pc_12 03 2009sub
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION HEARING
SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD
DECEMBER 3, 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
J. T. Ferstl
Troy Laha
Obray Nunnley, Jr.
William Rector
Billy Rouse
Candice Smith
Jeff Yates
Members Absent: 2 Open Positions
City Attorney: Cindy Dawson
III. Approval of the Minutes of the October 15, 2009 Meeting of the Little Rock
Planning Commission. The Minutes were approved as presented.
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION AGENDA
DECEMBER 3, 2009
OLD BUSINESS:
Item Number:
File Number:
Title:
A. Z-8470 Ramirez Short-form PCD, located at 3723 West 98th Street.
B. S-46-JJ Lot 134R Overlook Park Addition Replat, located at
27 Overlook Circle.
C. 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.
NEW BUSINESS:
I. SITE PLAN REVIEW:
Item Number:
File Number:
Title:
1. S-867-IIIIIII Chenal Valley Phase 18 E-2 Preliminary Plat, located on
Chalamont Drive, East of Chalamont Place, West of
Challan Drive.
2. S-1394-B Carter Oaks Subdivision Preliminary Plat, located on Carter
Lane.
3. S-1427-C Chateau on Stagecoach Replat Lots 13A-R, 13-R-B and
14RR, located at 38 Chateaus Lane.
4. S-1636-A Heights Addition Preliminary Plat, located East of South
Ridge Drive, South of Walton Heights Subdivision.
5. S-1642 Clay Commercial Subdivision Preliminary Plat, located at
13297.
Agenda, Page Two
I. SITE PLAN REVIEW: (CONTINUED)
Item Number:
File Number:
Title:
6. S-1643 PPG Subdivision Preliminary Plat, located on the Southeast
Corner of Vimy Ridge and Alexander Roads.
7. S-1644 Stagecoach Baseline Preliminary Plat, located on the
Northeast Corner of Baseline and Stagecoach Roads.
II. PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS:
Item Number:
File Number:
Title:
8. Z-2326-C G & S Insulating Revised Short-form PCD, located at
6620 South University Avenue.
9. Z-4473-D Kavanaugh Place Revised Short-form PCD, located at
2701 Kavanaugh Boulevard.
10. Z-5984-B 5201 Jerry Drive and Lot 4 Hoggard’s Addition Short-form
POD, located at 5201 Jerry Drive.
11. Z-6120-P Governor’s Manor Revised PD-R, located at Rushmore
Avenue and Capitol Hills Boulevard.
12. Z-7008-B Kanis Office Park Short-form POD, located at 18425 Kanis
Road.
13. Z-7025-C Creekwood Plaza Revised Short-form PCD, located on the
Northeast Corner of Kanis and Bowman Roads.
14. Z-7917-B Verizon Wireless Revised Short-form PCD, located at
12018 Chenal Parkway.
15. Z-7920-B Lot 1 Baker Addition Short-form PCD, located at
17410 Kanis Road.
Agenda, Page Three
II. PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS: (CONTINUED)
Item Number:
File Number:
Title:
16. Z-8118-A 18220 Cantrell Road Short-form PCD Time Extension,
located at 18220 Cantrell Road.
17. Z-8445-A C Street Surgery Center Revised Short-form POD, located
at 5910 C Street.
18. Z-8501 Stanton Optical Short-form PCD, located at 112 South
University Avenue.
19. Z-8502 Gadberry Short-form PD-R, located at 720 Ash Street.
20. Z-8503 The Residence at Brodie Creek Long-form PD-R, located
on the Northwest Corner of West 36th Street and Bowman
Road.
December 3, 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
December 3, 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
December 3, 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
December 3, 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
December 3, 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.
December 3, 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
December 3, 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
December 3, 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.
December 3, 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.
December 3, 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.
STAFF UPDATE:
There has been no change to the application request since the previous staff write-up.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 3, 2009)
Mr. Able Ramirez was present representing the request. There were registered
objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the request was a rezoning of the
non-residential portion of the site only to recognize and existing auto body repair shop
and allow a building located along the southern perimeter to be used as storage by
Mr. Ramirez.
Mr. Ramirez addressed the Commission. He stated he bought the property a few years
ago and the site had an auto body repair shop on the property when he purchased the
site. He stated there were seven mobile homes located on the site. He stated #1 was
no longer on the site.
Mr. Pat Gee addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated she
was President of the Upper Baseline Neighborhood Association and Vice-President of
the Southwest Little Rock United for Progress. She stated both organizations had voted
to oppose the request. She stated the site was a nuisance to the area residents. She
provided the Commission with copies of police reports for the area. She stated the
violations included noise, loud music, gun fire and disturbing the peace. She stated she
had visited the site and when she pulled in she did not feel comfortable which was
unusual for her. She requested the Commission deny the request.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8470
11
Mr. Tommy Hayes addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated
his home was two blocks from the site and his family was disturbed on a number of
occasions by the gun fire and loud music from the site. He stated he checked with the
Secretary of States office to determine if the business had a license and was told they
did not. He stated the property was purchased in 2003 by Mr. Ramirez. He stated the
neighborhood concerns were noise, buffering and disturbance calls. He stated the
police had been to the site a number of times to quite persons from large social
gatherings. He stated the residents did not need this disturbance within their residential
neighborhood.
Mr. Hayes stated the neighborhood was a quiet working class, mixed race and age
neighborhood. He stated the neighborhood cared about each other and checked on
each other. He stated the area was not rental but an area of new homeowners and
retirees. He stated the neighborhood was not safe and the area needed to be rid of the
loud noise, running gun battles and various disturbances.
Mr. Ramirez addressed the Commission addressing the issues raised. He stated he
was not aware of any issues at the auto body repair shop. He stated the noise
complaints were most likely coming from the mobile homes. He stated he did not live
on site and was not aware of the problems the neighborhood was having. He stated the
site was not being used as a special events center. He stated there was a family
reunion earlier in the year but most of the persons left by 10:00 to 11:00 pm. He stated
there were two keys to the gate. He stated one held by the auto body repair shop
owner and the second he had. He stated the gate was located at 5:00 in the afternoon
and was not reopened until 8:00 the next morning. He stated his mother-in-law lived in
one of the mobile homes and his sister-in-law and brother-in-law each lived in two
separate mobile homes. He stated the remainder of the homes were rented by persons
renting to own the home. He stated he owned all the land on the site.
Commissioner Rector stated he had concerns with Mr. Ramirez’s statement that he was
unaware of the problems taking place in the area. He told Mr. Ramirez he did not feel
he had control of his property to not know the number of complaints and the number of
police calls to the area. He stated he had constructed a building without a permit, had
not shown at a couple of the public hearings and was now saying he was unaware of
the numerous police calls to the property. Mr. Rector stated the issue before the
Commission was a land use issue. He stated he had concerns with approving a land
use for the property if there was no control of what was going on in the area.
Mr. Ramirez stated he would get a better handle on the activities in the area and
determine if the noise was coming from his tenants or the adjacent tenants.
There was a general discussion by the Commission and Mr. Ramirez concerning the
construction on the site and the cost of construction. Mr. Ramirez stated he did the
work himself and the materials to enclose the small addition were $4,000.
Commissioner Laha commented this was less than $9.00 per square foot. The
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8470
12
Commission questioned if Mr. Ramirez had obtained a building permit. He stated he did
obtain a permit in July after being told by the City a permit was necessary. The
Commission questioned if the auto body shop had a business license. He stated he did
not have a business license. Staff stated the auto repair shop could not get a license
unless the zoning was approved.
The Commission questioned the culvert and the driveway access. Staff stated the
culvert appeared to have been in place a number of years. Staff stated the culvert
appeared to be clogged and would have operations check and clean the culvert if
necessary. The Commission questioned permitting process for culverts. Staff stated
plans were reviewed along with pipe sizes to determine the capacity and if the pipe size
could handle the water flows.
The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff. The
motion failed by a vote of 3 ayes, 6 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: B 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
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (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.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (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
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (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.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (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.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (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).
STAFF UPDATE:
There has been no contact by the applicant since the previous public hearing. Staff
recommends this item be withdrawn, without prejudice, and resubmitted once the
outstanding issues related to access is resolved.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 3, 2009)
The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated
the applicant had contacted them on December 2, 2009, requesting a deferral of the
item to the January 14, 2010, 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.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-46-JJ
7
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the By-law waiver with regard to the late deferral request. The motion
carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions. The chair
entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried
by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: C 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.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (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.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant submitted a request dated November 18, 2009, requesting this item be
deferred to the January 14, 2010, public hearing. The deferral request will require a
waiver of the Commission’s By-laws with regard to the late deferral request. Staff is
supportive of the deferral request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 3, 2009)
The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request dated November 18,
2009, requesting a deferral of the item to the January 14, 2010, public hearing. Staff
stated the deferral request would require a waiver of the Commission’s By-laws with
regard to the number of deferral request. Staff stated they were supportive of the
deferral request.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-E
3
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the By-law waiver to allow the additional deferral request. The motion
carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions. The chair
entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried
by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: S-867-IIIIIII
NAME: Chenal Valley Phase 18 E-2 Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: Located on Chalamont Drive, East of Chalamont Place, West of Challan Drive
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: 6.1 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 22 FT. NEW STREET: 950 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 19 - Chenal
CENSUS TRACT: 42.11
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1. A variance from the Master Street Plan to allow the intersection street grade to exceed the
typical ordinance standard.
2. A variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow advanced grading of the entire
property with the installation of the basic infrastructure.
3. A variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow a reduced front building line for the
plat area. (Section 31-256)
4. A variance from the Zoning Ordinance to allow reduced side yard setbacks for the plat
area (5-feet). (Section 36-254(d)(2))
5. A variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow a reduced lot size for Lots 1-5.
(Section 31-232)
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-867-IIIIIII
2
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The request is a preliminary plat to allow the creation of 22 new single-family lots from
this 6.1 acre tract located just south of Joe T. Robinson School. The subdivision is
proposed with a single access from Chalamont Drive with 950 linear feet of new public
street constructed to serve the new lots. There are a number of variances associated
with the proposed preliminary plat. All 22 of the new lots are proposed with a 15-foot
front building line and 5-foot side yard setbacks. Lots 1 – 5 are indicated with a lot
area less than the typical 7,000 square feet as required by the R-2, Single-family
zoning district. The request includes a variance from the Master Street Plan to allow a
ten percent (10%) grade over the entire length of the entrance street. The request
also includes a variance from the City’s Land Alteration Ordinance to allow the grading
of the lots during the construction of the streets and utilities.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a wooded site located south of Joe T Robinson School and west of the area
private neighborhood clubhouse and pool. The site appears to slope slightly from
Chalamont Drive upward to the north. Chalamont Drive is constructed as a collector
street with curb and gutter. An entrance access to this site was installed with the
construction of Chalamont Drive. The area to the southeast is developed with
single-family homes. The area to the west is vacant but was recently final platted for
new single-family home construction. South of the site is wooded with no home
constructed at this time.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from the area property owners.
All property owners abutting the site, the Coalition of West Little Rock Neighborhoods
and the Duqesne Place Property Owners Association were notified of the public
hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required
prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other than residential
subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be submitted and approved
prior to the start of construction.
2. Since the street is 24 feet in width, show on the plan the area of restricted
parking.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-867-IIIIIII
3
3. With site development, provide the design of street conforming to the Master
Street Plan. Construct street improvement to Chalamont Court with the planned
development.
4. 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.
5. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of
work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from
Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner).
6. 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.
7. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed
location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan.
8. Staff is in support of the variance for a ten percent (10%) intersection grade.
9. Street improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic Engineering
must approve completed plans prior to construction.
10. Provide a letter prepared by a registered engineer certifying the sight distance at
the intersections comply with 2004 AASHTO Green Book standards.
11. The Public Works notes pertaining to street and right-of-way width do not match
the widths shown on the plans.
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: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the
time of request for water service must be met. Water main extensions will be required
in order to provide service to this property. 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. Please submit plans for water facilities
to Central Arkansas Water for review. Plan revisions may be required after additional
review. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of water
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-867-IIIIIII
4
facilities. Approval of plans by Central Arkansas Water, the Arkansas Department of
Health Engineering Division and Little Rock Fire Department is required.
Fire Department: Fire Hydrants will 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: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 12, 2009)
The applicant was not present. Staff presented the item to the Committee along with
the requested variances. Staff stated there were no significant technical issues
associated with the request. Staff noted there were a number of variances related to
lot development standards but were consistent with the previous development pattern
in the area. Staff stated they would contact the applicant and provide them with the
comments and work through any issues. There was no further discussion of the item.
The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff addressing the issues
identified for the November 12, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised
plat indicates the source of title of the landowner and indicates the street as a 24-foot
wide street in a 45-foot right-of-way. The plat also indicates the areas of restricted
parking.
The request is to create a preliminary plat to allow the 22 new single-family lots from a
6.1 acre tract with a density of 3.6 units per acre. A single access from Chalamont
Drive is proposed with 950 linear feet of new public street constructed to serve the
new lots. The street is proposed as a minor residential street with 24 feet of pavement
in a 45 foot right-of-way.
There are a number of variances from the Subdivision Ordinance proposed for the
development of the lots. All 22 of the new lots are proposed with a 15-foot front
building line and 5-foot side yard setbacks. The ordinance typically requires the
placement of a 25 foot front yard building line and a side yard of ten (10) percent of the
lot width not to exceed eight (8) feet.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-867-IIIIIII
5
The proposed plat contains a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow lots to
develop with a reduced lot area. Lots 1 – 5 are indicated with lot areas less than the
typical 7,000 square feet as required by the R-2, Single-family Zoning District. The
lots are indicated with 6,900 square feet.
The request includes a variance from the Master Street Plan to allow a ten percent
(10%) grade over the entire length of the entrance street. The Master Street Plan
states a maximum centerline grade at intersections for the first thirty (30) feet is five (5)
percent.
The request also includes a variance from the City’s Land Alteration Ordinance to
allow the grading of the lots during the construction of the streets and utilities. The
developers have indicated the variance is necessary to balance the site.
Staff is supportive of the proposed plat and the variance requests. Although there are
variances associated with the preliminary plat the development standards of the lots
are consistent with development standards of other phases of Chenal within the area.
The density proposed for the new subdivision is 3.6 units per acre which is also typical
of the development pattern in the Chenal area. Two (2) tracts of open space are
indicated on the proposed plat to allow buffering from Chalamont Drive and a third
tract is indicated along the western perimeter of the proposed subdivision. Staff is
supportive of the variance request from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow
advanced grading of the site to allow the site to balance and eliminate the need for
hauling of material on City streets. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding
technical issues in need of addressing. Staff feels the creation of the subdivision as
proposed should have limited impact on the adjoining properties.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed preliminary plat 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 from the Land Alteration
Ordinance to allow grading of the entire tract with the placement of the streets and
utilities.
Staff recommends approval of the variance request from the Subdivision Ordinance
Section 31-256 to allow a reduced front building line for the plat area, the variance
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-867-IIIIIII
6
request from Section 36-254(d)(2) to allow reduced side yard setbacks for the plat
area (5-feet) and the variance from the Subdivision Ordinance Section 31-232 to allow
a reduced lot size for Lots 1-5.
Staff recommends approval of the variance request from the Master Street Plan to
allow the intersection grade to exceed the typical ordinance standard.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 3, 2009)
The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the
item with a recommendation of approval of the proposed preliminary plat subject to
compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the
agenda staff report. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the variance request
from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow grading of the entire tract with the placement of
the streets and utilities. Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the variance
request from the Subdivision Ordinance Section 31-256 to allow a reduced front building line
for the plat area, the variance request from Section 36-254(d)(2) to allow reduced side yard
setbacks for the plat area (5-feet) and the variance from the Subdivision Ordinance Section
31-232 to allow a reduced lot size for Lots 1-5. Staff presented a recommendation of
approval of the variance request from the Master Street Plan to allow the intersection grade
to exceed the typical ordinance standard.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of
the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and
2 open positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: S-1394-B
NAME: Carter Oaks Subdivision Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: Located on Carter Lane
DEVELOPER:
AEAD Investments
c/o White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
ENGINEER:
White-Daters Engineers
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 0.739 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 5 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 19 - Chenal
CENSUS TRACT: 42.11
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
On July 23, 2003, the Little Rock Planning Commission approved a preliminary plat for
an area containing 5.0-acres to allow the creation of 20 single-family residential lots. A
new public street extending from Carter Lane was proposed to access the new lots with
three of the lots fronting onto a proposed collector street (Lamarche Drive). The
average lot size proposed was 60-feet by 120-feet or 7,200 square feet.
A new residential street with 45-feet of right-of-way and 24-feet of pavement was
proposed with lots loading from the new street, Carter Oaks Lane. The applicant also
proposed ½ street construction to Lamarche Drive which adjoined the applicant’s
western property line with final platting.
The development was proposed in two phases with Lots 5 – 17 final platted in Phase I
and Lots 1 – 4 and 18 – 20 being completed in Phase II. A final plat for Phase I was
executed on March 10, 2006.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1394-B
2
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The request is to allow the creation of a zero lot line subdivision containing five
(5) lots from four (4) of the previously final platted lots. The proposal is to allow
structures to be constructed on the lot line, with the exception of 19R which will
have a six foot side yard setback on the southern property line adjacent to an
existing home. The lots are proposed with an average size of 53 feet by 120
feet. The proposed plat indicates the allowable building area on all lots is 42-feet
width by 70-feet in depth.
The building envelope allows a maximum building footprint of 2,940 square feet
for single story structures. The cover letter indicates the structures will be one or
two stories. The cover letter states the south building elevation will not include
doors or transparent windows. Translucent windows will be permitted.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There is a recently constructed single-family home located on Lot 20 which is not
a part of the proposed subdivision. There is also a single-family home located on
Lots 17R, 18R and Tract A. The area is predominately single-family located on
large lots. There is a small engine repair shop located to the southeast but it is
currently closed. Carter Lane is a narrow street constructed of chip seal. With
the final platting of Lots 16 – 20 a sidewalk, curb and gutter were constructed
along this property frontage on Carter Lane.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from the area property
owners. All property owners abutting the site and the Coalition of West Little
Rock Neighborhoods were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Carter Lane has been improved to the Master Street Plan standard along the
frontage of this property.
2. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed
location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan.
3. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1394-B
3
4. 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.
5. Measures to control the increase in stormwater runoff from the increased
impervious surface should be implemented to not damage adjacent property.
6. With site development, provide the design of street conforming to the Master
Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to LaMarche Drive with
the planned development. Staff recommends an in-lieu payment for the cost
of the required street improvements.
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. Contact Central Arkansas
Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. A Capital
Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this
project in addition to normal charges.
Fire Department: Fire Hydrants will 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: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 12, 2009)
The applicant was not present. Staff presented the item to the Committee stating
the request was to allow five (5) zero lot line lots to be created from four (4)
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1394-B
4
previously final platted lots. Staff stated there were few outstanding technical
issues associated with the request. Staff stated they would contact the applicant
and work to resolve any outstanding issues prior to the full Commission hearing
the request. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then
forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat addressing issues raised at
the November 12, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised cover
letter states the area of the previously approved preliminary plat will be revised
and submitted to staff upon dedication of right of way for LaMarche Drive located
along the preliminary plats western boundary. The home on Tract A will be
removed and this land area will become a part of lots within the preliminary plat
area located west of this site.
The subdivision is proposed as a replat for four (4) previously final platted lots
allowing the creation of a zero-lot-line subdivision containing five (5) lots. Section
36-254(d)(4) states for the purposes of zero-lot-line lots, the minimum lot width
may be reduced to not less than thirty-five (35) feet. The lot area shall not be less
than four thousand (4,000) square feet. Section 31-234 states submission of a
plat creating a zero-lot-line development shall be accompanied by a generalized
site plan showing the proposed locations and dimensions of all buildings,
accessory uses and other improvements. Platted building lines shall be shown on
all sides of each lot for purposes of delineating the maximum buildable area of
each lot and specify the zero-lot-line yard.
The proposal is to allow structures to be constructed on the lot line, with the
exception of 19R which will have a six foot side yard setback on the southern
property line adjacent to an existing home. The remainder of the lots will have a
zero setback on the southern property line and a ten foot side yard setback on
the northern property line. The average lot size is 53 feet by 120 feet for a lot
area of 6,360 square feet. The proposed plat indicates an allowable building
area on all lots of 42-feet by 70-feet for a building envelope of 2,940 square feet.
Staff is supportive of the request. The applicant has provided the required
information to verify lot development standards as established for a zero-lot-line
subdivision per the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. To staff’s knowledge
there are no remaining outstanding technical issues in need of addressing
related to the proposed preliminary plat 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.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1394-B
5
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 3, 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 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 9 ayes,
0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: 3 FILE NO.: S-1427-C
NAME: Chateaus on Stagecoach Replat Lots 13A-R, 13-R-B and 14RR
LOCATION: Located at 38 Chateaus Lane
DEVELOPER:
Cipriano Avial
38 Chateaus Lane
Little Rock, AR 72210
ENGINEER:
White Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 0.58 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 16 – Otter Creek
CENSUS TRACT: 42.08
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1. A variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow a reduced front building line of
15-feet. (Section 31-256)
2. A variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow a reduced lot area for Lot 13A-R.
(Section 31-232)
3. A variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the lots to be created with a lot
width less than typically required per the R-2, Zoning District. (Section 31-232(a))
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The project contains 0.58 acres and is located on Chateaus Lane. The site was
originally final platted as three (3) residential lots and later replatted into two (2)
residential lots. The owner now desires to replat the lots into three (3) residential
lots.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1427-C
2
The original approval allowed for a reduced front building line for all the lots of
15-feet which the applicant is continuing to request. Lot 13A-R is indicated with a
reduced lot area than is typically required per the R-2, Single-family Zoning
District. Each of the lots are indicated with a lot width less than typically required
per the R-2, Single-family Zoning District.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The subdivision has developed with few lots remaining without homes. The site
has a home on the western most lot with the area to be replatted vacant.
Chateaus Lane is a residential street constructed with curb and gutter. There are
no sidewalks in place along this property frontage.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from the area property
owners. All property owners abutting the site, the Chateaus on Stagecoach
Neighborhood Association and Southwest Little Rock United for Progress were
notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
No comment.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this project.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: No objection.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1427-C
3
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 12, 2009)
The applicant was not present. Staff presented the item to the Committee stating
the request was to allow two (2) lots to become three (3). Staff stated at the time
the subdivision was final platted the area was three lots and was later replatted
into two (2). Staff stated there were no outstanding technical issues in need of
addressing related to the proposed replat. There was no further discussion of
the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final
action.
H. ANALYSIS:
There were no outstanding technical issues in need of addressing raised at the
November 12, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The request is to allow
two (2) single-family residential lots to become three (3) residential lots. At the
time the final plat was approved the area contained three (3) lots. During
construction of the owners home he decided to recombine the lots into two (2)
lots. He has since decided to take the lots back to the original configuration with
a slight modification to the lot lines allowing for three (3) lots.
As with the original approval the lots are indicated with a fifteen (15) foot front
building line. Lots 14RR and 13R-B are indicated with a minimum lot area which
is consistent with the R-2, Single-family Zoning District. Lot 13R-A is indicated
with 5,986 square feet. As with the original approval all the lots are indicated
with a reduced lot width at the building line. Lot 14RR is indicated with a 34-foot
lot width, Lot 13R-B a 32-foot lot width and Lot 13R-A a 40-foot lot width.
Staff is supportive of the request. Staff does not feel the subdivision of the lots
into three (3) residential lots as proposed will impact the area. The lots are
proposed with similar lot widths, areas and setbacks as the original approval with
a slight modification to the originally approved lot lines.
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.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1427-C
4
Staff recommends approval of the variance request from the Zoning and
Subdivision Ordinances to allow the lots to be replatted with a lot area, a lot width
and a front building line less than is typically required per the R-2, Single-family
Zoning District.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 3, 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 outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of
the agenda staff report. Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the
variance request from the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances to allow the lots to be
replatted with a lot area, a lot width and a front building line less than is typically
required per the R-2, Single-family 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 9 ayes,
0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: S-1636-A
NAME: Heights Addition Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: Located East of South Ridge Drive, South of Walton Heights Subdivision
DEVELOPER:
Kenneth Sholimier
6000 Scott Hamilton Drive
Little Rock, AR 72209
ENGINEER:
The Holloway Firm, Inc.
200 Casey Drive
Maumelle, AR 72113
AREA: 16.438 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 30 FT. NEW STREET: 1341 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 1 – River Mountain
CENSUS TRACT: 42.05
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval to allow the development of
16.43 acres with 30 single-family lots and four (4) Tracts. Tract A is proposed as
a conservation easement with a nature trail containing 8.0 acres. Tracts B and C
are indicated along Southridge Drive containing 0.056 and 0.179 acres and
proposed as open space and buffering along the existing street. Tract D is
indicated as open space containing 0.46 acres.
The subdivision is proposed with lots averaging 0.224 acres with a minimum lot
size of 0.164 acres. The subdivision is proposed with an overall density of
1.825 units per acre. A new public cul-de-sac street will be constructed to serve
the new homes. The street is indicated with 1,341.39 linear feet with a street
width of 25-feet constructed to City standard for a minor residential street.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1636-A
2
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is heavily wooded and appears to contain a significant slope from north
to south. The site abuts the Walton Heights Subdivision to the north and to the
south an area zoned Open Space. Along the southern boundary the site is
adjacent to a City of Little Rock Fire Station, vacant property, an office building, a
church and single-family homes located on large lots all in excess of five (5)
acres which are accessed from River Mountain Road. Pleasant Ridge Towne
Center is located to the south and across Cantrell Road. The Center has
developed with a number of retail and restaurant uses. Within the general area
are a number of apartments, commercial and office uses located to southeast
and southwest of the site, along and across Cantrell Road.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received a few informational phone calls from the area
property owners. All property owners abutting the site and the Walton Heights
Property Owners Association were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. 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).
2. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other
than residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be
submitted and approved prior to the start of construction.
3. Provide the profile of the proposed street showing centerline grade, sight
distance, and horizontal radius of the centerline.
4. Provide on the plan the location of area of restricted parking.
5. Measures to control the increase in stormwater runoff from the increased
impervious surface should be implemented to not damage adjacent
property.
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.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1636-A
3
8. Provide a letter prepared by a registered engineer certifying the sight
distance at the intersections comply with 2004 AASHTO Green Book
standards.
9. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
10. Street Improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic
Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction.
11. 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.
12. Vegetation must be established on disturbed area within 21 days of
completion of harvest activities.
13. The proposed median at the entrance should be removed due to the
restrictions in the intersection area. If you have any questions, contact Bill
Henry in Traffic Engineering at 379-1816.
14. Retaining walls designed to exceed 15 feet in height are required to seek a
variance for construction. Provide proposed wall elevations. Prior to
construction of the retaining wall, the engineer's certification of design and
plans must be submitted to Public Works for approval. After construction,
an as-built certification is required for construction of the retaining wall.
15. Plat a no access easement along the south side of Beau Rivage Drive east
of the last proposed lot.
16. 100 foot spacing is required between the proposed tangent curves of the
street or a variance is required to be requested.
17. A maintenance access easement should be provided from Beau Rivage
Drive to the detention ponds for access when maintenance is required.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements for this project.
Gravity sewer system required, force main is not acceptable for this project.
Contact the Little Wastewater Utility for additional information.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1636-A
4
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. Please submit plans for water
facilities to Central Arkansas Water for review. Plan revisions may be required
after additional review. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures
for installation of water facilities. Approval of plans by Central Arkansas Water,
the Arkansas Department of Health Engineering Division and Little Rock Fire
Department is required. This development will have minor impact on the existing
water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide
adequate pressure and fire protection
Fire Department: Fire Hydrants will 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: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 12, 2009)
Mr. Mark Redder was present representing the owner. Staff presented the item
to the Committee members stating a plat was reviewed by the Commission at
their September 3, 2009, public hearing. Staff stated the previous plat contained
variances and the Commission denied the request based on the variance
requests. Staff stated they felt the current request was substantially different
since the current request did not contain any variance requests.
Staff requested Mr. Redder provide a 25-foot front building line on the proposed
plat. Staff noted the cover letter indicated the street as a public street but the plat
indicated the street as private. Staff requested Mr. Redder revise the general
notes section of the plat to indicate the street as a public street.
Public Works comments were addressed. Mr. Redder stated the developers
were not requesting a variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to advance
grade the site. He stated he would provide the profile of the proposed street
showing centerline grade, sight distance and horizontal radius of the centerline.
Staff stated 100 foot of spacing was required between the proposed tangent
curves of the street. Mr. Redder stated he would correct the plat to provide the
required spacing. Staff requested a note be provided on the plat to indicate the
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1636-A
5
total height of the retaining wall. Staff also requested a maintenance access
easement be provided from Beau Rivage Drive to the detention pond area.
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 preliminary plat addressing the issues raised
at the November 12, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised plat
provides the profile of the proposed street showing centerline grade, sight
distance and horizontal radius of the centerline. The plat has also been revised
to allow the proper spacing for the tangent curves of the street. The applicant
has indicated the retaining wall will not exceed the height allowed per City
ordinance. A letter has been prepared by the engineer certifying the sight
distance is adequate at the intersection of the new street and Southridge Drive.
The development is proposed as a single-family subdivision containing
30 residential lots and four (4) tracts. Tract A is indicated as a Conservancy
Dedication containing 7.563 acres. Tracts B (0.056 acres) and C (0.179 acres)
are indicated as open space located along Southridge Drive. Tract D also
identified as open space is located on the south side of Beau Rivage Drive and
contains 0.46 acres.
The plat is indicated with a 25-foot front building line along the new street. A
note on the plat indicates side and rear yard setbacks consistent with the Zoning
Ordinance for R-2, Single-family zoned property. The lot widths and areas are
indicated consistent with the development standards established by the
Subdivision Ordinance for R-2, Single-family zoned property.
Beau Rivage Drive is indicated as a public street with a centerline grade of
17.6 percent. The Master Street Plan allows for a maximum centerline grade of
16 percent but allows staff to administratively approve a variance in the design
standard of up to ten percent. The Master Street Plan states this variance in
design standard does not require an amendment to the Master Street Plan. With
the administrative variance the street is allowed a maximum centerline grade of
17.6 percent, as proposed by the developer.
To staff’s knowledge there are no remaining outstanding technical issues in need
of addressing associated with the request. The subdivision is proposed with an
overall density of 1.825 units per acre which is consistent with single-family
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1636-A
6
development per the City’s Future Land Use Plan. The proposed subdivision
appears to fully comply with the typical design standards of the City’s ordinances.
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: (DECEMBER 3, 2009)
Mr. Mark Redder of the Holloway Firm was present. There were registered objectors
present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval. Staff stated the
Commission reviewed a plat at their September meeting and denied the request based
on the associated variances. Staff stated the current request did not include any
variances from the Subdivision Ordinance.
Deputy City Attorney Cindy Dawson addressed the Commission. She stated the City
Attorney’s office was asked to review the International Building Code with regard to
access. She stated it was the opinion of the City Attorney that the development should
be allowed access to Southridge Drive. Ms. Dawson also reminded the Commission of
the Richardson case stating if the subdivision complied with the City’s Subdivision rules
and regulations the Commission had no discretion. Commissioner Smith questioned if
the Commission could take safety into consideration. Ms. Dawson stated the Staff had
reviewed the proposed entrance drive and determined there was adequate distances to
meet ordinance standards.
Mr. Mark Reeder addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. He stated
the subdivision was being developed in full compliance with the City’s rules and
regulations.
Mr. John Miller addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated his
home was on Bainbridge Drive and he would be directly affected by the proposed
subdivision. He stated safety was a concern. He stated the entrance to the new
subdivision was in the worst place possible on Southridge Drive. He stated when the
street was wet there were a number of persons who missed the curve both up and
down hill. He stated the traffic on Southridge was very congested and his concern was
the additional traffic would cause problems at the fire station and possibly block their
ability to get in and out. He stated he felt the plan a poor plan for the entire Walton
Heights Subdivision.
Mr. Jim Persell addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated he
was an architect by trade and had served on a number of commissions and committees.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1636-A
7
He stated just because a development met the ordinances did not mean it was a good
plan. He stated the subdivision was not good for the neighborhood.
Mr. Steve Reed addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated he
was President of the Walton Heights Candlewood Property Owners Association and
was speaking for the group. He provided the Commission with a photo of the curve. He
stated the neighborhood was disappointed with the City Attorney’s opinion that the
development would be allowed access to Southridge Drive. He stated Walton Heights
had 465 homes fifteen times to number of homes allowed on a cul-de-sac per the fire
code. He provided the Commission with an aerial indicating locations for access to
River Mountain Road. He stated with the extension to River Mountain Road this would
relieve some traffic on Southridge Drive and allow a second access from the
neighborhood.
Ms. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in support of the request. She stated this was
not the first plat the Commission had been told they had to support based on
Richardson and she did not feel it would be the last. She stated maybe it was time for
the Commission to review their Subdivision Ordinance and make changes.
Mr. Redder addressed the Commission stating the development was in full compliance
with the City’s ordinances. He stated the access to the south did not exist and the
developer did not have the ability to obtain the access. He stated the property was
located adjacent to a right of way and the developer had the right to access the right of
way.
The Commission questioned how Walton Heights became a cul-de-sac neighborhood.
Staff stated the neighborhood requested the Board of Directors abandon right of way
along the western edge which would have provided a future connection to Pinnacle
Valley Road and Cantrell Road.
There was a general discussion by staff and the Commission concerning the street
location and sight distances. Staff stated the developers had prepared a letter certifying
the sight distance for the new street based on the posted speed limits of the street.
Staff stated the information provided did provide for adequate stopping distances.
There was no other 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,
0 absent, 1 abstention (Commissioner Adcock) and 2 open positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: S-1642
NAME: Clay Commercial Subdivision Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: Located at 13297 I-30
DEVELOPER:
Joe Clay
223 Canyon Way
Bryant, AR 72022
ENGINEER:
The Sentinel Group, LLC
3412 Travis Parkway
Bryant, AR 72022
AREA: 66.01 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family – Non-conforming Auto race tract
PLANNING DISTRICT: 16 – Otter Creek
CENSUS TRACT: 41.04
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval to allow the creation of two
(2) lots from this existing parcel. Lot 1 is proposed containing one (1) acre and
Lot 2 containing 65.01 acres. The plat indicates a 25-foot building setback along
the street. The lots are proposed to be final platted in two (2) phases with Lot 1
being final platted in the initial phase.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The property is the I-30 Speedway. There are a number of uses located in the
immediate area including liquor stores, retail businesses, used automobile
dealerships all on the south side of I-30, with a large manufactured home park
and Pulaski Technical College located on the north side of I-30. Located on the
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1642
2
eastern edge of the site is a restaurant/bar/grill and on the western edge a
business that sells prefabricated storage buildings.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from the area property
owners. All property owners abutting 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. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance.
2. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from
AHTD, District VI.
3. At the time of development, the stormwater detention ordinance applies to
this property. Show the proposed location for stormwater detention facilities
on the plan.
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: Water is not available from CAW at this time. Please
contact CAW for additional information concerning water service to the site.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1642
3
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 12, 2009)
Mr. Eric Krebs was present representing the owner. Staff presented the item to
the Committee members stating the request was a two (2) lot plat for the I-30
speedway. Staff stated the owner was requesting to final plat the lots in two
phases with the smaller one (1) acre parcel final platted first. Staff stated the
remaining 65 acre tract containing the speedway would remain unplatted. Staff
requested Mr. Krebs provide the two (2) lots on a single plat drawing. Staff also
requested the zoning classification be corrected on the plat drawing. Staff stated
the current zoning of the property was R-2, Single-family.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated any new drives were
required as concrete aprons per the City Ordinance. Staff stated at the time of
development the stormwater detention ordinance would apply.
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 raised at the
November 12, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised plat indicates
the zoning as R-2, Single-family and provided the two (2) lots on a single
drawing.
The request is a preliminary plat to allow the creation of two (2) lots from an
existing 66 acre parcel. Lot 1 is proposed containing one (1) acre and Lot 2
containing 65.01 acres. A 25-foot front building line along the frontage road has
been provided. Staff recommends the front building line be similar to the front
building line typically required in the C-4, Open Display Zoning District or 45-feet.
Staff feels the 45-foot building line is more consistent with the existing
non-residential uses and potential future uses which will likely locate in the area.
The developer has indicated the lots will be final platted in two (2) phases with
Lot 1 being final platted in the initial phase.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1642
4
Staff is generally supportive of the request. The applicant has indicated the
subdivision is being requested to allow Lot 1 to be sold. There are no immediate
plans for a change in use of Lot 2, the remaining 65 acre tract. The area is
currently zoned R-2, Single-family with a non-conforming status for the race
track. To staff’s knowledge there are no remaining outstanding technical issues
associated with the request. All future development of the site must comply with
the current zoning or a rezoning request approved to allow a change of use.
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 the front building line for the lots be placed at 45-feet to be
more in keeping with the existing non-residential uses any potential future
non-residential uses in the area.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 3, 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 outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of
the agenda staff report. Staff also presented a recommendation that the front building
line for the lots be placed at 45-feet to be more in keeping with the existing
non-residential uses any potential future non-residential uses in the area.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes,
0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: S-1643
NAME: PPG Subdivision Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: Located on the Southeast Corner of Vimy Ridge and Alexander Roads
DEVELOPER:
PPG Industries, Inc.
11605 Vimy Ridge Road
Little Rock, AR 72002
ENGINEER:
McClelland Engineers
900 West Markham Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
AREA: 36.63 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 4 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: I-3, Industrial District
PLANNING DISTRICT: 16 – Otter Creek
CENSUS TRACT: 41.04
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The request is to subdivide this existing tract owned by PPG Industries, Inc into
four (4) lots. The lot sizes range from 4.40 acres to 16.50 acres. Lot 1 is
proposed containing 7.48 acres, Lot 2 containing 7.52 acres, Lot 3 containing
16.50 acres and Lot 4 containing 4.40 acres. The developer has indicated the
lots will be final platted in phases based on market demand with a single lot in
each phase.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The area contains a mix of uses including industrial, commercial and residential.
South of the site located on Vimy Ridge Road are single-family homes. West of
the site are two (2) large manufacturing plants, a convenience store, a residence
and a church. East of the site is a utility substation and south of the site is a
large maintenance area for Entergy. The railroad splits the northern proposed lot
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1643
2
from the southern three (3) lots. This area is wooded while the area to the south
of the railroad tracts contains the existing manufacturing plant with the remainder
of the area cleared of trees. Both Vimy Ridge Road and Alexander Road have
not been constructed to Master Street Plan standard adjacent to the site.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from the area property
owners. All property owners abutting 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.
2. Alexander 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. Where
a minor arterial street intersects a minor arterial street, the subdivider shall
dedicate an additional 10 feet of right-of-way, measured from the centerline
of the right-of-way for a right turn lane. This additional right-of-way shall be
along the entire Alexander Road frontage to the bridge.
3. At Vimy Ridge Road and Alexander Road, due to the minor arterial-minor
arterial intersection, right-of-way shall be dedicated to a radius of 75 feet at
the intersection.
4. With site development, provide the design of street conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to Vimy Ridge
Road including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. The new
back of curb should be located approximately 29.5 feet from centerline.
Near the intersection, pavement should be provided for a left turn lane and
two (2) thru lanes.
5. With site development, provide the design of street conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to Alexander
Road including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. Pavement
must be provided for a left turn lane, two (2) thru lanes, and one (1) right
turn lane.
6. Obtain a franchise agreement from Public Works (Bennie Nicolo, 371-4818)
for the private improvements located in the right-of-way.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1643
3
7. Show proposed driveway locations to access the lots. Driveway spacing on
minor arterial streets is 300 feet from intersections and other driveways and
150 feet from property lines. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City
Ordinance.
8. 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.
9. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the
proposed location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan.
10. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
11. 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).
12. A portion of the property appears to be located in the 100 year floodplain.
The floodplain boundary should be shown on the survey.
13. Street improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic
Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction.
14. Coordinate design of traffic signal upgrade if in existence with proposed
street improvements. Plans to be forwarded to Traffic Engineering for
approval.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Existing sewer mains on site. Easements required for all existing
sewer mains. Provide the locations on the proposed preliminary plat. Contact
Little Rock Wastewater Utility for additional information.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. Please submit plans for water
facilities to Central Arkansas Water for review. Plan revisions may be required
after additional review. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1643
4
for installation of water facilities. Approval of plans by Central Arkansas Water,
the Arkansas Department of Health Engineering Division and Little Rock Fire
Department is required. This development will have minor impact on the existing
water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide
adequate pressure and fire protection.
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: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 12, 2009)
Mr. Kirt Sledge was present representing the owner. Staff presented the item
stating there were few outstanding technical issues in need of addressing prior to
the item being forwarded to the full Commission. Staff requested Mr. Sledge
provide the front building setback on the proposed plat, provide the source of
water and the means of wastewater disposal and provide the average size of the
lots and the minimum lot size in the general notes section of the proposed plat.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated Vimy Ridge and
Alexander Roads were classified on the Master Street Plan as minor arterials.
Staff stated due to the classifications of the streets a 75 foot radius was required
at the intersection. Staff also stated a dedication of 45 feet from centerline was
required on both streets. Staff stated an additional ten feet of right of way was
required along the entire length of Alexander Road frontage to the bridge. Staff
stated the minimum driveway spacing for an arterial street was 300 feet from
intersections and 150 feet from property lines. Staff requested Mr. Sledge
provide the location of the future drives on the preliminary plat.
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.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1643
5
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff addressing the issues
raised at the November 12, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised
plat indicates the front building line per the I-3, Industrial Zoning District or
50-feet. The revised plat also indicates the source of water as Central Arkansas
Water and the source of wastewater disposal as the City of Little Rock
Wastewater. The average size of the lots is 8.975 acres.
The lot sizes range from 4.40 acres to 16.50 acres. Lot 1 contains 7.48 acres,
Lot 2 contains 7.52 acres, Lot 3 contains 16.50 acres and Lot 4 contains
4.40 acres. The Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum lot size for I-3, Industrial
District zoned property to be a minimum of one (1) acre with a minimum frontage
of one hundred fifty (150) feet and a minimum depth of two hundred fifty (250)
feet. The lots as proposed meet this requirement.
The developer has indicated the lots will be final platted in phases based on
market demand with a single lot in each phase. The developer will work with
staff at the time of final platting to ensure the boundary street ordinance required
street construction is completed in a manner which is logical.
To staff’s knowledge there are no remaining outstanding technical issues
associated with the request in need of addressing. Staff is supportive of the
proposed plat. The plat appears to comply with the development standards
established by the City ordinances. Staff does not feel the creation of four (4)
industrially zoned lots as proposed for future development will significantly 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.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 3, 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 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 9 ayes,
0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: S-1644
NAME: Stagecoach Baseline Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: Located on the Northeast Corner of Baseline and Stagecoach Roads
DEVELOPER:
USA Drug/Super D
2100 Brookwood Drive
Little Rock, AR 72202
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 3.37 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District
PLANNING DISTRICT: 16 – Otter Creek
CENSUS TRACT: 42.08
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1. A variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow advanced grading of Lot 2
with the construction of a building on Lot 1.
2. A waiver of the stormwater detention ordinance requirements.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The property contains 3.37 acres and is located at the northeast corner of
Baseline and Stagecoach Roads. The developer wishes to split the property into
two (2) lots. USA Drug will retain ownership of Lot 1 and will sell Lot 2. A
common access easement for ingress/egress is indicated on the plat. Both
developments will utilize a single driveway apron.
The request includes a variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow
grading of Lot 2 with the construction of a building on Lot 1. The request also
includes a waiver of the City’s Stormwater Detention Ordinance requirements.
The property is located adjacent to the Fourche Creek.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1644
2
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site previously contained two (2) warehouse buildings which have been
removed. The intersection of Baseline and Stagecoach Roads contains a
number of retail uses including a convenience store with gas pumps, a strip retail
center with a multiple uses including a restaurant and vacant C-3, General
Commercial District zoned property. The eastern boundary is the Fourche
Creek. To the north is an office use. A new Family Dollar Store is currently
under construction on Stagecoach Road further south of this site and a site plan
for a multi-building multi-phased retail center was recently approved to the
southwest of this site on the C-3, General Commercial District zoned property.
AHTD recently constructed Stagecoach Road to a four lane road with turn lanes
at major intersections. There is not a sidewalk in place adjacent to the site.
There is however a marked bike lane. Baseline Road is a two lane road with no
sidewalks in place adjacent to the site.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from the area property
owners. All property owners abutting the site, the Chateaus on Stagecoach
Neighborhood Association, the Otter Creek Homeowners Association and
Southwest Little Rock United for Progress were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Baseline 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. Where
a principal arterial street intersects a principal arterial street, the subdivider
shall dedicate an additional 10 feet of right-of-way, measured from the
centerline of the right-of-way for a right turn lane. This additional right-of-
way shall be along the entire Baseline Road frontage to the bridge.
2. At Stagecoach and Baseline Roads, due to the principal arterial-principal
arterial intersection, right-of-way shall be dedicated to a radius of 75 feet at
the intersection.
3. Stagecoach 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.
4. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required to be installed
along Stagecoach Road in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little
Rock Code and the Master Street Plan.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1644
3
5. The code requires with site development, construction of one-half street
improvement to Baseline Road including a right turn lane and 5-foot
sidewalks with the planned development. Due to Baseline Road being a
State Highway and controlled by the Arkansas Highway and Transportation
Department; the length of the required improvements, its relationship with
the bridge and the intersection, staff believes the improvements will not be
permitted by the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department and
therefore the improvements cannot be constructed.
6. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
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. 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.
9. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the
proposed location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan.
10. 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.
11. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per
Section 8-283 prior to construction.
12. The minimum Finish Floor elevation of at least one (1) foot above the base
flood elevation is required to be shown on plat and grading plans.
13. In accordance with Section 31-176, floodway areas must be shown as
floodway easements or be dedicated to the public. In addition, a 25 foot
wide access easement is required adjacent to the floodway boundary.
14. Due to possible bridge obstructions, provide a letter prepared by a
registered engineer certifying the sight distance at the proposed driveway
on Baseline Road complies with 2004 AASHTO Green Book standards.
15. 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.
16. Obtain a franchise agreement from Public Works (Bennie Nicolo, 371-4818)
for the private improvements located in the right-of-way.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1644
4
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available for this property on the west side of Stagecoach
Road. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for additional information.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. A Capitol Investment Charge
is applicable to all connections off the waterlines along Hwy 5. 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 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: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 12, 2009)
The applicant was not present. Staff presented the item stating there were few
outstanding technical issues in need of addressing prior to the Commission
acting on the request. Public Works staff noted the applicant would be required
to work with AHTD on the allowable street improvements at the intersection of
Baseline and Stagecoach Roads. Staff stated the improvements indicated were
per the Master Street Plan and with the location of the existing bridge on
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1644
5
Baseline Road staff was not sure AHTD would allow the improvements as
indicated.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
There were no outstanding technical issues in need of addressing raised at the
November 12, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant is seeking
preliminary plat approval to allow two (2) commercial lots from this 3.37 acre
tract. Lot 1 is indicated containing 1.92 acres and Lot 2 containing 1.46 acres.
The property is zoned C-3, General Commercial District which requires a
minimum lot area of 14,000 square feet. The lot widths proposed exceed the
typical minimum lot width of the Zoning District of 100 feet. Lot 2 is indicated with
a lot width of approximately 175 feet. Lot 1 is indicated with over 300 feet of
frontage on both Baseline and Stagecoach Roads. The plat is indicated with a
45-foot front building line along the abutting roadways. The Zoning District
typically requires the placement of a 25-foot front building line.
Staff does not support an in-lieu payment for stormwater detention. Recently,
staff has not supported detention variances from two (2) developments and
preliminary plats upstream of this site on Fourche Creek. Those locations were
on the southeast corner of Otter Creek Road and Stagecoach Road and on the
southeast corner of Baseline and Stagecoach Roads. The site is in the upper
portion of the Fourche Creek watershed in relation to the City of Little Rock.
Public Works receives a number of drainage complaints along Fourche Creek.
Staff believes stormwater detention should be provided on site.
Staff is supportive of the preliminary plat request but not of the request for the
in-lieu payment for stormwater detention. The proposed plat appears to comply
with the development standards of the Subdivision Ordinance and the C-3,
General Commercial Zoning District. To staff’s knowledge there are no
remaining outstanding technical issues associated with the request. Staff feels
the creation of two (2) commercial lots on the site will not adversely impact the
area.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends 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 recommends stormwater detention be provided on the site.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1644
6
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 3, 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 outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of
the agenda staff report. Staff also presented a recommendation that stormwater
detention be provided on the site.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes,
0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: Z-2326-C
NAME: G & S Insulating Revised Short-form PCD
LOCATION: Located at 6620 South University Avenue
DEVELOPER:
Jeronimo Insulating, LLC
6620 South University Avenue
Little Rock, AR 72209
SURVEYOR:
Brooks Surveying, Inc.
20820 Arch Street Pike
Hensley, AR 72065
ARCHITECT:
Terry Burruss Architects
614 Center Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
AREA: 1.96 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 zoning lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: Office Warehouse – Contractors Storage Yard and Single-family
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD
PROPOSED USE: Restaurant, Office Warehouse – Contractors Storage Yard and
Single-family
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
On January 8, 1970, the Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed a request to rezone this
property from A, One-family District to D, Apartment District and G-1, Commercial District.
Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the rezoning for the G-1, Commercial
District portion of the tract and denial of the rezoning to the D, Apartment District for the west
portion of the tract. A motion was made by the Commission to approve the request as
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2326-C
2
recommended by staff. The motion carried. The Board of Directors approved the request on
January 19, 1970, by the adoption of Ordinance No. 12,317.
At the March 16, 1996, public hearing the Little Rock Planning Commission was to review a
request to allow the western portion of the property to be utilized for an all terrain vehicle
riding and safety course to be used for training of new ATV operators. The applicant
submitted a request for withdrawal of the item prior to the Commission acting on the request.
The item was withdrawn with prejudice at the March 16, 1996, public hearing.
Ordinance No. 20,129 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on July 7, 2009,
established a short-form PCD titled G & S Insulation PCD. The approval allowed a portion of
two tracts to be rezoned to PCD with an area 109.19 feet by 140-feet to remain zoned R-2,
Single-family. The plan indicated the single-family area separate from the commercial area
with access from Mabelvale Pike.
There were two (2) existing buildings, a warehouse containing 5,000 square feet and a retail
building containing 11,700 square feet. The paving on the site was from the north property
line to within five (5) feet of the south property line. The proposal included the removal of the
rear building and construction of a new 14,100 square foot warehouse building to house
materials and allow parking of service vehicles indoors.
The approval allowed for C-4, Open Display District uses as allowable alternate uses for the
property. The proposed use of the property was to match the parking available on the site.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is now proposing a revision to the previously approved PCD to add a
restaurant as an allowable use to the site. The restaurant will be 2,500 square feet
located within the retail building along South University Avenue. The hours of
operation are from 10 am to 10 pm Sunday through Thursday and from 10 am to
11 pm Friday and Saturday. There are no other modifications proposed to the
previously approved PCD.
The Bill of Assurance for the subdivision does not address use of the property.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains two vacant buildings, which appear to have previously been used as
a restaurant supply business. To the north is Richard’s Honda and to the south is
Crain Chevrolet. A fence has been installed along the rear of Tract 1 and the Tract 2
area is vacant. The applicant is currently making improvements to the interior of the
building.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2326-C
3
The area along South University Avenue is developed with commercial businesses.
The road is constructed as a four-lane road with a grassed median. Mabelvale Pike is
a narrow roadway with open ditches and no sidewalks. In this section of Mabelvale
Pike there are few homes located on the east side of the road. The homes on the
west side are homes located on larger lots or acreage. Directly across from the
proposed development a new home has recently been constructed and a second
home appears to have recently undergone a significant renovation.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area
residents. Southwest Little Rock United for Progress, Upper Baseline Neighborhood
Association and several area residents have called indication opposition to the
request. All property owners located within 200 feet, all residents, who could be
identified, located within 300 feet of the site, Southwest Little Rock United for
Progress, the South Brookwood Ponderosa Neighborhood Association, the
Meadowcliff Brookwood Neighborhood Association and the Wakefield Neighborhood
Association were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Mabelvale Pike 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. With site development, provide the design of street conforming to the Master Street
Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to Mabelvale Pike including 5-foot
sidewalks with the planned development. Mabelvale Pike should be widened with
the new back of curb placed 18 feet from centerline of the street and the back of
the sidewalk placed on the property line.
3. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required
prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other than residential
subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be submitted and approved
prior to the start of construction.
4. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed
location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan.
5. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of
work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from
Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner).
6. 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.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2326-C
4
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this project.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: No objection to food service being added. Contact Central
Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. 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. 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.
AT & T: No comment received.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The rear of the site abutting Mabelvale Pike is located on CATA Bus Route
#17 – the Mabelvale-Downtown Route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the 65th Street West Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Single Family and Commercial for this property. The
applicant has applied for a revised Planned Commercial Development to add a
restaurant as an allowable use on the site. This area is shown as Commercial fronting
University Avenue and Residential Low Density backing up to Mabelvale Pike. The
original PCD for this property allowed for a residential strip facing Mabelvale Pike with
the commercial uses only allowed in the area closer to University Avenue, this will not
change with this revision. The proposed uses are consistent with the Land Use Plan.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2326-C
5
Master Street Plan: South University Avenue 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 University Avenue
since it is a Principal Arterial. Mabelvale Pike is a Collector. The primary function of a
Collector Street is to provide a connection from Local Streets to Arterials. These
streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for
entrances and exits to the site.
Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes in the immediate vicinity.
Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the 65th Street West
Neighborhood Plan. Their Land Use and Zoning goal states: “Ensure that non
residential development and multi family development in the area be limited to areas
currently reserved for such uses on the Future Land Use Plan or in areas currently
zoned for non residential and multi family uses.”
Landscape: All previous comment apply to any new development of the site.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 12, 2009)
Mr. Terry Burruss was present representing the owner. Staff presented an overview of
the request stating the previous application request did not include multiple uses for
the site. Staff noted C-4, Open Display District uses were approved as alternative
uses for the site. Staff stated the request was to allow a restaurant within the existing
building in addition to the office/warehouse activities. Staff noted the use of the
property was a restaurant and not a bar. Staff stated the hours of operation requested
were from 10 am to 10 pm Sunday through Thursday and from 10 am to 11 pm on
Friday and Saturday.
The Commission questioned Mr. Burruss as to the time frame for construction of the
new building and improvements. Mr. Burruss stated the new construction and
improvements were on hold in the short-term and were anticipated to begin within the
year. He stated the current economic climate had caused the owner to hold off on
plans for new construction.
Public Works stated the comments listed were the same as were previously identified.
Staff stated with the new development the indicated improvements would be required.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated also with the new development
the previously identified conditions 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
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2326-C
6
discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission
for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
There were no outstanding technical issues in need of addressing raised at the
November 12, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The request is add a restaurant
use to the existing approved use mix of the property. The previous approval allowed
for office/warehouse activities on the site and C-4, Open Display District uses as
allowable alternative uses for the property. The approval indicated the allowable uses
were to match the parking available on the site. The approval did not allow multiple
uses on the site.
The site plan is indicated with 42 parking spaces. Based on the typical minimum
parking requirements for the restaurant use and the office/warehouse use a total of
46 parking spaces is required (25-restaurant, 21-office/warehouse). Staff supports the
request. Staff does not feel the lesser number of parking spaces will significantly
impact the development or the area. The business has little to no customer traffic to
the site and a limited number of employees. In addition, the new construction will be
used to house service vehicles for the company reducing the number of surface
parking spaces required. Should additional parking become necessary there is
adequate area on the site to provide the four (4) additional parking spaces typically
required.
Signage for the development is proposed as allowed in commercial zones or a
maximum of thirty-six (36) feet in height and one hundred sixty (160) square feet in
area. Building signage is proposed with a maximum of ten (10) percent of the façade
area for facades with public street frontage.
There are no other modifications proposed to the previously approved site plan or use
mix. Staff is supportive of the request. The previous approval allowed for C-4, Open
Display District uses as allowable alternative uses for the property but did not specify
multiple uses for the property. The use of the property is restaurant use with limited
hours of operation closing no later than 11 pm on Friday and Saturday evenings. A
restaurant is an allowable use under the C-4, Open Display District zoning
classification. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding technical issues
associated with the request. Staff feels the addition of a restaurant use to the property
is appropriate.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments
and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report and all
conditions as identified in the previous approval.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2326-C
7
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 3, 2009)
Mr. Terry Burruss was present representing the owner. There were registered objectors
present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval.
Mr. Terry Burruss addressed the Commission on behalf of the owner. He stated the owner
was trying to maximize revenues during this time of economic downturn. He stated in the
initial application the developers intended to remove an existing building and use the site as
in office/warehouse for his insulating business. He stated since the turn in the economy
those plan had been put on hold and he was now requesting to be allowed a small restaurant
on the site. He stated the seating capacity would be 50 to 60 persons. He stated the
restaurant would be located within the former showroom area of the once used automobile
dealership.
Ms. Pat Gee addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated she was President of the
Upper Baseline Neighborhood Association and Vice President of Southwest Little Rock
United for Progress. She stated both had voted to oppose the request for a restaurant on this
site. She stated the concerns were traffic and noise. She stated the neighborhood did not
feel the use of the property as a restaurant was a good fit for the area.
Mr. John Honea addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated he was
President of South Brookwood/Ponderosa Neighborhood Association which had voted to
oppose the request. He stated the neighborhood felt mislead by the applicant because when
the original request was made the association specifically asked if there would be any other
activities taking place on the site. He stated Mr. Burruss stated there would not. Only the
insulation business. He stated the neighborhood felt this was not a good location for a
restaurant. He stated with the placement of the restaurant this was only the first step to
allowing a private club.
Mr. Burruss stated he did tell the association at the time the owner did not desire to use the
property for anything other than his insulation business. He stated things had changed. He
stated the economy was such that the owner was looking for an additional source of revenue
and also a place for employment for a few family members. He stated the approval allowed
for C-4 uses as alternative uses for the property. He stated the issue was there were not
multiple uses approved for the site. He stated the area was a commercial area and felt a
restaurant was a good fit. He stated the developers were not adding any paved area but
utilizing the existing on-site paving.
Commissioner Adcock questioned if there would be a dance floor. Mr. Burruss stated no.
She questioned access. Mr. Burruss stated the only access was from South University
Avenue. She questioned additional lighting. Mr. Burruss stated the only additional lighting
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2326-C
8
would be what was necessary to provide ingress and egress from the building. She
questioned if the site would be used as an events center or allowed for rental. He stated no.
There was a general discussion by the Commission as to the use not being a fit for the area.
The Commissioners noted there were several locations on South University Avenue which
were vacant and zoned for a restaurant use. The Commissioners indicated they felt the
reuse of a property was better than a vacant property. Commissioner Adcock stated the area
had been working to secure quality developments for the area. She stated a use verses a
viable use were two different things.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for approval of
the item as recommended by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 7 ayes, 2 noes, 0 absent
and 2 open positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: 9 FILE NO.: Z-4473-D
NAME: Kavanaugh Place Revised Short-form PCD
LOCATION: Located at 2701 Kavanaugh Boulevard
DEVELOPER:
Kelley Johnson
Hillcrest Properties, Inc.
2701 Kavanaugh Boulevard, Suite 202
Little Rock, AR 72205
SURVEYOR:
Brooks Surveying
20820 Arch Street Pike
Hensley, AR 72065
ARCHITECT:
Scott Smith
Smith Associates Architects
2701 Kavanaugh Boulevard, Suite 208
Little Rock, AR 72205
AREA: 0.507+ acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: PCD
ALLOWED USES: Mixed Use – Retail, Restaurant, Office
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD
PROPOSED USE: Mixed Use – Increase the allowable Restaurant Square Footage
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
Ordinance No. 14,928 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on August 6, 1985,
rezoned the site from C-4, Open Display District and R-2, Single-family District to PCD. The
approval allowed the existing structures to be used as office and retail uses. The site
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4473-D
2
contained 12,894 square feet of leasable space with eight (8) leasable units proposed. The
request was to allow 6,411 square feet of retail space and 6,483 square feet of office space.
The site contained 39 parking spaces. A letter in the file indicates the total square footage of
the building was increased with the addition of a third floor. The square footage was
increased to 13,398 square feet. The retail portion was increased to 6,698 square feet and
6,700 square feet of office space.
On August 25, 1992, the Planning Commission approved a request to add a food service
establishment in Suite 107. The type of food service was an espresso coffee shop. A note
on the file indicates the City Attorney’s Office reported that it was their opinion that staff could
have approved the addition of the food service to the site without Planning Commission
approval. The note states however, since the item had been sensitive in the past the
Planning Commission review was appropriate. Planning staff and the City Attorney staff
agreed that the Board of Directors was not required to approve the action.
Ordinance No. 16,038 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on April 16, 1991,
allowed a revision to the PCD. The revision was to allow a food service establishment in the
corner building and use of the immediate area above the video store on the second floor of
the main building for a family video rental store. The restaurant was to have a seating
capacity of 20 patrons.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is now proposing a revision to the previously approved PCD to add
additional square footage for restaurant use to the site. The former video user has
vacated the site. The video user occupied approximately 1,957 square feet on the
second floor and 1,837 square feet on the first floor. The applicant is requesting to
utilize the first floor square footage (1,837 square feet) and an additional 587 square
feet which was formerly a gift shop to be marketed to a bakery and coffee shop
(2,424 square feet total). The applicant has indicated the bakery will be primarily a
take-out business and the coffee shop will have a small seating area and/or lounge
seating where customers can sample their coffees. The coffee business will sell
packaged, fresh roasted and fresh ground coffees, and is secondary to the bakery.
With the request the owner has indicated the allowed retail located on the second floor
(1,957 square feet) will be returned to office uses.
The site currently contains two (2) commercial buildings and 38 parking spaces. The
site has 60 linear feet of street frontage and is allowed per the Hillcrest Design Overlay
District credit for six (6) on-street parking spaces for a total of 44 available parking
spaces. The main building contains 14,385 square feet and currently houses a
restaurant containing 2,867 square feet (Café Bossa Nova), 1,000 square feet
occupied by a tanning salon and 2,424 square feet vacant space on the first floor with
the remaining floors either vacant space or office space. The second building contains
1,340 square feet and is presently a restaurant use.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4473-D
3
The square footage of the uses and the total parking requirements per the Hillcrest
Design Overlay District are as follows:
5,291 square feet 1st floor Restaurant/Baker 26 spaces
1,000 square feet 1st floor Tanning Salon 1 spaces
8,094 square feet 2nd/3rd floors Office 10 spaces
1,340 square feet 1st/2nd floor Pizza restaurant 6 spaces
Total 43 spaces
According to the Pulaski County Circuit/County Clerk’s Web Page the Bill of
Assurances for Pulaski Heights Addition were filed beginning in 1904. The applicant
provided with the application request a Bill of Assurance for the Replat of Lots 1 – 3,
Block 21 Pulaski Heights Addition dated November 12, 1985. The Bill of Assurance
provided does not address the issue of use of the property.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The property is located in the heart of the Hillcrest Neighborhood with retail uses
located to the north and to the east of the site and residential uses located to the
south. The structures located on Beechwood Street located to the west are retail and
office uses. The structures on Ash Street located to the south are residential uses.
Other uses in the area include a grocery store, US Post Office, an auto repair shop, a
number of restaurants and office uses.
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 Hillcrest Residents
Association were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
No comment.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this project.
Entergy: No comment received.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4473-D
4
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 #1 – the Pulaski Height 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 revised PCD. The uses proposed with the Planned Commercial Development are
consistent with the Commercial land use category.
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. The 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 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.
Their zoning and land use goal states: “More mixed-use opportunities should be
provided within the commercial areas, including parts of Kavanaugh Boulevard,
Markham Street and Stifft Station. Mixed-use means more opportunities for residential
over commercial in existing commercial areas.”
Landscape: No comment on the change in use.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 12, 2009)
The applicant was not present. Staff presented the item stating there were no
outstanding technical issues in need of addressing related to the site. Staff stated the
request was to change the use mix allowed on the site and increase the total square
footage of restaurant use allowed. There was no further discussion of the item. The
Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4473-D
5
H. ANALYSIS:
There were no outstanding technical issues in need of addressing raised at the
November 12, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The request is to revise the
PCD to allow additional restaurant square footage for the main structure. The building
contains 6,291 square feet on the first floor with 8,094 square feet on the second and
third floors. A total of 5,291 square feet of restaurant space is proposed on the first
floor with the remaining two levels being leased for office space.
The site is located within the Hillcrest Design Overlay District. The Overlay states
parking requirements within the District shall be fifty (50) percent of that required by
Article VIII of the Zoning Ordinance. The maximum parking allowed for the District
shall be the minimum standard established. Where on-street parking is allowed credit
toward the parking requirements at a rate of one (1) space per ten (10) linear feet of
street frontage is allowed. Based on the proposed use mix a total of 43 parking
spaces is required to serve the site. There are 38 on-site parking spaces and per the
Overlay the site is given credit for six (6) on-street parking spaces. The parking
provided is adequate to serve the proposed use mix of the development. There are no
modifications proposed to the site including building layout or parking. No new
signage or lighting is proposed for the development.
Staff is supportive of the request. Although the immediate use of the property is a
bakery/coffee shop the parking requirements for this use per the Ordinance are the
same as a full-scale restaurant use. The site has adequate parking to serve the use
mix proposed per the Hillcrest Design Overlay District. To staff’s knowledge there are
no outstanding technical issues associated with the request in need of addressing.
Staff does not feel the applicant’s proposed change to add additional square footage
for restaurant use will significantly impact the area.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments
and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 3, 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 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 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and
2 open positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: 10 FILE NO.: Z-5984-B
NAME: 5201 Jerry Drive and Lot 4 Hoggard’s Addition Short-form POD
LOCATION: Located at 5201 Jerry Drive
DEVELOPER:
IBC, LLC and MC Investments LLC
116 N. First Street
Jacksonville, AR 72076
ENGINEER:
Thomas Engineering Company
3810 Lookout
North Little Rock, AR 72116
AREA: 0.87 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 Zoning Lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: POD
ALLOWED USES: Office
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised POD
PROPOSED USE: Real Estate Office, Financial Planning, General and
Professional Office
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
An application was filed for the June 27, 1995, Planning Commission public hearing to
allow a Conditional Use Permit for the site to allow the residential structure to convert to
a private school serving 20 students with a staff of six (6). During the review process it
was determined the proposed use of the property was in conflict with the Bill of
Assurance for the subdivision. The applicant was unable to resolve the Bill of
Assurance issues and the request was withdrawn prior to the Commission acting on the
request.
Ordinance No. 17,932 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on February 16,
1999, rezoned the site from R-2, Single-family to PD-O. The approval allowed the use
of the existing structure as a real estate office. No exterior changes to the structure
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5984-B
2
were proposed; only interior modifications. A new parking area containing five (5)
parking spaces was proposed between the building and Jerry Drive with an additional
five (5) parking spaces on the east side (rear) of the building. A single drive from Jerry
Drive was approved.
On the approved plan a vacant area on the south side of the parking and drive was
indicated. The applicant noted the area was reserved for future construction of an office
building similar in size to the existing structure. The approval stated at the time of
development a site plan would be required for review and approval as a modification to
the PD-O.
The approved office hours of operation were from 8:00 am to 6:00 pm Monday through
Friday with a staff person in the office from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm on Saturday and
1:00 pm to 5:00 pm on Sunday to answer the phones.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is seeking approval of a revised PD-O to provide the required site
plan for the southern lot. The site contains two lots with approximately
38,000 square feet of total lot area. The site plan indicates the construction of a
new single-story building on the southern lot containing 4,000 square feet. The
existing structure contains approximately 2,050 square feet. The site plan
indicates the construction of fourteen (14) new parking spaces. The existing
development contains eight (8) parking spaces for a total of twenty-two
(22) spaces.
The Bill of Assurance for the Subdivision is dated November 1958, and states
The Covenants and restriction are to run with the land and shall be binding upon
all parties and all persons claiming under then until January 1, 1999, at which
time said covenants and restrictions shall terminate unless a majority in area of
then owners of the lots in said addition agree in writing to extend said covenants
and restrictions either in whole or in part. The original covenants prohibited the
use of the property for any use other than single-family. It does not appear the
covenants were extended.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an existing one-story structure with approximately 2,000 square
feet currently being used as a real estate office. There is vegetation located
along the eastern property line. A church is located across Jerry Drive to the
west, with single-family residences to the south and east. The back yards of the
Westbury Subdivision abut this site. A branch bank facility is located immediately
north of the site, with other commercial uses located along Cantrell Road.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5984-B
3
Jerry Drive is a residential street recently resurfaced by the City. There is not a
sidewalk in place adjacent to this site. There is a second drive located from Jerry
Drive to the southern lot which contains a large graveled parking area.
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
Coalition of West Little Rock Neighborhoods, the Secluded Hills Property Owners
Association and the Westbury Neighborhood Association were notified of the
public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation
requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The lots must share a single
driveway. The proposed driveway on the south cannot be installed. The
width of driveway must not exceed 36 feet.
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 meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to
normal charges. This fee will apply to all connections including metered
connections off the private fire system. Contact Central Arkansas Water
regarding the size and location of the water meter. 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.
Fire Department: Fire hydrants will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department for additional information.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5984-B
4
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is located near 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 Suburban Office for this property. The
applicant has applied for a Planned Office Development. The Suburban Office
land use category requires a Planned Development. The proposed land uses in
the Planned Development are consistent with the Suburban Office Category.
Master Street Plan: Jerry Drive is a Local Street on the Master Street Plan. 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. The street may require
dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances
and exits to the site.
Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes along Jerry Drive.
Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the River Mountain
Neighborhood Plan, but the Plan does not have any recommendations relevant
to this request.
Landscape:
1. Site plan must comply with the City’s minimal landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
2. The zoning buffer ordinance requires a nine foot (9’) wide land use buffer
around the southern and eastern perimeters of the site; next to the
residentially zoned property. Seventy percent (70%) of this area must remain
undisturbed.
3. The landscape ordinance requires a nine foot (9’) wide landscape strip
around the sites entirety. A portion of the proposed/existing driveway
encroaches into this minimal area. A variance from this minimal amount must
be obtained from the City Beautiful Commission prior to the issuance of a
building permit.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5984-B
5
4. 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
southern, and eastern perimeters of the site. Credit towards fulfilling this
requirement can be given for existing trees and undergrowth that satisfies this
year-around requirement.
5. Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping appear to meet with minimal City
requirements.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 12, 2009)
Mr. David Carpenter was present representing the request. Staff presented the
item stating the property was zoned PD-O to allow for the use of the existing
building as a real estate office and indicated this lot for future development. Staff
stated the previous approval did not include a site plan and was required review
by the Commission and Board of Directors prior to development.
Staff questioned the rear access drive located on the southern lot. Staff stated
they had concerns with allowing activity in this area due to the proximity of the
homes in Westbury. Staff questioned the days and hours of operation. Staff
provided Mr. Carpenter with the previously approved hours of operation. Mr.
Carpenter stated he felt the hours would vary slightly from the previous approval.
Staff requested he provide the revised hours in an updated cover letter. Staff
questioned the purpose of the wood deck located on the northern lot. Mr.
Carpenter stated he was not sure but he felt the current owners used the deck to
allow employees outdoor seating for lunch or an area to take a break and get out
of the office. Staff stated the adjacent church had called and requested no
outdoor activities such as lawn care take place during worship hours. Mr.
Carpenter stated this would not be an issue.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the drives did not match
the minimum spacing requirements of the Master Street Plan or the Subdivision
Ordinance. Staff stated the lots should share a drive and the southern drive be
removed. Commissioner Laha stated he did not agree with Public Works on this
comment. He stated there were two existing platted lots and he felt the owner
was due right of access.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated screening was required
along the southern and eastern perimeters. Staff stated a portion of the eastern
drive encroached into the minimum landscape buffer strip. Staff stated any new
drive construction within the buffer area would require a variance from City
Beautiful Commission.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5984-B
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:
Mr. Carpenter submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing issues raised at
the November 12, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised plan has
removed the driveway from the rear of the building, removed the southern
driveway on Jerry Drive and eliminated the encroachment within the eastern
buffer of the existing and proposed paving.
The previous approval allowed for future development of the southern lot with an
office use. The applicant is proposing the construction of a 4,000 square foot
office building to be used as a real estate office and administrative offices for
Flis Enterprises, Inc., a Burger King Franchisee. Flis Enterprises, Inc.
occasionally stores small restaurant equipment items such as coffee makers or
drink machines within the building. Staff is supportive of allowing a limited
amount of this type storage but does not support this site becoming an
office/warehouse facility. The site plan indicates a drive located on the southern
perimeter of the site to allow a side access to the rear of the building for the
purpose of moving these small items in and out of the building.
The request includes general and professional office uses as alternate uses for
the southern building. The northern building is proposed as a financial advisory
office with general and professional office uses as allowable alternate uses for
the building.
The days and hours of operation proposed for the site are from 7:00 am to
8:00 pm Monday through Friday, 9:00 am to 6:00 pm Saturday and 1:00 to
5:00 pm on Sunday. The justification for the extended hours of operation are
many of the clients of the financial planner cannot come into the office until after
their work hours, which is often 5:00 pm. The volume of traffic is minimum and
typically only one to two clients at a time.
The site plan indicates the placement of a single dumpster on the site located
near the eastern perimeter. The applicant has limited the hours of service to
Monday through Friday during daylight hours. The applicant has indicated lawn
service will also be limited to daylight hours but may include Saturday service if
necessary.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5984-B
7
The existing structure contains approximately 2,050 square feet and the new
structure is proposed containing 4,000 square feet. The typical minimum parking
required for an office development of this size would be 15 parking spaces. The
site plan is indicated with 26 spaces.
There are two signs indicated on the site plan. The existing sign located on the
northern lot and a future sign to serve the southern lot. The signage requested is
consistent with signage allowed in office zones or a maximum of six feet in height
and sixty-four square feet in area. Building signage will also comply with signage
allowed in office zones or no more than ten percent of the façade area abutting
the public street.
The plan indicates a land use buffer along the southern and eastern perimeters
of nine feet. The street buffer is proposed at 9.45 feet. The applicant has
indicated the existing paving encroachment will be removed from the buffer area
and any future paving will not be constructed within the buffer area. The entirety
of the eastern land use buffer is located within a 10-foot sewer, utility and
drainage easement. The buffer ordinance typically does not allow easements to
count in computing the depth of the land use buffer in developments abutting
single-family or two-family zoned or used property. A screening fence is
proposed along the eastern perimeter. The fence is proposed as a wooden
privacy fence six feet in height.
Staff is supportive of the request and the allowance of the land use buffer to be
contained within the easement. The previous approval allowed for the land use
buffer to be within the easement and this does not appear to have impacted the
adjoining properties. Staff recommends the applicant work with the Plans
Development Administrator within the Planning Department to select plant
materials that can be planted within the easement. Otherwise to staff’s
knowledge there are no remaining outstanding technical issues associated with
the request. Staff feels the development of the site with the single story office
building should have minimal impact on the adjoining properties.
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 allowance of the eastern land use buffer to be
within the drainage and utility easement.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5984-B
8
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 3, 2009)
The applicant was present. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with
the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff
report. Staff also presented a recommendation to allow the eastern land use buffer to
be within the drainage and utility easement.
Mr. David Carpenter addressed the Commission as the applicant. He stated he did not
have anything additional to add to the staff presentation. He stated the developers had
worked with staff to modify the plan to address staff’s concerns. He stated the
development was complying with the staff recommendations. He requested to reserve
his remaining time for rebuttal.
Mr. Howard Ostendorft addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He
stated he was the president of the Westbury Neighborhood Association and was
speaking on behalf of the association in opposition of the request. He stated the
neighborhood had voted unanimously to oppose the request. He presented the
Commission with a petition representing 26 households within the neighborhood
opposed to the request. He stated the neighborhood was requesting the property be
rezoned to residential and remove the commercial development potential for the site but
understood this was not an option. He stated a six-foot fence was not acceptable. He
stated a six-foot fence would not offer any security to the adjacent homes. He stated
the existing buffer would be removed to add the fence along the property line. He
stated the neighborhood was also concerned with lighting, noise and the increase in
traffic. He stated the lot located to the south of the commercial area was a wooded
residential lot. He stated the residents located behind Bank of America were impacted
because of the noise from the ATM and the lighting from the bank site. He stated the
neighborhood had concerns with the placement of a dumpster on the property line. He
stated dumpsters typically attracted rodents which would become a nuisance to the
neighborhood.
Mr. Carpenter addressed the Commission stating the building was proposed as a brick
building constructed in a residential style. He stated there would be no pole lighting on
the site. He stated the site lighting would be no more than a typical residential home.
He stated a portion of the buffer would be removed to allow the fence to be installed.
He stated all the hardwoods would be saved during the development of the site. He
stated the developers did not desire to place an eight-foot fence on the property line
unless this was a requirement of all developments within the City. He stated the office
would not generate a great deal of trash and there would be no food trash produced
from the site unless it was someone’s left over lunch.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5984-B
9
There was a general discussion by the Commission concerning the fencing and fence
heights. Mr. Carpenter stated the buffer and screening ordinance required the
placement of a six foot fence on the property line. Mr. Carpenter stated he did not
desire to place a taller fence unless this was a requirement of all developments.
The Commission questioned the cost per square foot of the new office building.
Mr. Carpenter stated the cost was approximately $186.00 per square foot. The
Commission questioned site lighting. Mr. Carpenter stated no pole lighting would be
located on the site. The Commission questioned if the hours of dumpster service were
limited. Mr. Carpenter stated the hours of dumpster service were limited to daylight
hours Monday through Friday.
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 7 ayes,
2 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z-6120-P
NAME: Governor’s Manor Revised PD-R
LOCATION: Located at Rushmore Avenue and Capitol Hills Boulevard
DEVELOPER:
Accountable Property Management Corp
c/o Ted Upshaw
11523 Kanis Road, Suite A
Little Rock, AR 72211
ENGINEER:
White Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 9.120 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 45 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: PD-R
ALLOWED USES: Single-family
PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R
PROPOSED USE: Single-family – Modify previous specifics of the PD-R which include
roof pitch, fencing materials, reduce the minimum square footage of the homes, remove
the perimeter fencing requirement
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
The Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed a proposed preliminary plat application
for the site at their April 22, 2004, Public Hearing. The Commission made a
recommendation of approval of the proposed preliminary plat, which was then
forwarded to the Little Rock Board of Directors for final action on September 7, 2004.
The Little Rock Board of Directors denied the requested variances for the proposed
preliminary plat and suggested the applicant refile the request as a PD-R through the
planned development process.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6120-P
2
Ordinance No. 19,261 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on January 4,
2005, rezoned the site from R-2, Single-family to PD-R and established Governors
Manor Long-form PD-R. The approval allowed the subdivision of the 9.12-acre site into
45 single-family lots. The request resulted in a density of 4.9 units per acre. There
were several variances from the Subdivision Ordinance approved as a part of the
development which included reduced front building lines, reduced lot depths, reduced
lot widths on several of the proposed lots and reduced minimum lot square footages.
The subdivision was designed as a gated community but the gates would not be
installed at the time of development.
The development was approved with the average size of the lots as 50-feet by 90-feet.
The lots were designed to accommodate “patio” or “garden style” homes with smaller
yards. Buildable areas on the lots ranged from approximately 4,600 to 2,150 square
feet with the smallest allowable residence to be 1,600 square feet. The lots were
approved with a 12.5-foot front building line, 5-foot side yard setbacks and 10-foot rear
yard setbacks. Each lot would have a minimum of 1,600 square feet of private open
space.
The improvement plan indicated the location of the improvements on the lots, along with
any driveways or sidewalks, to ensure adequate views and privacy within the
subdivision. Only one detached single-family residence not to exceed two and one-half
stories in height would be placed on any lot. All residences less than 3,000 square feet
would have a minimum roof pitch of 10/12 and those greater than 3,000 square feet
would have a minimum roof pitch of 8/12. All roofs were to have architectural shingles.
All exteriors were to be 100 percent brick, dryvit or rock to the facia, with siding being
permitted above the facia. Each lot would be allowed one accessory structure. The
accessory structure would be of an architectural design and exterior finish in harmony
with the residence and general surroundings. The accessory structures were not to
exceed the height or floor area of the principal dwelling. No prefabricated structures or
metal buildings would be permitted as accessory structures.
The owner was to install a six foot tall wrought iron fence along all lot lines which
abutted Capitol Hills Boulevard and the Oasis Renewal Center, specifically the side lot
line of Lots 1, 45, 37, 36, 29, and 28; which were adjacent to Capitol Hills Boulevard,
and the rear lot line of Lots 9 through 28; which were adjacent to the Oasis Renewal
Center. Lot owners would not be allowed to remove or install any other fencing along
these lot lines where the Developer installed the wrought iron fencing. All privacy
fences installed by the lot owner were to be six feet in height and 100 percent cedar
wood. No chain link or similar fence would be used under any circumstances. Any
retaining walls were to be constructed of 100 percent brick, brick or stucco material.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6120-P
3
The Property Owners Association would be responsible for maintaining the wrought iron
fencing installed by the Developer. The areas designated on the plat as Pennsylvania
Court, Governors Cove, Pennsylvania Avenue, the entrance and exit gates to the
property, all related landscaping islands and related structures and all improvements
were to be maintained by the Property Owners Association. The open space and Lake
Governor were to be maintained by the owners of lots in the proposed subdivision in
conjunction with the owners of lots in Phase 1B, Capitol Lakes Estates Addition.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is now proposing to amend the previously approved PD-R and Bill
of Assurance for the subdivision. The modifications proposed include a revision
to the roof pitch, a change to the minimum square footage of the homes, removal
of the requirement for the developer to build a six foot wrought iron fence and
removal of the requirement that all interior fencing be constructed of cedar.
The developer is requesting to reduce the required roof pitch from a 10/12 for
homes less than 3,000 square feet and 8/12 for homes greater than
3,000 square feet to an 8/12 regardless of the home size.
The request also includes a reduction in the minimum square footage of the
homes from 1,600 square feet to 1,400 square feet of heated and cooled space.
The current approval does not define the minimum square footage of the homes
as heated and cooled; only specifies the minimum square footage.
The previous approval requires all interior fences to be constructed of one
hundred percent cedar materials. The developer desires to remove this
requirement and require all fences to be constructed of a wood material with no
specific species of wood material identified.
The final modification to the PD-R is to remove the requirement for construction
of a wrought iron fence around the perimeter of the site. A six foot tall wrought
iron fence along all lot lines which abutted Capitol Hills Boulevard and the Oasis
Renewal Center was required with the original approval. The developer wishes
to remove this requirement and allow individual lot owners to place fencing along
their property lines as desired. The developer has indicated the allowed fences
would be six foot high constructed of wood, brick or brick and wrought iron. As
was previously approved the six foot fencing may be located within the building
setback.
All the issues raised for modification are in conflict with the Bill of Assurance for
the Subdivision. If the modifications are approved for the PD-R the owner will
then pursue a modification to the Bill of Assurance through the mechanism
identified in the Bill of Assurance for modifications.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6120-P
4
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
Street construction has been completed within the subdivision and the lots have
been final platted. The entire subdivision was cleared at the time of infrastructure
construction. Ten to twelve new homes have been constructed and several new
homes are in various stages of completion. Capitol Hills Boulevard has been
constructed to Master Street Plan standard adjacent to the site. The interior
streets were constructed as private streets. Gates have been installed at the
entrances to the subdivision and Capitol Hill Boulevard.
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
Spring Valley Manor Property Owners Association were notified of the public
hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
No comment.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this project.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: No objection.
Fire Department: No comment.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6120-P
5
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Residential Low Density for this property. The
applicant has applied for a revised PD-R. This revision is to allow a reduction in
the required roof pitch, minimum square footage of the homes, modifications to
the allowed interior fencing and the removal of the required perimeter fencing for
previously approved PD-R and is not proposing a change in use. The proposed
land uses in the Planned Development are consistent with the Residential Low
Density Category.
Master Street Plan: Capitol Hills Boulevard is shown as 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 on
pedestrians. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may
require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. Rushmore
Avenue is a Collector. The primary function of a Collector Street is to provide a
connection from Local Streets to Arterials.
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: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 12, 2009)
Mr. Ted Upshaw was present representing the request. Staff presented an
overview of the PD-R amendment request to the Committee members. Staff
stated there were no outstanding technical issues associated with the request.
Commissioner Yates questioned if the existing homeowners were on board with
the request. Staff stated notification was sent to all property owners of the
subdivision via certified mail as well as staff’s post card notification. Staff stated
at this point there had not been any calls concerning the request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
There were no outstanding technical issues associated with the request in need
of addressing raised at the November 12, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6120-P
6
The applicant is proposing to amend the PD-R for the Governor’s Manor
Subdivision eliminating the requirement for a perimeter fence and that all interior
fences be constructed of cedar, to modify the minimum roof pitch and change the
minimum square footage of the homes.
The amendment is to reduce the required roof pitch from a 10/12 for homes less
than 3,000 square feet and 8/12 for homes greater than 3,000 square feet to an
8/12 roof pitch regardless of the home size.
The amendment also includes a reduction in the minimum square footage of the
homes from 1,600 square feet to 1,400 square feet. The developer has indicated
the 1,400 square feet will be heated and cooled space. The homes typically
have a two (2) car garage which is not included in the minimum square footage
of the home. The current approval does not define the minimum square footage
of the homes as heated and cooled; only specifies the minimum square footage
of home construction.
The previous approval required all interior fences to be constructed of one
hundred percent cedar materials. If approved, the amendment will remove the
requirement of cedar material construction and allow all fences to be constructed
of a wood material with no specific species of wood material identified.
The final modification to the PD-R is to remove the requirement for construction
of a wrought iron fence around the perimeter of the site. A six (6) foot tall
wrought iron fence along all lot lines, which abutted Capitol Hills Boulevard and
the Oasis Renewal Center was required with the original approval. The request
is to remove this requirement and allow individual lot owners to place fencing
along their property line as they desire. The proposed fencing to be allowed by
the individual lot owners is six (6) foot high fence constructed of wood, brick or
brick and wrought iron. As was previously approved the six (6) foot fencing may
be located within the building setback.
Staff is supportive of the request. The original subdivision was started by a
different developer and has since been taken over by the applicant. Through the
Planned Development process all aspects of a development may be reviewed
but the roof pitches of homes is not typically an item specified in the PD-R and is
typically handled through the Bill of Assurance. Minimum square footages of
homes, construction materials, fencing height and fencing construction materials
are items typically reviewed. Since the previous approval did not specify heated
and cooled verses total square footage staff does not feel this is a significant
change. The construction materials are not proposed to change. The
modification to the perimeter fencing allows for individuals to place fencing on
their property line constructed of a material of their choosing. To staff’s
knowledge there are no remaining outstanding technical issues in need of
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6120-P
7
addressing related to this issue. The modification to the Bill of Assurance will
have to be taken care of by the developer through the proper mechanism
outlined in the Bill of Assurance.
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: (DECEMBER 3, 2009)
Mr. Ted Upshaw and Mr. Cliff McKinney were present representing the request. There
were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of
approval of the request.
Mr. McKinney stated the development had started in 2005 and ended in foreclosure.
He stated the developer was trying to bring back the neighborhood from a zombie
neighborhood to a viable subdivision.
Mr. Robert Angell addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated he
bought his home at auction and had put a substantial amount of money in the home to
finish out the residences. He stated he had visited with three appraiser and they had
stated if lesser square footage homes were constructed the value of his home would be
reduced. He stated the roof pitch was a concern. He stated variations in roof pitches
and heights added value to a neighborhood. He stated the developer was responsible
for placement of a perimeter fence around the subdivision. He stated Mr. Upshaw had
bought the remaining lots, he was the developer and therefore he was responsible for
construction of the perimeter fence.
Ms. Sheila Colclasure addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She
stated she had also bought her home at auction. She stated the interior finish out had
been completed by herself and family members. She stated she could not afford a
home of this nature without the sweat equity on her part. She stated with the reduced
square footage of the homes this would decrease property values within the area. She
stated she had bought her home thinking the development was a gated community and
felt the developer should provide the fence as was previously approved.
Mr. Wesley White addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated
he did not buy his home at auction. He stated his home was not the largest or the
smallest on the block. He stated his builder had indicated if the developer was allowed
to construct homes with lesser square footages then the existing property values would
be decreased. He stated once the residents heard the lots had been sold there was a
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6120-P
8
feeling that things would get better. He stated this was not the case. He stated the
current developer had not worked with the neighborhood and had not meet with them as
a group to discuss the best solutions for the neighborhood. He stated he and his wife
bought their home in a gated community. He stated the developer had indicated the
residences would be required to pay for the fence through an assessment. He stated
the Bill of Assurance indicated the developer was responsible for the perimeter fence.
Mr. McKinney stated the subdivision as previously presented did not work. He stated
Mr. Upshaw had purchased the subdivision in foreclosure. He stated the Bill of
Assurance indicated each of the homes would be assessed a $1,000 fee to pay for
construction of the perimeter fence. He stated since the homes were bought at auction
the homes had not paid these fees which were still owed. He stated the desire of the
develop was to allow individuals to place fences as they wished.
Mr. Ted Upshaw addressed the Commission providing appraisal and comparable
pricing of new and proposed structures for the neighborhood. He stated homes
1,400 square feet would command a higher price per square foot than the larger homes.
He stated with a 1,400 square foot home he could provide a home to the West Little
Rock market less than $200,000. He stated new homes sales in the City less than
$200,000 were continuing to move. He stated over $200,000 the sales were stagnant.
He stated the market had changed. He stated there was a 67 percent decrease in the
number of building permits issued from the start of the project to current day.
Mr. Randy Sumbles stated he was the realtor that would market and sell the homes
once completed. He stated the market for homes over $200,000 was very difficult. He
stated it was true smaller square footages of homes did command a higher sales price.
He stated the sales price proposed was $120 to $125 per square foot for the
1,400 square foot homes.
There was a general discussion by the Commission concerning the development and
the impacts of the request on the existing homes in the area. The Commission
indicated they felt sympathetic to the residences. A few Commissioners indicated
homes even if smaller homes were better than vacant lots. Commissioner Rector
stated his neighborhood was very diverse and he never thought a smaller home
decreased property values. The Commission questioned Mr. Upshaw as to the smallest
box he would build. He stated heated and cooled space with a garage the smallest box
would be 1,850 square feet.
A motion was made to approve the request as recommended by staff. The motion
failed by a vote of 5 ayes, 4 noes, 1 recusal (Commissioner Ferstl) and 2 open
positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: 12 FILE NO.: Z-7008-B
NAME: Kanis Office Park Short-form POD
LOCATION: Located at 18425 Kanis Road
DEVELOPER:
Engineering Systems Group LLC
18425 Kanis Road
Little Rock, AR 72223
ENGINEER:
White Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 2.804 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 zoning lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: POD and R-2, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: General and Professional Office and Single-family
PROPOSED ZONING: POD
PROPOSED USE: General and Professional Office – 3 lot subdivision
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1. A variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of lots without public
street frontage.
2. A deferral of the required street improvements to Kanis Road for a period of five
years, until Phase II or until adjacent development, whichever occurs first.
BACKGROUND:
A request was to be heard by the Little Rock Planning Commission on May 3, 2001, for
the rezoning of the site from R-2, Single-family to C-1, Neighborhood Commercial. The
applicant withdrew his request prior to the public hearing.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7008-B
2
Ordinance No. 18,918 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on August 19,
2003, rezoned the property from R-2, Single-family to POD and established
ESG Short-form POD. The site contained 1.4 acres and located at 18425 Kanis Road.
The approval allowed the placement of three (3) structures on the site in three (3)
Phases. The first phase consisted of the construction of a small office of approximately
1,000 square feet in area. Additional structures would be constructed with Phase II
consisting of a second structure of approximately 1,000 square feet and Phase III a third
building with approximately 3,500 square feet.
The structures were to be aesthetically pleasing; the architectural style was to be more
residential than commercial in design. The approval allowed three (3) employees in the
Phase I building with little traffic to the site since most of the activity took place off site at
the customer’s place of business. Phase II and III buildings were to be marketed to
similar type uses. General and professional office users for the buildings were
approved. The hours of operation were from 7:30 am to 5:30 pm Monday through
Friday. The parking would be phased with the building construction. No ground
signage, only wall signage on each of the buildings, was approved.
A deferral of street improvements to Kanis Road until Phase III or ten years was
requested. The right-of-way as required per the Master Street Plan was to be dedicated
at the time of building construction. The proposed site plan also included landscaping
as required by the Landscape Ordinance and the Zoning Buffer Ordinance. At this time,
only the first building has been constructed. Street improvements to Kanis Road have
not been completed.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The developer is now requesting to revise the previously approved POD by
expanding the site from 1.4 acres to 2.8 acres to allow development of the site
with three (3) lots with immediate plans for buildings on Lots 1 and 3. Lot 2 will
be held for future development. The buildings are proposed constructed with
materials found in typical residential construction. The development is proposed
in two (2) phases. Phase I consists of the existing building as proposed Lot 1
and a second office building as proposed Lot 3. The second phase is
development of Lot 2. Phase II will not be developed until the developer is able
to annex the site into the corporate limits of the City of Little Rock.
The request includes a deferral of the required street improvements for Kanis
Road for a period of five (5)years, until Phase II or until adjacent development
occurs, whichever occurs first.
There does not appear to be a valid Bill of Assurance for the Independence
Farms Subdivision available.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7008-B
3
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There is an office building constructed on the eastern portion of the site
(proposed Lot 1). The building has a brick façade and was constructed with two
office bays. The area to the south is heavily wooded. The structures on the
western portion proposed for expansion of the development were recently
removed. This section of Kanis Road is primarily residential with homes located
on acreage. West of the site, at the intersection of Kanis and Denny Roads, is a
church and two (2) commercial businesses, a beauty salon and Plant/Plant which
provides plants for commercial businesses.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from the area property
owners. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site, all residents, who
could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site and the Coalition of West
Little Rock Neighborhoods were notified of the public hearing.
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 street conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to Kanis Road
including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. The new back of
curb should be located 29.5 feet from the centerline.
3. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
4. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance.
5. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES stormwater
permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the
start of construction.
6. On site striping and signage plans should be forwarded to Public Works,
Traffic Engineering for approval with the site development package.
7. Streetlights are required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Provide
plans for approval to Traffic Engineering. Streetlights must be installed prior
to platting/certificate of occupancy. Contact Traffic Engineering 379-1813
(Steve Philpott) for more information.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7008-B
4
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. The proposed driveway should intersect Kanis Road at a 90 degree angle.
The three (3) existing driveways should be removed.
10. 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 future curb line of the street. The north portion of the site should be
redesigned to move the intersection at least 75 feet from the intersection.
11. When the property is annexed, 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.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Outside the service boundary. Annexation to the City of Little Rock
is required to receive sanitary sewer service. Contact Little Rock Wastewater
Utility for additional information.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. 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. Additional fire hydrant(s) may 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 project is within
Water Improvement District 349 and there may be charges assessed by the
Improvement District in conjunction with water service to this property. This
development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system.
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
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7008-B
5
Department of Health Engineering Division and Little Rock Fire Department is
required.
Fire Department: Fire hydrants will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department for additional information.
County Planning: The site is located outside the City limits of the City of Little
Rock. Contact Pulaski County Planning for information concerning the required
development.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Residential Low Density for this property. The
applicant has applied for a revised Short-form POD. This site was previously
approved for a Planned Office Development in 2003, but the land use plan was
not amended at that time. This area of Kanis Road was studied by staff recently
and the consensus at that time was to keep the south side of Kanis Road rural in
character. Residential and non-residential uses to the north are proposed to be
higher density and more suburban or urban. Densification is proposed on the
Plan. While to the south large-lot low intensity uses are recommended, with
large-lot residential subdivisions along Longwood Road, Edswood Road and
Longway Drive. There have not been any significant changes in the area since
this Land Use review.
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 on pedestrians. 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 Kanis 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 not covered by a Neighborhood Action
Plan.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7008-B
6
Landscape:
1. Site plan must comply with the City’s minimal landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
2. The zoning buffer ordinance requires an average twenty-seven foot (27’)
street buffer along Kanis Road and in no case to be less than half. Currently,
the site is deficient on this minimal requirement.
3. A fifteen foot (15’) wide land use buffer is required to separate this proposed
development from the residential property on the eastern and western
perimeters of the site. Seventy percent (70%) of these buffers are to remain
undisturbed.
4. The property to the east and the west is zoned residential, therefore, a six (6)
foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed
outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along both the
eastern and western perimeters of the site.
5. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
6. 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.
7. 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: (November 12, 2009)
The applicant was not present. Staff presented the item stating there were a
number of issues related to the site which were in need of addressing prior to the
Commission acting on the request. Staff stated the development was proposed
in two (2) phases with the construction of an office building in the first phase
served by a septic system and development of the second phase upon
annexation to the City of Little Rock. Staff noted the site was not contiguous to
allow annexation in the near future.
Public Works comments were briefly discusses. Staff noted right of way
dedications and street construction would be required. Staff stated the design of
the existing drive did not meet the current ordinance requirements. Staff stated
they would work through this issue with the applicant.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7008-B
7
Landscaping comments were discussed. Staff stated all landscape and buffer
ordinance standards would apply to the future development of the site. Staff
stated a landscape plan 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 identifying a number of the issues
outlined for the November 12, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The
revised plan has removed the three (3) existing drives and located a shared drive
on the lot line between Lots 1 and 3.
The revised site plan identifies Lot 2, the rear lot, for future development and
proposing new construction on the lot abutting Kanis Road (Lot 3). The
development is proposed in two (2) phases. The first Phase consists of the
existing office building located on proposed Lot 1 and construction of a new office
building on proposed Lot 3. The existing building contains 2,326 square feet
with a 13.2 percent building coverage and Lot 3 is proposed with a new office
building containing 3,825 square feet and a 19.4 percent building coverage. All
lots are proposed with general and professional office uses as allowable uses.
The request includes a deferral of the required street improvements for Kanis
Road for a period of five (5) years, until the development of Phase II or until
adjacent development occurs, whichever occurs first. Staff is supportive of the
deferral request.
Staff has concerns with the potential future development of Lot 2 with
non-residential uses. The previous approval allowed the placement of three (3)
structures on the eastern portion of the site in three Phases containing
approximately 5,500 square feet. The first phase allowed the construction of a
small office building containing approximately 1,000 square feet which has been
built along Kanis Road. Phase II allowed a second building of approximately
1,000 square feet located immediately south of the existing structure and Phase
III allowed a third building with approximately 3,500 square feet also located
south of the existing structure. The structures were to be an architectural style
of more residential than commercial. Staff has concerns with committing to
potential future office development for the Lot 2 and feels the approval of office
uses on Lot 2 is premature. The property is located outside the City limits and is
not contiguous to allow for annexation. Staff feels moving the future
development of the office on the eastern portion of the development to the Kanis
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7008-B
8
Road frontage allows for the rear portion of the site to act as a buffer in the
short-term for the adjacent residentially zoned property. Although the proposed
use of the property is not consistent with the City’s Future Land Use Plan again
staff feels by moving the previously approved office square footage away from
the rear of the site to the street side allows for more protection of the adjoining
properties to the south and east.
The previous approval allowed office hours of operation were from 7:30 am to
5:30 pm Monday through Friday. The applicant has not requested a
modification to the hours of operation for the new office building.
The site plan indicates ten (10) parking spaces to serve the existing office use
and fourteen (14) spaces to serve the new office building. The ordinance would
typically require the placement of five (5) spaces to serve the existing office
building and nine (9) spaces to serve the new office use.
No ground signage was approved with the original request only wall signage on
each of the buildings. The current request does not include ground signage.
Wall signage is proposed as typically allowed in office zones or a maximum of
ten percent of the façade area abutting the public street.
According to Traffic Engineering the center of the 4-way intersection of the
driveway and parking lots should be located 75 feet from the future back of curb.
As proposed, it takes only two (2) cars to block access to one (1) of the parking
areas. Also only one (1) entry lane should be provided into the development
from Kanis Road. Two (2) exits lanes onto Kanis Road can be provided if
desired.
Staff is generally supportive of the development but has concerns with the
development of the Lot 2 portion of the site with office uses. Staff also has
concerns with the driveway entering the parking lot. Staff cannot support the
application as filed.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 3, 2009)
The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request dated December 1,
2009 requesting a deferral of the item to the January 14, 2010, public hearing. Staff
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7008-B
9
stated the deferral request would require a waiver of the Commission’s By-laws with
regard to the late deferral request. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral
request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the By-law waiver with regard to the late deferral request. The motion
carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions. The chair
entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried
by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: 13 FILE NO.: Z-7025-C
NAME: Creekwood Plaza Revised Short-form PCD
LOCATION: Located on the Northeast Corner of Kanis and Bowman Roads
DEVELOPER:
Creekwood Plaza LLC
c/o Davis Properties
P.O. Box 241025
Little Rock, AR 72223
ARCHITECT:
Terry Burruss Architects
614 Center Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
AREA: 6.41 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: PCD
ALLOWED USES: Office/Warehouse/Commercial
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD
PROPOSED USE: Office/Warehouse/Commercial – Extend the Hours of
Operation
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
The Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 18,515 on July 3, 2001, establishing
West Park Office Centre – Long-form PCD. The applicant proposed to construct eight
(8) buildings to be used as a mixed office warehouse development. The proposed use
mix was as follows:
Buildings A – D 60% Commercial (C-3 permitted uses) 40% General /Professional Office
Building E General/Professional Office
Buildings F - H Office/Office-Warehouse, with a maximum of 70% warehouse space
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7025-C
2
The proposed development was to have approximately 28,830 square feet of
commercial space, 45,830 square feet of office space and 25,410 square feet of
warehouse space. The development was proposed to have 233 parking spaces.
There were to be two (2) access points; one driveway from Kanis Road and one
driveway from Bowman Road. The proposed site plan included a monument-type
ground-mounted sign near the southwest corner of the property. The applicant
indicated the sign would have a maximum height of eight (8) feet and maximum area of
160 square feet.
The development was to be developed in two (2) phases. Phase I was to include
Buildings A – C, associated parking areas and a single access point from Bowman
Road. The Bowman Road improvements and a portion of the Kanis Road
improvements were to be made during Phase I construction. The applicant indicated
the remainder of the site was to remain undisturbed until Phase II construction began.
The applicant also indicated building elevations and description of the proposed
buildings as a part of the previous PCD. The applicant proposed the hours of operation
to be 6:00 am to 9:30 pm Monday – Saturday.
The Planning Commission reviewed a request at their August 8, 2002, Planning
Commission Public Hearing to amend the previously approved PCD to remove the
percentage mix placed on Buildings A – D and to extend the hours of operation for the
site. The applicant proposed the hours of operation as 6:00 am to 12:00 am seven days
a week. The applicant indicated, due to leasing constraints, his desire was to no longer
have a 60% Commercial and 40% Office limit placed on the buildings facing Bowman
and Kanis Roads. The application included a marketing plan for the units as 100%
commercial (or office) uses with C-3 uses being the allowable uses requested. The
applicant indicated Buildings E – H would remain as previously approved; Office/Office
Warehouse with a maximum of 70% Warehouse. Parking remained as previously
approved, 233 parking spaces. The applicant amended the request prior to the August
8, 2002, Planning Commission hearing to only revise the hours of operation and
eliminate the requested to market the site as a 100 percent commercial development.
On September 3, 2003, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No.
18,740, revising the PCD to allow the hours of operation to be extended to include 6:00
am to 12:00 am seven days per week. The use mix was not changed.
Ordinance No. 19,255 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on January 4,
2005, allowed a revision to the previously approved site plan for Buildings F and G. The
approval allowed warehouse storage separate from office uses in these two building to
give the owner flexibility in renting the spaces. The previous approval limited the use of
the space to office/warehouse activities. The approval allowed the buildings to be
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7025-C
3
rented to a warehouse user who did not require office space or an office user who did
not require warehouse space.
In addition, areas for outdoor dining were approved. There were five (5) areas identified
for outdoor dining. Each of the areas would have various size tables and seating
capacities. The tables were located along the existing sidewalk but still allowed
sufficient walk area to meet minimum ADA requirements.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The request is to amend the previously approved PCD to allow 24-hour a day
seven (7) day a week access for the fitness center located in Suites C-4, C-5 and
C-6. The approval is limited to the current occupant and limited to the indicated
suites. There are no other modifications to the previously approved PCD
proposed.
The property is located in Tracts 7 and 8 Montclair Subdivision. There does not
appear to be a valid Bill of Assurance for this subdivision.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is developed with most spaces occupied. There is a mixture of uses
within the development including restaurant uses, retail uses and office uses.
The gym is located in a space fronting Bowman Road. Bowman and Kanis
Roads have been constructed to Master Street Plan standard and there is a
sidewalk in place. Other uses in the area include retail uses such as a liquor
store, a drycleaners, a mini-warehouse development and an ice skating rink.
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
Gibraltar Heights Neighborhood Association and the John Barrow Neighborhood
Association were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of
Kanis Road and Bowman Road.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7025-C
4
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer service available to this project.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: No objection to extend hours of operation
Fire Department: Fire hydrants will 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 I-430 Planning District. The
Land Use Plan shows Mixed Office Commercial for this property. The applicant
has applied for a revised PCD, with no change in land use proposed. The
proposed land uses in the Planned Development are consistent with the
Commercial Category.
Master Street Plan: Kanis and Bowman Roads are both shown as Minor
Arterials. 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 and Bowman Roads. 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 in the immediate vicinity.
Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the Walnut Valley
Neighborhood Plan, but that plan does not address this issue directly. Their
neighborhood quality goal does state a need to “preserve the welcoming
attractive neighborhood where current residents are proud to live and others wish
to reside.”
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7025-C
5
Landscape: No comment on the change in hours of operation.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 12, 2009)
Mr. Terry Burruss was present representing the owner. Staff presented the item
to the Committee members stating there were no outstanding technical issues in
need of addressing prior to the Commission acting on the request.
Pubic Works stated a radial dedication was required at the intersection of
Bowman and Kanis Roads. Mr. Burruss stated the dedication was made at the
time of development of the site.
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 technical issues associated with the request in need
of addressing raised at the November 12, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting.
The request is an amendment to the previously approved PCD to allow 24-hour
seven (7) day a week access for the fitness center located in Suites C-4, C-5 and
C-6. The approval is limited to the current occupant and limited to these suites.
There are no other modifications to the previously approved PCD proposed.
Staff is supportive of the request. During the original approval process there
were a number of residential uses located in the area. These homes have since
been removed and the area is developed as a commercial area. Staff feels by
limiting the approval of the extended hours to the current user will negate any
potential negative impacts on the development and the surrounding 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: (DECEMBER 3, 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
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7025-C
6
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 9 ayes,
0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: 14 FILE NO.: Z-7917-B
NAME: Verizon Wireless Revised Short-form PCD
LOCATION: Located at 12018 Chenal Parkway
DEVELOPER:
Verizon Wireless
c/o Pinnacle Signs and Graphics
14710 Cantrell Road
Little Rock, AR 72223
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Road
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 1.19 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: PCD
ALLOWED USES: C-3, General Commercial District Uses – Wall sign west
façade 75 square feet
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD
PROPOSED USE: C-3, General Commercial District Uses – Wall sign west
façade 117 square feet
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
The site was constructed as a single user building which housed a Gateway computer
store. Once the original tenant moved from the site the property was divided into
two (2) individual retail spaces, to be leased independently. An application request was
filed to allow signage on the western wall of the building; the wall was located without
public street frontage. According to the applicant the sign allowances per the Ordinance
provided limited visibility for tenants leasing the west side of the property. Based on the
property being located within the Chenal Parkway/Financial Center Design Overlay
District the only option for allowance of signage without public street frontage required
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7917-B
2
the applicant to file a Planned Development application and rezone the site from C-3,
General Commercial District. The allowable uses for the site remained as C-3, General
Commercial District uses.
The applicant requested the rezoning of the site to PCD to allow signage along the
western façade of the building, located without public street frontage. The original
application for Verizon indicated a total sign area which would not exceed 240 square
feet and the “V” being the largest letter with a maximum height of 57 inches. During the
Planning Commission public hearing the applicant reduced the total sign area being
requested to 100 square feet. The application request was amended during the Board
of Directors meeting as well. The Board of Directors approved the applicant’s amended
request to allow signage along the western façade with a maximum area of fifty (50)
square feet by the adoption of Ordinance No. 19,429 on November 1, 2005.
On December 7, 2006, the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request to allow
expanded signage on the western façade of this building. The request was to allow the
placement of a sign without public street frontage with a total sign area of 150 square
feet. The developers indicated a new façade would be placed on the front and west
walls changing the color of the building and adding architectural elements such as brick
accents and false windows. During the public hearing process the applicant indicated
the smallest sign acceptable to serve the needs and provide visibility would be
100 square feet in area.
The denial was appealed to the Board of Directors. The applicant amended the request
at the Board of Directors meeting to limit the signage to seventy-five (75) square feet.
Ordinance No. 19,724 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on March 20, 2007,
approved signage on the western façade not to exceed seventy-five (75) square feet in
sign area.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is now proposing to revise the previously approved PCD to
increase the signage located on the western façade. According to the applicant’s
cover letter the reason for the request is that current signage has poor visibility
for the traffic traveling eastbound on Chenal Parkway. The letter states as good
signage is critical to any retail operation, Verizon would like to maximize its
visibility to all traffic on Chenal.
Additional data provided indicates the west elevation of the building is 33 feet
high and 100 feet in width for a total façade area of 3,300 square feet. The
existing sign is 32 inches high and 210 inches wide for a total sign area of
50 square feet. The sign proposed is 50 inches high and 335 inches wide for a
total sign area of 117 square feet.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7917-B
3
The Bill of Assurance for the Subdivision indicates the covenants are to run with
the land and shall be binding on all parties for a period of twenty-five (25) years
from the date of recording after which time said covenants shall have an
automatic extension for successive periods of ten (10 years unless an instrument
signed by a majority of the owners of lots in the Parkway West Addition has been
recorded, agreeing to change of said covenants in whole or part. The Bill of
Assurance for this lots does not address specifics related to signage.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains a two (2) bay commercial building with one side occupied by
Verizon and the other with an eye care use. The area is built-out. Wal-mart is
located to the south with a bank located to the east. There are several
restaurants in the area to the northeast, west and northwest. This site has a right
in right out drive onto Chenal Parkway. Persons traveling from the west do not
have direct access to the site but must turn on Westhaven Drive and access the
site through the adjacent restaurant site parking lot.
There is a wall sign located on the west façade of the building identifying Verizon.
The sign permit indicates the sign is 50 square feet.
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
Gibraltar Heights Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
No comment.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer service available to this project.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7917-B
4
Central Arkansas Water: No objection.
Fire Department: No comment.
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 Ellis Mountain Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant has
applied for revised Short-form PCD, with no change in land use proposed. The
proposed land uses in the Planned Development are consistent with the
Commercial Category.
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. 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 the immediate vicinity.
Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the Rock Creek
Neighborhood Plan. The plan does not address the issue of signage on
commercial buildings.
Landscape: No comment on the proposed signage request.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 12, 2009)
The applicant was present. Staff presented the item with a history of the signage
request for the site. Staff stated the current approval allowed for 75-square feet
of signage along the western façade. Staff stated the sign currently located on
the west wall was 50 square feet. Staff stated Verizon was requesting to be
allowed a sign 50 inches high and 335 inches wide for a total sign area of
117 square feet. Staff stated there were no outstanding technical issues
associated with the request.
There was a brief discussion by the Committee members and the applicant
concerning the request, previous request and the allowable signage. There was
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7917-B
5
no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the
full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
There were no outstanding technical issues in need of addressing raised at the
November 12, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The request is to allow
wall signage on the west elevation of the building which is located without public
street frontage. The wall is 33 feet high and a 100 feet wide for a total façade
area of 3,300 square feet. The existing sign is 32 inches high and 210 inches
wide for a total sign area of 50 square feet. The new sign proposed is 50 inches
high and 335 inches wide for a total sign area of 117 square feet.
Staff is not supportive of allowing the increase in signage as proposed by the
applicant. The current approval allows for a sign 75 square feet in area on the
western wall which is a fifty (50) percent increase in the total sign area than the
current fifty (50) square foot sign located on the building. As stated in staff’s
previous recommendation staff feels any limited visibility of the sign is due to the
white sign being placed on a white wall. The applicant indicated during the
application process in 2007 that improvements would be made to the building
and the color of the building would be changed to allow for added visibility of the
sign. These improvements have not occurred. The existing wall sign located on
the front of the building facing Chenal Parkway is 138 square feet and also
located on Chenal Parkway is a monument sign 96 square feet in area. Staff
feels the site has adequate signage to inform customers of the location.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 3, 2009)
Mr. Sherman Tate and Mr. Mike Rutter were present representing the request. There
was a registered objector present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of
denial.
Mr. Tate stated when persons traveled east on Chenal Parkway it was difficult to see
the sign located on the western wall of the building. He stated signage was a necessity
for business to attract new customers. He stated based on the location of the wall and
the elevation of the wall this could be viewed as a wall with street frontage. He stated
he did not feel Verizon was asking for anything out of the ordinary just a way for
customers to find the store.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7917-B
6
Mr. Rutter stated visual communication was very important to businesses. He stated a
facilities ability to succeed was based on visual communication. He stated the west wall
functioned as a street frontage. He stated the wall had a clear unobstructed view from
the parkway. He stated the existing sign was 1.5 percent of the wall façade. He stated
the new sign was proposed at 3.5 percent of the façade area.
Ms. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated the
League of Women Voters opposed the request when the application was initially filed
and continued to oppose the request. She stated when driving this area of the parkway
it was important to watch for vehicles and not look for signage. She stated there was a
point signage became visual clutter and no longer serve the intended purpose.
There was a general discussion by the Commission concerning the existing signage
and visibility. Commissioner Smith and Commissioner Rector commented they had
driven the parkway and the existing sign was not visible. Commissioner Yates
questioned Mr. Tate if he would be willing to remove the sign on the front of the store to
be allowed signage on the west wall as proposed. Mr. Tate stated he was not willing to
remove the sign on the front of the building to be allowed signage on the west wall.
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 7 ayes,
2 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: 15 FILE NO.: Z-7920-B
NAME: Lot 1 Baker Addition Short-form PCD
LOCATION: Located at 17410 Kanis Road
DEVELOPER:
DOB enterprises
19 Sologne Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
ENGINEER:
McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers
10 Otter Creek Circle, Suite A
Little Rock, AR 72210
AREA: 7.89 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: PCD and R-2, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Retail – Mini-warehouse and Single-family
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: Retail and Mini-warehouse
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance
to allow grading of the entire site with the construction of one or more buildings.
BACKGROUND:
The Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request to rezone a portion of this site
from R-2, Single-family to PCD at their September 29, 2005, public hearing. The denial
was appealed to the Little Rock Board of Directors and was heard at their December 20,
2005, public hearing.
Ordinance No. 19,461 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on December 20,
2005, rezoned the western portion of the site from R-2, Single-family to PCD to allow
construction of a strip center containing 27,300 square feet with C-3, General
Commercial District uses as allowable uses and a six (6) building mini-warehouse
development containing 47,100 square feet.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7920-B
2
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is proposing a revision to the approved PCD to modify the
approved site plan and expand the area of development. The new site plan
indicates the construction of 46,500 square feet of commercial retail space with
C-3, General Commercial District uses as allowable uses and a mini-warehouse
development with 18,100 square feet of unconditioned space and 29,800 square
feet of conditioned storage space. A 2,400 square foot office to serve the center
is indicated on the site plan.
The hours of operation for the retail portion of the site are from 7:00 am to
12:00 pm Monday through Sunday. The hours of operation for the
mini-warehouse portion of the development are from 6:00 am to 10:00 pm
Monday through Sunday.
The property is located outside the City limits of Little Rock but the applicant has
indicated the property will be annexed into the City once the zoning request is
approved.
There does not appear to be a valid Bill of Assurance for the Independence
Farms Subdivision available.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There are a few commercial uses located in the area which were existing prior to
the City taking in this area for Extraterritorial Zoning and are still zoned R-2,
Single-family with a non-conforming status. There are a number of residential
structures located on the site proposed for development but for the most part the
site is yard area for these homes. There is a utility substation located to the east
of the site and residential zoned and used property to the west. There is a pet
boarding facility located one parcel removed to the west on AF zoned property.
South of the site is residentially zoned and used property. The property to the
north was recently rezoned to POD to allow future development by St. Vincent’s
as a health care village.
Kanis Road is a narrow unimproved street with open ditches for drainage.
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
Coalition of West Little Rock Neighborhoods were notified of the public hearing.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7920-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 street conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to Kanis Road
including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. The new back of
curb should be located 29.5 feet from centerline.
3. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance.
4. The driveway should intersect Kanis Road at a 90 degree angle.
5. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the
proposed location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan.
6. If the property will be annexed into the City, a grading permit in accordance
with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or
grading activities at the site. Other than residential subdivisions, site
grading and drainage plans must be submitted and approved prior to the
start of construction.
7. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES stormwater
permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the
start of construction.
8. If the property will apply to be annexed, a special Grading Permit for Flood
Hazard Areas will be required per Section 8-283 prior to construction. The
finished floor of the proposed building should be elevated to at least one (1)
foot above the base flood elevation.
9. Since portions of the property is located within the 100 year floodplain. The
Pulaski County Planning Department should be contacted pertaining to
floodplain requirements.
10. Provide a letter prepared by a registered engineer certifying the sight
distance at the intersections comply with 2004 AASHTO Green Book
standards.
11. 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).
12. 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.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7920-B
4
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Outside the service boundary. Annexation to the City of Little Rock
is required to receive sanitary sewer service. Contact Little Rock Wastewater
Utility for additional information.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. A 39-inch raw water line
crosses this site within a 50-foot wide waterline easement on the north side of
property. Care must be taken to protect these water lines and any
appurtenances, such as access and air release vaults, or monumentation which
may be in the area. No signs, light poles, dumpster pads or other structures on
foundations will be allowed within the existing 50-foot waterline easement.
Paved parking and driveways are allowed. 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. 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 project is within
Water Improvement District 349 and there may be charges assessed by the
Improvement District in conjunction with water service to this property. 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. Please submit plans for water facilities to Central Arkansas Water for
review. Plan revisions may be required after additional review. Contact Central
Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of water facilities. Approval
of plans by Central Arkansas Water, the Arkansas Department of Health
Engineering Division and Little Rock Fire Department is required.
Fire Department: Fire Hydrants will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department for additional information.
County Planning: The site is located outside the City limits. Contact Pulaski
County Planning for specific development criteria.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7920-B
5
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The
Land Use Plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant has applied
for a revised Short-form PCD. The proposed land uses in the Planned
Development are consistent with the Commercial Category.
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. 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 proposed along this portion of Kanis 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 not covered by a Neighborhood Plan.
Landscape:
1. Site plan must comply with the City’s minimal landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
2. The zoning buffer ordinance requires an average thirty-six foot (36’) street
buffer along Kanis Road and in no case to be less than half. Currently, the
site is deficient on this minimal requirement.
3. A thirty-six foot (36’) wide land use buffer is required to separate this
proposed development from the residential property on the eastern and
western perimeters of the site. Seventy percent (70%) of these buffers are to
remain undisturbed. Easements cannot count towards this minimal City
requirement.
4. The landscape ordinance requires a nine foot (9’) foot wide landscape strip
around the sites entirety. A variance from this minimal amount must be
obtained from the City Beautiful Commission prior to the issuance of a
building permit.
5. Currently, there are proposed parking spaces located within both the required
street buffer area(s) and the required landscape strip along Kanis Road.
6. The property to the north, east and the west is zoned residential, therefore, a
six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7920-B
6
directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the
northern, eastern and western perimeters of the site.
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 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: (November 12, 2009)
Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the owner. Staff presented an
overview of the development stating there were a few technical issues
associated with the request in need of addressing prior to the Commission acting
on the request. Staff questioned if the development would seek annexation prior
to development. Mr. McGetrick stated the owner would seek annexation prior to
development. Staff also questioned the proposed signage plan and requested a
note be provided on the site plan concerning dumpster screening.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated dedication of right of way
and street construction would be required at the time of development. Staff
requested Mr. McGetrick work with the developers to the east to tie the Kanis
Road improvements together. Staff questioned if advanced grading was a part of
the request. Mr. McGetrick stated advanced grading was being requested to
allow for clearing of the entire site with the construction of one or more buildings.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated buffering would be
required along the property perimeters where abutting residentially zoned or
used property. Mr. McGetrick stated the eastern perimeter abutted a utility
substation and should not be subject to the buffering and screening requirements
of the ordinance. Staff stated the Planning Commission could approve a
variance for this perimeter. Mr. McGetrick stated the property to the north was
recently rezoned to allow for an office development. He questioned the buffer
requirements in this area. Staff stated they would work with him to determine the
actual buffer requirements for the site.
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.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7920-B
7
H. ANALYSIS:
Mr. McGetrick submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing the issues raised
at the November 12, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised plan
indicates the proposed signage plan as well as a note has been provided
identifying the dumpster screening requirement.
The plan indicates a land use buffer along the western perimeter of 44.5 feet
increasing to 55-feet near Kanis Road. Of the land use buffer there is a 20-foot
access easement which is not typically allowed to count towards the buffering
requirement. The plan indicates in this are there is no existing vegetation. An
eight (8) foot chain link fence will be installed on the east side of the access
easement and vines, shrubs and trees will be planted on the inside of the fence.
Along the northern perimeter a land use buffer is not required. The site plan
indicates the placement of a nine (9) foot landscape strip in this area as required
by the Landscape Ordinance. Along the site’s eastern perimeter there is a
50-foot easement dedicated to allow access to the adjacent utility substation.
The substation is zoned R-2, Single-family. The applicant is requesting to not be
required to provide a buffer along this perimeter. A nine (9) foot landscape strip
has been indicated on the site plan to comply with the Landscape Ordinance.
The street buffer has been indicated to comply with the typical ordinance
standards.
The site plan indicates the construction of 46,500 square feet of commercial retail
space with C-3, General Commercial District uses as allowable uses and a
mini-warehouse development with 18,100 square feet of unconditioned space
and 29,800 square feet of conditioned storage space. A 2,400 square foot office
to serve the center is indicated on the site plan. The typical minimum parking
required for the strip center would be one hundred fifty-five (155) parking spaces
based on a one (1) to three hundred (300) parking ratio. If parking is calculated
as typically required in a shopping center development (1 to 225) a total of two
hundred six (206) parking spaces would be required. The office for the
mini-warehouse would typically require six (6) parking spaces. The site plan
indicates one hundred sixty-two (162) parking spaces.
The development is proposed as a retail development with C-3, General
Commercial District uses as allowable uses for the site. Staff has concerns with
the parking should the center develop with a large amount of retail and restaurant
space. Staff recommends the development maintain a use mix of office and
retail which will not create a parking concern. Staff recommends limiting the
retail portion of the development to seventy (70) percent and maintain thirty (30)
percent of the space for office uses.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7920-B
8
The hours of operation for the retail portion of the site are from 7:00 am to
12:00 pm Monday through Sunday. The hours of operation for the
mini-warehouse portion of the development are from 6:00 am to 10:00 pm
Monday through Sunday.
The property is located outside the City limits of Little Rock but is contiguous on
the northern perimeter. The applicant has indicated the property will be annexed
into the City once the zoning request is approved and prior to development.
The site plan indicates a single ground sign located on Kanis Road to serve the
development. The sign is proposed consistent with signage allowed in
commercial zones or a maximum of thirty-six (36) feet in height and one hundred
sixty (160) square feet in area. Building signage is to comply with signage
allowed in commercial zones or a maximum of ten (10) percent of the total
façade area abutting a public street. The retail buildings are proposed with wall
signs facing into the development as typically allowed in shopping center
developments.
The request includes a variance request from the City’s Land Alteration
Ordinance to allow grading of the Phase II portion of the development with the
construction of a building within the Phase I portion of the development. The
applicant has indicated the advanced grading is necessary to balance the site
and eliminate the need to hall excess materials or bring in fill materials at the
time of development.
Staff is supportive of the request. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding
technical issues in need of addressing related to the proposed development.
Staff feels the development as proposed is an appropriate use of the site.
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 the use mix of the two commercial building portion of the
development contain a maximum of seventy (70) percent retail uses and
maintain a minimum of thirty (30) percent office uses.
Staff recommends approval of the buffering on the eastern and western
perimeters as proposed by the applicant.
Staff recommends approval of the variance request from the Land Alteration
Ordinance to allow grading of the Phase II portion of the development with the
construction of a building within the Phase I portion of the development.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7920-B
9
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 3, 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 outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of
the agenda staff report. Staff presented a recommendation the use mix of the
development contain a maximum of seventy (70) percent retail uses and maintain a
minimum of thirty (30) percent office uses. Staff also presented a recommendation of
approval of the buffering on the eastern and western perimeters as proposed by the
applicant. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the variance request from
the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow grading of the Phase II portion of the
development with the construction of a building within the Phase I portion of the
development.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes,
0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: 16 FILE NO.: Z-8118-A
NAME: 18220 Cantrell Road Short-form PCD Time Extension
LOCATION: Located at 18220 Cantrell Road
DEVELOPER:
Desiderio Juarez
18220 Cantrell Road
Little Rock, AR 72223
ENGINEER:
Crafton Tull and Associates
10825 Financial Center Parkway, Suite 300
Little Rock, AR 72211-3554
AREA: 1.85 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: PCD
ALLOWED USES: Mixed Use Commercial 80% - Office 20%
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD – Time Extension
PROPOSED USE: Mixed Use Commercial 80% - Office 20%
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
The Little Rock Board of Directors zoned this site to PCD on February 6, 1990, by the
adoption of Ordinance No. 15,813. The rezoning was a part of a larger effort to rezone
the area “west of the city limits and north of Denny Road” as a part of implementation of
the land use regulation of the extraterritorial planning area. The rezoning effort
recognized existing businesses in the area and established a Business Node in this
area. This site was rezoned to PCD to recognize an existing custom window covering
and blind company which was operating from the single-family home.
On March 20, 2003, the Little Rock Planning Commission approved a request for the
placement of seasonal sale of Class C 1.4G Common Fireworks. The company
proposed the placement of a temporary tent on the site for the seasonal sale of
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8118-A
2
fireworks. The sale of fireworks was proposed from June 20th through July 4th each
year. The request was denied by the Board of Directors at their May 6, 2003, public
hearing.
On January 16, 2007, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 19,678
rezoning the site from R-2, Single-family to PCD. The project contained 1.85 acres and
was located on the northwest corner of Cantrell Road and North Ridge Road. The
approval allowed the development of the property as a commercial site to include a
21,000 square foot, two story building with an approximate ratio of 80 percent
retail/commercial and 20 percent office uses. The approval allowed C-1 uses as
allowable uses.
Building signage was approved as typically allowed per the Highway 10 Design Overlay
District as a single ground mounted monument style sign near the street intersection
with a maximum height of 10-feet and a maximum sign area of 100 square feet.
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 PCD Per
Section 36-454(e) the applicant shall have three (3) 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 (2) years. Time extensions shall be applied for by formal written request not
less than ninety (90) 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 demand
for new construction of retail and office uses 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 contains an existing single-family structure used as a residence. The
areas to the west and south are currently zoned PCD. Located further east there
is a site zoned PCD for the FFLS Company, a financial form company and a
church on R-2 zoned property adjacent to Patrick Country Road. South of the
site is a PCD for two separate restaurants.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8118-A
3
The area is a mix of single-family and non-residential uses on large tracts in a
rural setting. East of the site is the Ranch Development with a mix of
Commercial, Office and Multi-family zoning and south of Highway 10 are
single-family subdivisions, Aberdeen and Maywood Manor.
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
Coalition of West Little Rock Neighborhoods, the Maywood Manor Neighborhood
Association and the Aberdeen Property Owners Association were notified of the
public hearing.
I. 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: (DECEMBER 3, 2009)
The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the requested 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 9 ayes,
0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: 17 FILE NO.: Z-8445-A
NAME: C Street Surgery Center Revised Short-form POD
LOCATION: Located at 5910 C Street
DEVELOPER:
University Properties
409 North University Avenue
Little Rock, AR 72205
ENGINEER/SURVEYOR:
White-Daters and Associates
24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 0.45 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 Zoning Lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: PD-O
ALLOWED USES: Surgery Center
PROPOSED ZONING: PD-O
PROPOSED USE: Surgery Center – Temporary Use Existing Structure
OVERLAY DISTRICT: Mid-Town Design Overlay District
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
Ordinance No. 20,114 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on August 3, 2009,
rezoned the site from R-3, Single-family to PD-O to allow construction of a surgery
center on the site. The property contained two (2) single-family structures which would
be removed to allow the new construction. The building was proposed with 8,780
square feet containing four (4) operating rooms and ten (10) prep and recovery rooms.
Two (2) doctors would operate from the facility.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8445-A
2
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is now requesting use of one (1) of the existing structures for a
temporary administrative office use for the adjacent surgery center. The
applicant has indicated the use of the property will be the administrative offices of
the adjacent medical office/surgery center until the design documents have been
drafted for the surgery center. No exterior modifications will be made to the
existing structure. Once the design documents have been completed the two (2)
structures will be removed and the surgery center will be constructed as
approved on the original site plan.
The Bill of Assurance for the Howard Adams and R.D. Plunkett’s Subdivision was
filed in August of 1959 and has since expired.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There are occupied single-family homes located on the two (2) lots proposed for
rezoning. The parking lot area located to the west of the two (2) homes is
currently zoned R-3, Single-family. To the north are single-family homes and to
the east are two additional homes. An area zoned PD-O located north of the
parking lot has been developed as parking to serve the doctors offices to the
west. South of the site is the Mid-towne Shopping Center and southeast are
single-family homes and multi-family housing. West of the site is a parking area
serving the medical offices fronting North University Avenue.
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 Hillcrest
Residents Neighborhood Association and the Mid-Town Advisory Review
Committee were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Due to the proposed use of the property, the Master Street Plan specifies that
C Street for the frontage of this property must meet commercial street
standards. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline.
2. With site development, provide the design of the street conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to C Street
including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. The new back of
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8445-A
3
curb should be located 18 feet from the centerline of the street and match the
curb of the property to the west.
3. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
4. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of
work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from
Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner).
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer service 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. 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. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding the size and
location of the water meter.
Fire Department: Fire hydrants will 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 Heights Hillcrest Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Office for this property. The applicant has
applied for a revised Planned Development Office to allow temporary use of the
existing structure as an office for the adjacent medical office/surgery center. The
long term use of the property is to allow the removal of two (2) homes and the
construction of a medical office/surgery center. This area is located within the
Midtown Design Overlay District, so all designs should reflect these design
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8445-A
4
standards. The proposed land uses in the Planned Development are consistent
with the Office Category.
Master Street Plan: C Street is shown as 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 in the immediate vicinity.
Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood
Plan. Their Zoning and Land Use goal states: “Adopt a plan of action to stop the
degradation, to reverse its course, and to recreate a neighborhood that is once
again a pleasant place to work and live. This includes no net loss of residential
units by demolition or conversion to other uses.”
Landscape: All previous comment apply to any new development of the site.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 12, 2009)
The applicant was not present. Staff presented the item to the Committee
members stating the proposed use of the property was a temporary use as the
administrative offices for the adjacent medical office/surgery center to allow
design documents to be created for the new surgery center. Staff stated the
most pressing issue was correcting the drainage problem related to the adjacent
parking lot. Staff reminder the Committee members this was a point of
discussion during the previous review process. Staff stated they would work with
the owner to determine if the drainage could be rerouted now as opposed to
during the future construction phase.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
There were no outstanding technical issues associated with the request in need
of addressing via a revised site plan raised at the November 12, 2009,
Subdivision Committee meeting. The request is to allow one of the existing
single-family structures to be used as administrative offices for the adjacent
surgery center on a temporary basis. The temporary use will be until the design
documents have been drafted for the surgery center. There will be no exterior
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8445-A
5
modifications made to the existing structure. Once the design documents have
been completed the two (2) single-family structures will be removed and the
surgery center will be constructed as approved on the original site plan.
During the original approval process there was a great deal of discussion
concerning the adjoining parking lot drainage onto two (2) properties located to
the north. The developer agreed during the review process to reconstruct the
outfall for the parking lot and drain the parking lot across the rear of this property
and the adjacent lot to the east. Staff feels this should be completed at this time
and not put off until the new construction begins.
To staff’s knowledge there are no other outstanding issues associated with the
request. Staff feels the use of the property as temporary offices for the adjacent
medical office/surgery 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.
Staff recommends the outfall for the adjacent parking lot be reconstructed with
the current application request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 3, 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 outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of
the agenda staff report. Staff also presented a recommendation the outfall for the
adjacent parking lot be reconstructed with the current application request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes,
0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: 18 FILE NO.: Z-8501
NAME: Stanton Optical Short-form PCD
LOCATION: Located at 112 South University Avenue
DEVELOPER:
Stanton Optical
4800 N. Federal HWY #201B
Boca Raton, FL 33431
ARCHITECT:
The Core Group
203 Dixie Boulevard
Delray Beach, FL 33444
AREA: 0.39 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District
ALLOWED USES: General Retail Uses
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: C-3, General Commercial District uses
OVERLAY: Mid-town Design Overlay District
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
The applicant submitted a request dated November 19, 2009, requesting a deferral of
this item to the January 14, 2010, public hearing. The applicant has indicated they are
working to determine if the redevelopment of the property exceeds fifty percent of the
structure’s current replacement value.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 3, 2009)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request dated November 19,
2009, requesting a deferral of this item to the January 14, 2010, public hearing. Staff
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8501
2
stated the applicant was working to determine if the redevelopment of the property
exceeded fifty percent of the structure’s current replacement value.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes,
0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: 19 FILE NO.: Z-8502
NAME: Gadberry Short-form PD-R
LOCATION: Located at 720 Ash Street
DEVELOPER:
Brady and Jennifer Gadberry
720 Ash Street
Little Rock, AR 72205
SURVEYOR:
Brooks Surveying
20820 Arch Street Pike
Hensley, AR 72065
ARCHITECT:
Scott Smith Associates
2701 Kavanaugh Boulevard, Suite 208
Little Rock, AR 72205
AREA: 0.17 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-5
ALLOWED USES: Single-family and Multi-family
PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R
PROPOSED USE: Single-family
DESIGN OVERLAY DISTRICT: Hillcrest Design Overlay District
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The request is a rezoning from R-5 to PD-R to allow the construction of a new
single-family home located at 720 Ash Street. The owners have worked with
various builders and they have determined the existing foundation will not
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8502
2
support the new construction proposed. The owners must remove the existing
structure to allow construction of the new space. The applicant is proposing to
construct the new home with similar characteristics as the existing home. The
existing home sits beyond the setback but the front porch and steps cross the
setback line. The home was originally constructed in 1927. Due to the location
of the porch and steps, a rezoning to PD-R must be sought.
The home will be constructed in craftsman style with exposed rafter tails and
brackets. The structure will contain brick veneer, painted wood trim, and double
hung windows. The front portion of the house is proposed as two (2) story with
the rear portion one (1) story. The structure will have a front porch with wood
columns. The rear will have a screened porch. The roof is proposed as a
5:12 with shingles. The structure is proposed with 3,470 square feet
(2,350 square feet lower level 1,120 square feet upper level). The unit will have
a detached carport off the alley. The lot coverage proposed is 47% and the floor
to area ratio is 49%.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The property is located within an area of Hillcrest which contains both
single-family and multi-family uses. The multi-family uses include duplexs as
well as multi-unit apartment buildings. A property located to south was recently
rezoned from R-5 to PD-R to allow construction of a garage with alley access
which exceeded the rear lot coverage allowed per the Hillcrest DOD. West of the
property is a parcel zoned PD-R which was approved as a duplex unit with a rear
garage and an apartment above the garage. South of the site, along Kavanaugh
Boulevard, there are commercial and office uses.
Ash Street is a residential street. The homes located along Ash Street are
constructed with a similar setback as the applicant is request.
The Bill of Assurance for this area was filed in March of 1903 and outlined the
division of land and the dedication of public rights-of-way. The Bill of Assurance
is not legible to determine if it has since expired.
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
Hillcrest Residents Association were notified of the public hearing.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8502
3
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Measures to control the increase in stormwater runoff from impervious
surface should be implemented to not damage adjacent property.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer service 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. Contact Central Arkansas
Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are 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 located near 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 Residential High Density for this property.
The applicant has applied for a rezoning Short-form PD-R. This area is located
within the Hillcrest Design Overlay District, so all designs should reflect these
design standards. While this use is not as dense as the Residential High Density
Category, the application is consistent with the existing use pattern in the
neighborhood. The area is a mix of single family and multifamily uses in a
traditional neighborhood. The application would not change the use of the site.
Master Street Plan: Ash Street is shown as 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
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8502
4
duplexes are considered as “Commercial Streets”. These streets have a design
standard the same as a Collector.
Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes in the immediate vicinity.
Neighborhood Action Plan: The Hillcrest Neighborhood Plan’s Land Use and
Zoning Goal states: “develop the Hillcrest Overlay District that will require
Planned Unit Development for reclassification/redevelopment of land use
(zoning), density, setbacks, of other changes to the existing infrastructure of the
neighborhood.” This has since been done and this Planned Development is a
direct result of the Design Overlay District.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 12, 2009)
The applicant was not present. Staff presented the item stating there were few
outstanding technical issues in need of addressing prior to the Commission
acting on the request. Staff stated the lot coverage and floor area ratio were both
within the limits to the Hillcrest DOD. Staff stated the building setback compared
to the adjacent two homes was not consistent with that as allowed per the DOD
but was proposed in the exact location as the porch on the existing home.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
There were no outstanding technical issues in need of addressing raised at the
November 12, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. The rezoning request is
from R-5 to PD-R to allow construction of a new single-family home. The
structure is proposed crossing the front setback line. The site is located within
the Hillcrest Design Overlay District. The DOD outlines development criteria for
residential development including floor area ratio, lot coverage and building
height. The DOD also addresses front setback lines and the placement of new
structures as they relate to adjoining structures.
The structure is proposed with 3,470 square feet (2,350 square feet lower level
1,120 square feet upper level) with a detached carport off the alley. The lot is a
typical Hillcrest lot or a 50-foot by 140-foot lot containing 7,000 square feet. The
floor area ratio is defined as the total area of all floors of the principal structure as
measured to the outside surfaces of the exterior walls and including halls,
stairways, elevator shafts, and attached garages divided by the area of the lot.
The floor to area ratio states the floor area of the principal building/gross size of
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8502
5
the lot. Structures with more than one floor shall not have a floor area greater
than 0.37 FAR. For residential structures with two floors, the FAR shall be
0.50 percent. The maximum lot coverage for all structures under roof shall not
exceed fifty (50) percent. The lot coverage proposed is 47% and the floor to area
ratio is 49%.
The reason for the requested rezoning is the front porch and steps of the existing
structure sit across the 25-foot front setback. The home was originally
constructed in 1927. The DOD states all setbacks shall be as required for the
Zoning District except the front yard setback for the principal structure shall be
aligned with the current setbacks of the adjoining residential structures within a
ten (10) percent variation, but no structure may be within the setback. The
structure is proposed with a front setback line of 20.3 feet which is within the
required 25-foot front setback of the R-5, Zoning District. Also the adjoining
structures are located 22-feet and 29.7-feet from the right of way which would
require this structure to be located at 23.04 feet. The applicant desires to
maintain the current setback and not move the home back as would typically be
required per the DOD.
Staff is supportive of the requested PD-R and the front building setback as
proposed. The develop appears to meet all other aspects of the DOD. To staff’s
knowledge there are no remaining outstanding technical issues associated with
the request. Staff feels the rezoning of the site from R-5 to PD-R to allow
construction of a new single-family home will not adversely 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: (DECEMBER 3, 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 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 9 ayes,
0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
December 3, 2009
ITEM NO.: 20 FILE NO.: Z-8503
NAME: The Residence at Brodie Creek Long-form PD-R
LOCATION: Located on the Northwest Corner of West 36th Street and Bowman Road
DEVELOPER:
Richardson Properties, LLC
9800 Maumelle Boulevard
Maumelle, AR 72113
ENGINEER:
White Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 41.9 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Single-family
PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R
PROPOSED USE: Multi-family
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1. A variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow advanced grading of Phase
II with the construction of Phase I.
2. A waiver of the stormwater detention ordinance requirements.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The project contains approximately 42 acres and is located near the northwest
corner of West 36th Street and South Bowman Road. The developer is proposing
the construction of 480 units of multi-family housing for a density of 11.45 units
per acre. The project will consist of twenty (20) buildings with twenty-four (24)
units per building. There will also be garages, carports and a maintenance
building. The site will contain a wellness center and pool. The project is
proposed as a gated community with a security fence around the perimeter.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8503
2
The property is not located within a subdivision therefore there is not a Bill of
Assurance for this property.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
This area of South Bowman Road contains primarily residential uses located on
acreage. The site proposed for development is heavily wooded as is the property
to the north. There are single-family homes located south of this site and further
south is a parcel zoned O-2, Office and Institutional District which also contains
single-family homes. East, across South Bowman Road, is wooded property
currently zoned R-2, Single-family.
Adjacent to this site South Bowman Road has not been constructed to Master
Street Plan standards. There is no curb, gutter or sidewalk in place.
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 John
Barrow Neighborhood Association and the Woodlands Edge Community
Association were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Bowman Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A
dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be required.
2. With site development, provide the design of street conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to Bowman
Road including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. The new
back of curb should be located 29.5 feet from the centerline of the street.
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. 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.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8503
3
5. Due to the proposed number of units, an emergency access is required to
be provided.
6. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the
proposed location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan.
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. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per
Section 8-283 prior to construction.
9. The minimum Finish Floor elevation of at least one (1) foot above the base
flood elevation is required to be shown on plat and grading plans.
10. In accordance with Section 31-176, floodway areas must be shown as
floodway easements or be dedicated to the public. In addition, a 25 foot
wide access easement is required adjacent to the floodway boundary.
11. Street improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic
Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction.
12. 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.
13. The proposed driveway should intersect Bowman Road at a 90 degree
angle.
14. Provide a sketch grading and drainage plan. If retaining walls or cut are
proposed and the heights exceeds 15 feet for each wall or 30 feet of total
height and variance is required to be obtained.
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: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. A Capitol Investment Charge
is applicable to all connections off the waterlines along Bowman Road as well as
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8503
4
the 24". 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. A water main extension will be needed to provide water
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. A 24-inch water line
crosses this site within a 15-foot wide waterline easement on southwest side of
property. Care must be taken to protect the water line and any appurtenances,
such as access and air release vaults which may be in the area. No signs, light
poles, dumpster pads or other structures on foundations will be allowed within
the existing 50-foot waterline easement. Paved parking and driveways are
allowed.
Fire Department: Fire hydrants will be required. The development must maintain
a 20-foot minimum gate opening. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for
additional information.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is not located near a dedicated CATA Bus Route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Residential Medium Density for this property. The
applicant has applied for a Long-form PRD. The proposed land uses in the
Planned Development are consistent with the Residential Medium Density
Category.
Master Street Plan: Bowman Road and West 36th Street are both Minor Arterials
on the Master Street Plan. West 36th Street is proposed to continue west from
this intersection as a Minor Arterial. Additionally, the Master Street Plan shows a
Collector heading north from the West 36th Street extension up to South Trail
Drive. This Collector may go through, be adjacent or just west of this
development. As part of this application a more exact location for the Collector
must be determined. The primary function of a Collector Street is to provide a
connection from Local Streets to Arterials. A Minor Arterial provides connections
to and through an urban area and their primary function is to provide short
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8503
5
distance travel within the urbanized area. Entrances and exits should be limited
to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on these streets since they
are Minor Arterials. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and
may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site.
Bicycle Plan: A Class II bike route is shown along Bowman Road. A Class II
bikeway is located on the street as either a five foot (5’) shoulder or six foot (6’)
marked bike lane. Additional paving and right-of-way may be required.
Neighborhood Action Plan: There is not a neighborhood plan for this area.
Landscape:
1. Site plan must comply with the City’s minimal landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
2. The landscape ordinance requires a minimum of 8 % of the paved areas be
landscaped with interior islands of at least 7 ½ feet in width and 300 square
feet in area.
3. Interior islands must be a minimum of three hundred (300) feet in area to
receive credit toward fulfilling landscape ordinance requirements. These
islands are to be evenly distributed throughout the site.
4. The property to the north, south, east and the west is zoned residential,
therefore, a six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its
face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required
along the northern, southern, eastern and western perimeters of the site.
5. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
6. 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.
7. 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: (November 12, 2009)
The applicant was not present. Staff presented the item stating the development
was proposed as a multi-family development at a density consistent with the
City’s Future Land Use Plan. Staff stated there were few outstanding technical
issues in need of addressing related to the site plan. Staff stated they and the
applicant had met a number of times to discuss the site plan, the alignment of
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8503
6
South Bowman Road and the location of the north/south collector street identified
on the Master Street Plan. Staff stated they had determined the collector street
located in the area should be located on the west side of the creek and not on
this site. Staff stated this would allow a north/south connection on both sides of
the creek.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing the issues outlined
for the November 12, 2009, Subdivision Committee meeting. A secondary
access has been included on the site plan along the northern perimeter as
required by the State fire code. The developer has also provided building
elevations showing the structures as three (3) story with a maximum building
height of 45-feet.
The site plan indicates the placement of perimeter fencing constructed of vinyl on
the north and south property lines and a brick column and wrought iron fence on
the east abutting South Bowman Road. All fencing is proposed eight (8) feet in
height. The brick columns are proposed with a maximum height of ten (10) feet.
The site plan indicates a minimum of a 50-foot buffer along the street and
eastern perimeter. There is a sixty-foot land use buffer in addition to the Brodie
Creek located along the western perimeter. On the northern perimeter the buffer
is 30-feet along the rear of buildings 17 – 20 and increases to 50 feet in the
western portion of the site. The southern land use buffer behind buildings 1 – 6
is indicated as 30-feet.
The site is proposed with 20 buildings of multi-family housing, 1 clubhouse,
1 maintenance building and covered parking both in the form of garages and
carports. There are a total of 480 units proposed. Of the units 160 are
1-bedroom, 200 are 2-bedroom and 120 are 3-bedroom. The site plan indicates
large areas of open space and there is a playground area identified on the site
plan. The playground area is to include stationary recreational equipment.
The parking indicated on the plan consists of a garage parking, carport parking
and surface parking. A maximum of 100 garages and 100 carports are
proposed. The site plan indicates a total of 993 surface parking spaces. Based
on the typical minimum parking required for a multi-family development a total of
720 parking spaces would typically be required. The parking indicated is more
than adequate to serve the development.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8503
7
The applicant has provided a rendering of the proposed sign. The sign is
indicated with a maximum height of 8’1½” tall and a maximum width of 16’6”.
The sign is proposed with a variation in height constructed of similar materials as
the apartment units. The lettered sign area is indicated containing 46 square
feet.
The right of way for South Bowman Road will be dedicated and street
improvements will be completed to one-half of a 59-foot street with a 5-foot
sidewalk with the development of Phase I.
The development is proposed in two (2) phases with the clubhouse, maintenance
building and apartment buildings 1 – 6 and 17 – 20 constructed in the first phase.
Buildings 7 – 16 will be completed in the second phase. The development is
proposed as a gated community. Each gate will have an entrance and exit drive.
Both drives will maintain a 20-foot minimum gate opening as required by the fire
department.
Staff does not support an in-lieu payment for stormwater detention. The site is
approximately 41 acres and is in the upper reaches of the Brodie Creek
watershed. Much development has occurred downstream of the site in which
Public Works receives a number of drainage complaints. Drainage problem are
common in the Cherry Creek, Tall Timber and Pecan Lake areas. Staff believes
stormwater detention should be provided on site.
Staff is supportive of the request to allow rezoning of the site from R-2,
Single-family to PD-R to allow the development of the site with multi-family
housing. The property is identified on the City’s Future Land Use Plan as
Residential Medium Density. This classification allows for single-family attached,
single-family detached, duplex, town homes, multi-family and patio or garden
homes. The density allowed in this classification is between six (6) and twelve
(12) dwelling units per acre. This development is proposed with an overall
density of 11.45 units per acre. 13.2 percent of the site will be covered with
buildings and 45.7 percent of the site covered in paving. The remaining
41.1 percent is dedicated to landscaping and common open space. Staff feels
the development of the site as proposed is appropriate and should not have an
adverse impact on the adjoining properties.
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.
December 3, 2009
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8503
8
Staff recommends approval of the variance request to allow grading of the Phase
II portion of the development with the issuance of a building permit for the Phase
I portion of the development.
Staff recommends stormwater detention be provided on site with the
development of the project.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 3, 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 outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of
the agenda staff report. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the variance
request to allow grading of the Phase II portion of the development with the issuance of
a building permit for the Phase I portion of the development. Staff also presented a
recommendation the stormwater detention be provided on site with the development of
the project.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes,
0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.