-O currently being used as a veterinarian office. A POD located to the east of the site currently being used as an office use. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6446-C 3 The uses along Cantrell Road are for the most part non-residential uses in this area but the area to the south, along Taylor Loop Road, are primarily single- family homes. The site adjoins the Westchester Subdivision to the southwest, which is predominately built out. Southeast of the site is the Secluded Hills Subdivision, which is also predominately built out. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received a few informational phone calls from the area property owners. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site, all residents who could be identified located within 300 feet of the site and the Westchester Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available to this project. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Due to the nature of this facility, installation of an approved reduced pressure zone backflow preventer assembly (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. Contact Central Arkansas Water if additional fire protection or metered water service is required. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6446-C 4 Fire Department: Fire hydrants may be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Transition for this property. The applicant has applied for a rezoning for a POD. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Taylor Loop 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. This street may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. Bicycle Plan: A Class I bike route is shown along Taylor Loop Road. A Class I bikeway is built separate from or alongside a road. Additional paving and right of way may be required. Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Plan. The Residential Development goal states: “Enforce the construction of sidewalks with all types of development.” Landscape: 1. Site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 2. Landscaping will be required in conjunction of any newly paved parking areas. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 24, 2009) Mr. Robertson was present. Staff presented an overview of the request stating there were few outstanding technical issues in need of addressing related to the request. Staff stated the property was under new ownership and the previously approved PD-C did not allow for a transfer of uses for the property. Staff stated October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6446-C 5 the new owner desired the allowance of general and professional office uses, a chiropractic office and a nail salon as allowable uses for the property. Staff stated the structure could also include residential in conjunction with the proposed non-residential uses. Staff stated they were not supportive of the allowance of the nail salon. Mr. Robertson stated he would remove the allowance of a nail salon from the request. Staff requested the applicant provide the days and hours of operation for the non-residential uses. Staff also requested the applicant provide the maximum number of employees for the non- residential uses. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated any broken curb, gutter or sidewalk was to be repaired prior to the issues of a certificate of occupancy for the development. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated any newly paved parking areas would require landscaping in conjunction with the construction. 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 provided staff with a revised cover letter removing the nail salon as an allowable use for the property. The approval would allow for general and professional office uses and a chiropractor clinic and residence. The property will be marketed as a residence, an office use with a residential component or an office use without a residential component. The hours of operation for the non-residential uses are indicated 8 am to 6 pm Monday through Friday. Signage is proposed as a four (4) foot by six (6) foot sign within the front yard area. Staff is not supportive of the signage as proposed. Staff recommends the signage be smaller and more in keeping with signage allowed in residential district. Staff feels a two (2) by three (3) sign is adequate to serve as identification of the businesses located within the structure. Staff feels building signage should also comply with signage allowed in residential zones or a maximum of one square foot in area. Staff is generally supportive of the request to allow the rezoning of the site from PD-C to POD to allow the use of the property as proposed. Staff is not however supportive of the signage plan. As indicated staff feels signage should be more in keeping with signage permitted in residential zones. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6446-C 6 I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 15, 2009) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had amended the signage request limiting the proposed signage to a three (3) foot by four (4) foot sign located within the front yard area. Staff stated the applicant had indicated the hours of operation were from 8 am to 6 pm Monday through Saturday and there would be a limit of a maximum of five (5) employees. Staff stated to their knowledge there were no remaining outstanding technical issues associated with the request. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comment and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent. October 15, 2009 ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: Z-4565-B NAME: Lot 2 Kanis/Shackleford Subdivision Short-form PCD LOCATION: Located West of Kaufman Road in the 10700 Block of Kanis Road DEVELOPER: Kana Hotel Group – Alpesh Patel 308 North Peters Road, Suite 110 Knoxville, TN 37922 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 1.6 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: O-3, General Office District ALLOWED USES: General Office PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: Hotel VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The developers are proposing a rezoning of this 1.63 acre lot from O-3, General Office District to PCD to allow construction of a new hotel. Fairfield Inn and Suite Hotel which is a division of Marriot Hotels is proposing a three story 80 room facility just east of the intersection of Kanis and South Shackleford Roads. The hotel is proposed with a covered canopy facing to the west and a two story parking deck adjacent to Kanis Road. With the two story deck and parking to the south of the canopy, the total parking provided is 94 parking spaces which exceeds the City requirement. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4565-B 2 Access will be from the existing private driveway off Kanis Road. The northern driveway will access the lower parking deck. The southern driveway will access the upper parking deck and the hotel entrance. Patrons will go to the hotel entrance for check in and then proceed to the parking deck. This will eliminate cars that would stop to turn left into the lower parking deck. An additional access point will be the common access easement that extends out to South Shackleford Road across the existing bank parking lot. This will add circulation within the hotel development and also provide two access points for emergency vehicles. The development is proposing the placement of two (2) signs. A pylon sign is proposed on Kanis Road at the driveway entrance. The sign is proposed thirty-six (36) feet high and one hundred and sixty (160) square feet in area. The request includes the option of an electronic reader board sign. The second sign is proposed within a sign easement located on the adjacent lot near South Shackleford Road. The sign is proposed with a maximum height of six (6) feet and a maximum sign area of sixty-four (64) square feet. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: Kanis Road adjacent to the site has been constructed to Master Street Plan standard. The sidewalk is in place along the property frontage. The site is tree covered with a single-family residence located to the east of the site fronting Kaufman Road. There are other single-family homes located along Kaufman Road. There are a number of zoning classifications within the area. This site is zoned O-3, General Office District as is the Bancorp South Bank property. The property to the west, Mamma Bea’s Big Burger is zoned O-2, Office and Institutional District as is property located to the south, fronting South Shackleford Road, containing hotels, restaurant uses and the Heart Hospital. Across South Shackleford Road is property zoned PCD, O-3, General Office District, C-2, Shopping Center District and C-3, General Commercial District which has developed with a number of uses including a convenience store, hotels, automobile dealerships and general office uses. North of the site is a large insurance company office complex, Arkansas Farm Bureau, and a daycare facility, Kidco. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received a few informational phone calls from the area property owners. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site, all residents who could be identified located within 300 feet of the site and the John Barrow Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4565-B 3 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Kanis 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. With site development, provide the design of the street conforming to the Master Street Plan. An in-lieu contribution must be made for one half street improvements on Kanis Road for future dual left turn lanes with the planned development. 3. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required along the 30 foot common access easement in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. 4. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 5. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other than residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 6. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan. 7. Provide proposed elevations for the top and bottom of the proposed retaining wall. If wall height is greater than 15 feet a variance must be requested from the Land Alteration Regulations. 8. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner). 9. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Existing private sewer main on the site must be relocated prior to construction. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4565-B 4 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. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). The facilities on-site will be private. When meters are planned off private lines, private facilities shall be installed to Central Arkansas Water's material and construction specifications and installation will be inspected by an engineer, licensed to practice in the State of Arkansas. Execution of Customer Owned Line Agreement is required. 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. Fire sprinkler systems which do not contain additives such as antifreeze shall be isolated with a double detector check valve assembly. If additives are used, a reduced pressure zone backflow preventer shall be required. Fire Department: Drive canopy must be constructed with a 13 ½ foot clearance. Install fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #3 the Baptist Medical Center Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the I-430 Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Office for this property. The applicant has applied for a rezoning for a PCD. Because this PCD request is for a hotel, which is considered an office use, the request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Kanis 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 Kanis Road October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4565-B 5 since it is a Minor Arterial. This street may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes in this immediate vicinity. Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the John Barrow Neighborhood Action Plan. Their Business and Commercial Goal states: “enhance the climate directed towards encouraging new businesses and commercial establishments to located in the area as well as retention of existing businesses.” Landscape: 1. Site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 2. The zoning buffer ordinance requires a fifteen foot (15’) wide land use buffer along the eastern property line. The property to the east is being used as single family residential. Seventy percent (70%) of these buffers are to remain undisturbed. 3. The landscape ordinance requires a minimum of eight percent (8%) of the paved surface areas to be allocated as green space. These islands are to be evenly distributed throughout the site. 4. The property to the east is residential; therefore, a six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the eastern perimeter of the site. 5. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. 6. 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 preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 24, 2009) Mr. Joe White was present representing the applicant. Staff presented an overview of the request stating there were a few outstanding technical issues in need of addressing prior to the item being forwarded to the Commission for final action. Staff requested the site plan include details concerning the total height and total area for the ground mounted signs indicated on the site plan. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated Kanis Road was classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial which would required right of way dedication and street construction per the Boundary Street Ordinance and October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4565-B 6 Master Street Plan. Staff also stated a grading permit would be required prior to any clearing or grading on the site. Staff stated the stormwater detention ordinance would apply to the future development of the site. Staff requested Mr. White provide the location of the stormwater detention facilities on the plan. Staff stated all plans for work in the right of way would require proper permits and approval prior to the start of construction. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated screening was required along the eastern perimeter of the site since the adjacent property was currently being used as a residences. Staff stated the parking areas would require landscaping per the City’s Landscape Ordinance requirements. Staff also stated at the time of development a small amount of building landscaping would be required. 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 cover letter to staff addressing the issues raised at the September 24, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has removed the request for building signage along the eastern and southern facades. The request is to allow the rezoning of this site from O-3, General Office District to PCD to allow the construction of a new hotel on the site. The hotel is proposed with three stories and a maximum building height of 60-feet. The site plan indicates the placement of a two story parking deck with the first level at grade with Kanis Road in front of the hotel. The site plan indicates an existing utility easement located along the eastern perimeter. The property to the east is zoned office but is currently being used as a single-family home. The zoning buffer ordinance requires buffering and/or screening for property zoned or used with a lesser intense use. Typically utility easements cannot count as a part of the buffering requirement. For this site the zoning buffer ordinance requires a fifteen foot (15’) wide land use buffer along the eastern property line. Seventy percent (70%) of the buffer is remain undisturbed. The buffer area was previously cleared with the installation of the sewer line located within the utility easement. Also the development will require the placement of a retaining wall within the required buffer area. The request includes the allowance of the utility easement as the required buffer. According to the applicant the easement will be relocated and abandoned in the future but October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4565-B 7 most likely not at the time of development. The site plan indicates the reestablishment of screening by the placement of an evergreen screen along the eastern perimeter at the time of development. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. Signs are proposed along Kanis Road and along Shackleford Road. The sign proposed on Shackleford Road is located within a signage easement on the adjacent bank lot. The signage along Kanis Road is proposed as a pylon sign as typically allowed in the commercial zoning district or a maximum height of thirty-six feet and a maximum sign area of one-hundred sixty square feet. The signage proposed on Shackleford Road is proposed as typically allowed in office zones or a maximum of six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area. Staff is not supportive of the pylon sign located on Kanis Road. The property is currently zoned office. Staff feels signage complying with the office zoning district is more appropriate for this area. The sign plan includes building signage at the third level along the northern and western facades. The signage is proposed with a maximum of ten percent of the façade area on which the sign is to be located. The signage along the western façade does not have public street frontage. Staff is supportive of allowing the signage as proposed on the western façade. Staff feels the location of the hotel and the visibility this additional signage will offer will eliminate the need for a pylon sign along Kanis Road. 86 parking spaces are proposed within the parking deck and eight (8) surface spaces are proposed for a total of 94 parking spaces. Hotel developments typically require the placement of one parking space per guestroom, plus an additional ten percent of the total of all parking spaces required for developments larger than twenty rooms for employees and non-guest users patronizing meeting rooms, restaurants and other facilities. The hotel is proposed with 80 guestrooms, no restaurant and a small meeting room. Based on the number of rooms the ordinance would typically require the placement of 88 parking spaces. The site development composition includes a total of 43,500 square feet of building (20.0%) and a 31,500 square foot two story parking deck (14.6%). The area proposed with paving is 10,400 square feet (14.5%) and 31,224 square feet (50.9%) is proposed as landscape area. The dumpster hours of service have been limited to 7 am to 10 pm Monday through Saturday. The applicant has indicated when the property to the east and south are redeveloped and no longer used as residential the limits on the hours of dumpster service be removed. Staff is supportive of the request. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4565-B 8 Staff is generally supportive of the development as a hotel but staff is not supportive of the signage plan as proposed. The area has developed with a mixture of uses including a variety of retail uses, hotels, a hospital, an automobile dealership and office uses. Staff feels the use of the property as a hotel is appropriate but does not feel the placement of a 36-foot tall 160-suqare foot in area sign along Kanis Road is needed. The area on the east side of South Shackleford Road is zoned and has developed with the general development criteria of the office zoning district including signage. The underlying zoning of this property is office as is the adjacent parcels. Staff feels a ground sign is adequate to identify the business from customers traveling west bound on Kanis Road and with the placement of the wall sign on the third level of the building facing west this provide the desired visibility for customers entering from South Shackleford Road. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 15, 2009) The applicant was present. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had amended the request to limit the signage along Kanis Road to a ground mounted monument sign with a maximum height of six (6) feet and a maximum sign area of sixty-four (64) square feet as recommended by staff in the agenda write-up. Staff stated to their knowledge there were no remaining outstanding technical issues associated with the request. Staff stated they were now supportive of the request and presented a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comment and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the applicant’s request to allow the placement of a wall sign on the western façade as presented on the site plan. Mr. Joe White stated there were two issues raised by the adjoining property owner which they desired to be read into the record. One was that all water would be directed to the northwest and no water would drain across Ms. Pearson’s property which was located to the east. He stated the second was the adjoining property owners were filing a Future Land Use Plan Amendment for several properties in the area. Mr. White stated his client would support the neighbors in their efforts. Mr. John McKay stated these two commitments addressed his and Ms. Parson’s concerns. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4565-B 9 There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff and amended by the applicant. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent. October 15, 2009 ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: Z-8115-B NAME: 1422 Townhomes Short-form PD-R Time Extension LOCATION: Located on the Northwest corner of 15th and Rock Streets DEVELOPER: Paul Page Dwellings, LLC 1516 Rock Street Little Rock, AR 72202 ENGINEER: Brooks Surveying 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.51 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 zoning lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: PD-R ALLOWED USES: Townhomes PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R – Two-Year Time Extension PROPOSED USE: Townhomes VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 19,649 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on October 26, 2006, rezoned the property from R-4 to PD-R. The approval allowed the construction of five two story adjoining townhomes containing 1,300 square feet of living space, a detached garage, interior courtyard and space for outdoor living. The concept of “Intown Living” included a 25-foot front yard setback on Rock Street, 18-foot setback on 15th Street, 33-foot setback to the rear alley entrance and a 10-foot setback that included green space to the north property line. Street trees within the City right-of-way were proposed along the roadways with the aid of Tree Streets. The Commission approved a revocation of the previously approved PD-R and the creation of a new PD-R for Lot 7, Block 49 of the Original City of Little Rock Subdivision October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8115-B 2 on July 23, 2009. The lot existed as a 50-foot by 140-foot lot. The developer proposed to split the lot to allow the creation of two (2) single-family residential lots to allow two new units to be constructed on the property. The lots were proposed as 70-foot by 50 foot lots. The new homes would front East 15th Street. The western most lot was proposed with a driveway from East 15th Street and the eastern most lot would take driveway access from the alley. The site is located within the MacArthur Park Historic District. A condition of the approval was the applicant was to secure approval from the Historic District Commission concerning the proposed design elements of the structures. The applicant has been unable to obtain approval of the Historic District Commission regarding the design elements due to the lack of a quorum. Due to the previously approved PD-R set for expiration in October of 2009 the applicant is requesting a time extension of the previously approved PD-R to ensure the time for development does not expire should the current plan not be approved. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: As stated the applicant is now requesting approval by the Planning Commission of a time extension for implementation of the previously approved PD-R. Per Section 36-454(e) the applicant shall have three years from the date of passage of the ordinance approving the preliminary approval to submit the final development plan. Requests for extensions of time shall be submitted in writing to the Planning Commission which may grant one (1) extension of not more than two years. Time extensions shall be applied for by formal written request not less than ninety days prior to the first expiration date. Failure of the applicant to file a timely extension shall be cause for revocation of the PUD as provided in the ordinance. The applicant has indicated they have been actively working on the project in an effort to refine and further improve the design. According to the applicant, based on the current economic climate, it is difficult to secure financing and the customer base has declined. The applicant has indicated the two (2) additional years will allow the economic climate to recover and allow the project to move forward. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is currently vacant. The area is predominately residential with a scattering of single-family and multi-family units. The site is located in the MacArthur Park Historic District. Two blocks west of the site is Main Street with a number of office and commercial businesses. October 15, 2009 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8115-B 3 C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area resident. All property owners located within 200 feet, all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site, the MacArthur Park Property Owners Association, the Pettaway Park Neighborhood Association and the Downtown Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request for a two-year time extension for the proposed development subject to compliance with all previously approved comments and conditions. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 15, 2009) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request for a two-year time extension for the proposed development subject to compliance with all previously approved comments and conditions. 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 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent.