pc_06 19 2008sub
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION HEARING
SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD
JUNE 19, 2008
4:00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being nine (9) in number.
II. Members Present: Pam Adcock
Valerie Pruitt
Lucas Hargraves
Obray Nunnley, Jr.
William Rector
Jeff Yates
Jerry Meyer
J. T. Ferstl
Chauncey Taylor
Members Absent: Darrin Williams
Troy Laha
City Attorney: Cindy Dawson
III. Approval of the Minutes of the May 8, 2008 Meeting of the Little Rock
Planning Commission. The Minutes were approved as presented.
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION AGENDA
JUNE 19, 2008
OLD BUSINESS:
Item Number:
File Number:
Title:
A. S-1540-A 8622 Chicot Road Subdivision Site Plan Review, located at
8622 Chicot Road.
B. Z-8337 Ms. Bertha's Child Care Center Short-form PCD, located at
8215 Colonel Glenn Road.
C. S-1435-C Bentley Court Revised Preliminary Plat, located just South of
Bentley Circle.
D. S-1509-A Valley Springs Subdivision Preliminary Plat, located West of
Geyer Springs Road and North of Stillman Drive.
E. S-1487-A The Ridge Estates Revised Preliminary Plat, located North
of Pleasant Hill Road and West of Vimy Ridge Road.
NEW BUSINESS:
I. SITE PLAN REVIEW:
Item Number:
File Number:
Title:
1. S-185-AA Sage V Foods, Tract E-2, Area 102, Little Rock Industrial
Port Subdivision Site Plan Review, located South of Frazier
Pike, just East of Zeuber Road.
2. S-185-BB Man Industries Site Plan Review, located South of Zeuber
Road at Fletcher Road.
Agenda, Page Two
II. PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS:
Item Number:
File Number:
Title:
3. Z-4587-D Hunters Green Estates Lot 12 Revised Short-form PD-R, 51
Hunters Green Circle.
4. Z-4923-F Shackleford Crossing Revised Long-form PCD, located on
the Southwest corner of I-430 and Shackleford Road.
5. Z-5099-D Lots 9B - 9E Northwest Territory Short-form PCD, located
North of Cantrell Road and South of Chenal Parkway, just
West of the Chenal Parkway/Cantrell Road Intersection.
6. LU08-08-01 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Central City Planning
District located at Battery and Roosevelt Roads from Public
Institutional to Mixed Use.
6.1. Z-5442-C James Mitchell School Short-form POD, located at 2410
South Battery Street.
7. Z-8042-B Lot 10 Northwest Territory Revised Short-form PCD, located
on the Northeast corner of Cantrell Road and Chenal
Parkway.
8. Z-8262-A Rowan Village Revised Long-form PCD, located at the
current terminus of Aldersgate Road and East of
Shackleford Road, near the intersection of Old Shackleford
Road.
9. LU08-01-02 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the River Mountain
Planning District located at the Southeast corner of Black
Street and Cantrell Road from Low Density Residential to
Commercial.
9.1. Z-8348 Loftin Short-form PCD, located on the Southeast corner of
Cantrell Road and Black Street.
10. Z-8349 John Barrow Neighborhood Association Open Air Market
Short-form PCD, located near 3220 South University
Avenue.
Agenda, Page Three
II. PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS: (CONT.)
Item Number:
File Number:
Title:
11. Z-8350 Walker Short-form PD-R and Right of way abandonment for
Oakwood Road and Cedar Street, located at 4001 Oakwood
Road.
12. LU08-10-01 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Boyle Park Planning
District located at the northeast corner of John Barrow Road
and 40th Street from Single Family to Neighborhood
Commercial.
12.1. Z-8351 Pickett Short-form PCD, located on the Northeast corner of
West 40th Street and John Barrow Road.
III. OTHER BUSINESS:
Item Number:
File Number:
Title:
13. Z-4953-B Park Avenue Long-form PCD Update, located on the
Northwest corner of St. Vincent Circle and University
Avenue.
June 19, 2008
ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: S-1540-A
NAME: 8622 Chicot Road Subdivision Site Plan Review
LOCATION: Located at 8622 Chicot Road
DEVELOPER:
Manuel Beza Beltran
8622 Chicot Road
Little Rock, AR 72209
ENGINEER:
Troy D. Laha
6602 Baseline Road, Suite E
Little Rock, AR 72209
ARCHITECT:
Terry Burruss Architect
1202 South Main Street
Little Rock, AR 72202
AREA: 1.01 NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District
PLANNING DISTRICT: 15 – Geyer Springs West
CENSUS TRACT: 41.03
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1. A variance from Sections 30-43 and 31-210 of the Little Rock code to allow driveway
space less than typical ordinance standard.
2. A variance from City’s Landscape and Buffer ordinance requirements for landscape
installation along Chicot Road.
BACKGROUND:
On December 7, 2006, the Planning Commission approved a site plan to allow an
addition to the restaurant building located at 8622 Chicot Road. The site contained an
existing 1,200 square foot restaurant and a 2,622 square foot automobile detail shop
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1540-A
2
along with 15 parking spaces. The approval allowed an expansion of the restaurant by
adding a 26-foot by 46-foot enclosed dining area and a 12-foot by 46-foot patio area.
The request included additional parking for a total of 24 parking spaces located on the
site to serve the two businesses. A deferral of the required paving for 18-months was
approved. The approval included a variance to allow a reduced number of parking
spaces for the site.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is now proposing a revision to the previously approved site plan to
reduce the required landscaping along Chicot Road and to maintain the
southern-most drive. The applicant has indicated with the removal of the
southern drive, access to the southern most building cannot be achieved
because of the location of the building and the closeness of Chicot Road. The
developer has also stated due to the existing site paving, the expense of
removing the paving to prepare the area for plantings is extremely expansive and
based on improvements recently made to the site, the removal of the paving is
economically unachievable at this time. The developer is proposing to maintain
parking within the paved area along Chicot Road.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is located near the intersection of Baseline and Chicot Roads; a
commercial node. At this intersection there are a number of activities including
office and retail activities. The site being considered for Subdivision Site Plan
Review is located just north of the Baseline/Chicot Roads intersection and
contains two buildings; one a restaurant, the second a detail shop. There is a
railroad main line located to the west of the site. The Cloverdale Subdivision, a
single-family subdivision, is located across Chicot Road to the east. Chicot Road
has been constructed to Master Street Plan standard abutting the site.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area
property owner. All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, the
Cloverdale Neighborhood Association and Southwest Little Rock United for
Progress 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. Due to the length of street
frontage the property can only have a single driveway. The width of driveway
must not exceed 36 feet. On a principal arterial street, the Master Street Plan
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1540-A
3
standards require a minimum driveway spacing of 300 feet between
driveways and at least 150 feet from property lines. Therefore, the south
driveway does not comply with the Master Street Plan standards and must be
removed.
2. Old driveway cuts in the curb must be replaced.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this property.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or
additional meter(s) are needed. If larger and/or additional meter(s) are required,
a Capital Investment Charge based on the size of meter connection(s) will apply
to this project in addition to normal charges.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape:
1. Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required.
2. The existing structure is a total of 1,200 square feet in area. The new
structure is a total of 1,422 square feet in area. This equates to an eighty-four
(84%) upgrade towards the landscape ordinance requirements.
3. The new parking lot must be built in full compliancy with the landscape and
buffer ordinance.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1540-A
4
4. The area along Chicot Road does not reflect the previous approval which
included the elimination of the parking area along Chicot Road. The parking
along Chicot Road is located within the public right-of-way. A franchise
agreement must be obtained for any parking and/or landscaping proposed for
this area.
5. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (April 17, 2008)
Mr. Terry Burruss was present representing the request. Staff stated the site
plan was approved and the applicant had completed the building expansion but
was now requesting a revision to the previously approved site plan in two areas.
Staff stated the site plan as submitted included removal of asphalt located along
Chicot Road, removal of parking and the installation of landscaping. Staff also
stated the approved site plan eliminated the northern and southern drives
maintaining one driveway location near the center of the site. Staff stated the
applicant was now requesting to maintain two of the three drives. Staff stated the
southern-most drive was desired to be retained but the drive would be narrowed
per the typical ordinance requirements.
Staff questioned if the right of way for Chicot Road was dedicated with the
building permit application request. Staff also stated there were automobiles
being sold from the site which was not allowed under the current zoning. Staff
requested the applicant cease the sale of automobiles immediately. The owner
stated the only automobile sales was his personal vehicle which was parked on
the site with for sale signs in the windows. He stated there were no other
vehicles for sale on the site.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the drive did not meet
typical ordinance standards for driveway spacing and the southern drive should
be removed to facilitate traffic movement in the area. Staff also stated all old
driveway cuts were to be removed.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated with the new construction
an 84 percent expansion had taken place. Staff stated a landscaping upgrade to
meet the typical landscape ordinance requirements was required. Staff stated
the new parking lot was required to fully comply with the Landscape Ordinance
standards. Staff also stated the site plan as presented indicated parking along
Chicot Road which was not previously approved. Staff noted a portion of the
parking was located within the right of way and would require a franchise
agreement with the City.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1540-A
5
Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and
agencies. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then
forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
There were no outstanding technical issues associated with the request in need
of addressing. Staff stated the developer desired to amend the previously
approved site plan removing two of the previously imposed conditions. The
original approval eliminated the southern-most drive which accesses the detail
shop. The developer has stated by removing this drive it is difficult for customers
to enter the detail shop. The developer desires to maintain this drive and limiting
the access to the drive to enter only or exit only. Staff is not supportive of the
request. Chicot Road is indicated on the Master Street Plan as a principal
arterial street. The Master Street Plan standards for this classification require a
minimum driveway spacing of 300 feet between driveways and at least 150 feet
from property lines. The south driveway does not comply with the Master Street
Plan standard and must be removed.
The applicant is also requesting to amend the previously approved site plan by
placing parking within the front yard area and eliminating the proposed
landscaping. The site plan indicates the placement of six (6) parking spaces
along Chicot Road and four of the six are indicated in the right of way. To allow
the placement of the parking spaces as proposed a franchise agreement with the
City must be approved. The developer has indicated a portion of the paving
located between the parking and sidewalk will be removed and landscaped. This
area is also located within the right of way and will require a franchise agreement
to allow the landscaping within the right of way.
The previously approved site plan indicated the placement of 24 parking spaces
to serve the two (2) businesses. Based on the typical ordinance standards, the
typical minimum parking required would be 16 parking spaces for the restaurant
and 15 parking spaces for the detail shop. The request included approval of a
variance to allow a reduced number of parking spaces for the site. The basis of
the approval was the detail shop did not generate a parking demand near the
typical number required and the 24 parking spaces as indicated was sufficient to
meet the needs of the business.
Staff has concerns with the site plan as proposed. Staff does not support the
request to allow the drive located in front of the detail shop to remain. The drive
does not meet the typical spacing requirement of the Master Street Plan. Chicot
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1540-A
6
Road is a principal arterial street which is designed to handle large volumes of
traffic. The intent of the driveway spacing criteria is to limit the number of drives
to facilitate traffic flows. Also staff has concerns with the placement of the
landscaping and parking within the right of way. Staff feels the parking located
within the right of way should be removed and the area landscaped. With the
landscaping of this area, the site will more closely comply with the City’s
landscape and buffer ordinances.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends denial of the request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 8, 2008)
The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated
the applicant had submitted a request dated April 21, 2008, requesting a deferral of the
item to the June 19, 2008, public hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the
deferral request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The commission voted to approve the item
for deferral on the consent agenda by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 19, 2008)
Mr. Terry Burris was present representing the request. Staff stated the developers were
requesting an amendment to a previously approved site plan to allow landscaping and
parking to remain in the right of way and to allow the southern most drive to remain on
the site. Staff stated the site was existing. Staff stated previously the Commission
approved a site plan which indicated the removal of these items but the developer was
now requesting the improvements in the right of way to remain. Staff stated they were
not supportive of the request.
Mr. Terry Burruss stated he was not a part of the original request but had been hired for
the architectural design of the building expansion. He stated once the expansion was in
place the owner determined the parking located in the right of way was necessary
parking to serve his restaurant use. He stated the same was true of the drive. He
stated the building was being used as a tire store and access was difficult based on the
location of the building and the need for a 90 degree turn into the building. He stated
the drive would be narrowed and could function as a one way drive either in or out. He
stated there were three doors and the three doors would remain.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1540-A
7
Commissioner Rector questioned what was different today than when the plan was
approved. Mr. Burruss stated he felt it was a misunderstanding between the owner and
the previous agent. He stated the landscaping would be installed on the site to meet
the typical ordinance standards but the landscaping would be placed in the right of way
with a franchise agreement. He stated the drive appeared to not hinder the site but
after further research it was determined the closure of the drive would rendered the
building unusable or extremely difficult to maneuver into.
Commissioner Adcock stated the site was located next to her neighborhood. She
stated the neighborhood had tried for a number of years to make the site successful.
She stated due to the location and traffic the site was a difficult site to develop. She
stated the drives needed to be taken down to one to limit the confusion as to entering
and exiting the site. She stated the owner should consider removing the tire building to
de-clutter the site. She stated she thought the desire was for a restaurant and the tire
store was limiting the restaurant potential. She stated the drives created a safety
concern with cars trying to enter the site and exit the site in these areas.
Chairman Taylor stated the site was a difficult site and leaving the drives was a safety
concern. He questioned if a deferral would allow the applicant and staff time to reach
some middle ground. Staff stated they were always willing to meet with an applicant but
did not feel there was a middle ground to reach. Staff stated they felt the developer
should construct to the plan he presented to the Commission and the Commission
approved just over a year ago.
Mr. Burruss requested the item be deferred to meet with staff. The Commission noted
the deferral would be to the August 7, 2008, meeting. A motion was made to defer the
item to the August 7, 2008, public hearing. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes,
0 noes and 2 absent.
June 19, 2008
ITEM NO.: B FILE NO.: Z-8337
NAME: Ms. Bertha's Child Care Center Short-form PCD
LOCATION: Located at 8215 Colonel Glenn Road
DEVELOPER:
Ed Jordan
8215 Colonel Glenn Road
Little Rock, AR 72204
ENGINEER:
White Daters and Associates
24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
ARCHITECT:
Williams and Dean Associated Architects
18 Corporate Hill Drive, Suite 210
Little Rock, AR 72205
AREA: 0.68 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 zoning lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family and O-3, General Office District
ALLOWED USES: Daycare center and Barbershop
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: Daycare center and Barber shop
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
The applicant failed to provide staff with a revised site plan addressing comments and
concerns raised at the April 17, 2008, Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff
recommends this item be deferred to the June19, 2008, public hearing.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8337
2
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 8, 2008)
The applicant was present. There were registered objectors present. Staff stated the
applicant failed to provide staff with a revised site plan addressing comments and
concerns raised at the April 17, 2008, Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff presented
a recommendation the item be deferred to the June19, 2008, public hearing.
There was no further discussion of the item. The commission voted to approve the item
for deferral on the consent agenda by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
There has been no contact with the applicant since the previous public hearing. Staff
continues to await responses from the Subdivision Committee comments raised at the
Committee meeting on April 17, 2008. Staff recommends deferral of this item to the
August 7, 2008, public hearing.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 19, 2008)
The applicant was not present. Staff presented the item stating there had been no
contact with the applicant since the previous public hearing. Staff stated they continued
to await responses from the Subdivision Committee comments raised at the Committee
meeting on April 17, 2008. Staff presented a recommendation of deferral of this item to
the August 7, 2008, public hearing.
There was not 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 and 2 absent.
June 19, 2008
ITEM NO.: C FILE NO.: S-1435-C
NAME: Bentley Court Revised Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: Located just South of Bentley Circle
DEVELOPER:
Malmstorm Family LLC
11610 Kanis Road
Little Rock, AR 72211
ENGINEER:
McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers
319 President Clinton Avenue, Suite 202
Little Rock, AR 72201
AREA: 6.19 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 9 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 16 – Otter Creek Planning District
CENSUS TRACT: 42.08
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1. A variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow a reduced lot depth for Lot 65
(Section 31-232(a)).
2. A variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow a reduced front building line for
the indicated lots (Section 31-256).
3. A variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of a lot without
public street frontage (Section 31-231).
BACKGROUND:
On June 17, 2004, the Little Rock Planning Commission approved a preliminary plat
allowing the subdivision of 39.40-acre site into 119 single-family lots and two (2) tracts.
A fifteen-foot front building line for the single-family lots and a thirty foot front building
line along Stagecoach Road for the two tracts was approved.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1435-C
2
The single-family lots average sixty-two feet by one hundred thirty-two feet or 8,184
square feet. The minimum lot size proposed was seventy-three feet by one hundred
five feet or 7,351 square feet. The two tracts would contain approximately three and
one-half acres and four and one-third acres and would be held for future development.
The plat was proposed for development in four phases. Lots 13 – 25, 44 and 82 – 100
(33 Lots) would be developed in the first phase. Phase 2 consisted of Lots 1 – 12,
45 and 65 – 81 (31 Lots), Phase 3 included Lots 26 – 34 and 101 – 113 (22 Lots) and
the final phase (Phase 4) would consist of the development of Lots 35 – 43, 46 – 63 and
114 – 119 (33 Lots).
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is now seeking approval of a preliminary plat expanding the
development to allow the creation of nine (9) additional lots and two (2) tracts
from this 6.19 acre tract. Tract E is located within the floodway and Tract D will
serve as detention for the proposed lots. The average lot size proposed is
73 feet by 120 feet.
There are variances associated with the proposed lot development. The
applicant is seeking a variance to allow a reduced front building line for the
proposed lots. The applicant has indicated the previous phases of the
subdivision were approved with a 15-foot front building line and the applicant has
indicated a desire to continue the continuity of the development by placing the
building line of the proposed new lots also at 15-feet. The plat indicates Lot 65
with a reduced lot depth than typically allowed per the Subdivision Ordinance.
The plat also indicates the creation of a lot without public street frontage
(Lot 105). The lot is proposed adjacent to the floodway and will be accessed by
a 20-foot access and utility easement across Lot 79.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is vacant abutting a floodway to the south. To the north is a
single-family subdivision currently under construction (the Bentley Court
Subdivision Phase III). Further north is the Westfield and the Otter Creek
Subdivisions. To the Southwest is the Otter Creek Homeowners Association
clubhouse and immediately South of the site is Tract A Courtside Place Addition;
a Planned Residential Development with zero lot line detached single-family
homes. This site is located north of the floodway while the Otter Creek
Subdivision is located south of the floodway.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1435-C
3
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received an informational phone call from an area
resident. All abutting property owners, Southwest Little Rock United for Progress
and the Otter Creek Homeowners Association were notified of the Public
Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. With site development, provide the design of the street conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct street improvements to Bentley Circle
including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development.
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 will need to
be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction.
3. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property.
4. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water
permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the
start of construction.
5. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start
of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way
from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner).
6. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per
Section 8-283 prior to construction.
7. The minimum Finish Floor elevation of one (1) foot above the base flood
elevation is required to be shown on the plat and the grading plans.
8. 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.
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.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1435-C
4
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements. Contact Little
Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. Access to Lot 79 and 105 must
be confirmed.
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: (March 6, 2008)
Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. Staff presented an
overview of the proposed development questioning how access would be
provided to Lot 79. Mr. McGetrick stated Lot 118 would be redesigned to allow
right of way for Bentley Circle to front Lot 79. Staff also noted the plat was
indicated with a reduced lot depth for Lot 65 and a reduced front building line for
all the proposed lots.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted the floodway was required
to be shown as an easement or dedicated to the City. Staff also stated a 25-foot
access easement was required adjacent to the floodway. Staff noted the access
easement could not be fenced. Staff also requested Mr. McGetrick provide the
minimum finished floor elevation for the proposed lots. Staff also stated
streetlights would be required at the time of final platting.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1435-C
5
Staff noted comments from the various other departments and agencies
suggesting Mr. McGetrick contact them directly for additional information. 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 drawing to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the March 6, 2008, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has
indicated Lot 79 with public street frontage, provided a 25-foot access easement
adjacent to the floodway and indicated a note on the plat stating the access
easement cannot be fenced and provided the minimum Finish Floor Elevation for
the proposed lots.
The request is to allow the creation of nine (9) additional lots and two (2) tracts
from this 6.19 acre tract for the Bentley Court Subdivision. Tract E is located
within the floodway and Tract D will serve as detention for the proposed lots.
The average lot size proposed is 73 feet by 120 feet or 8,760 square feet.
There are variances associated with the proposed development. The plat
indicates a variance to allow a reduced front building line for the proposed lots.
The previous phases of the subdivision were approved with a 15-foot front
building line and the applicant has indicated a desire to continue the continuity of
the development by placing the building line of the new lots as were previously
approved or at 15-feet. The plat also indicates the creation of Lot 65 with a
reduced lot depth and the Lot 105 as a lot without public street frontage. Based
on the location of the existing floodway Lot 65 has been indicated along the
western boundary with a lot depth of 31.42 feet. The lot is proposed with
adequate area to allow for development of a new single-family home. The
request includes a variance to allow the creation of a lot without public street
frontage. The developer has indicated the desire is to create a secluded lot
adjacent to the floodway and the area indicated for detention. The lot will be
served by a 20 foot access and utility easement along the eastern property line of
Lot 79. The driveways for Lots 79 and 105 will be accessed from this access and
utility easement.
The lots adjacent to the floodway are indicated with a 25-foot easement along the
rear property line to allow access to the adjacent floodway. A note on the plat
indicates all fencing is to be located outside the floodway easement.
Staff is supportive of the request and the associated variances. Staff does not
feel the creation of the nine (9) additional lots for the Bentley Court Subdivision at
a density of 1.45 units per acre will significantly impact the development or the
area.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1435-C
6
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
comments and conditions as noted in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff
report.
Staff recommends approval of the variance request from the Subdivision
Ordinance to allow a reduced lot depth for Lot 65 (Section 31-232(a)).
Staff recommends approval of the variance request from the Subdivision
Ordinance to allow a reduced front building line for the indicated lots
(Section 31-256).
Staff recommends approval of the variance request from the Subdivision
Ordinance to allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage
(Section 31-231).
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 27, 2008)
The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request dated March 12, 2008,
requesting a deferral of the item to the May 8, 2008, public hearing. Staff stated they
were supportive of the deferral request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for approval of the deferral request. The
motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 8, 2008)
The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request dated May 6, 2008,
requesting a deferral of this item to the June 19, 2008, public hearing. Staff stated the
deferral request would require a wavier 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. A motion was made to waive the
Commission’s by-laws with regard to the late deferral request. The motion carried by a
vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. The commission voted to approve the item for
deferral on the consent agenda by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1435-C
7
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant has provided staff with an updated preliminary plat providing the finished
floor elevation for all the proposed lots within the subdivision. Staff is supportive of the
preliminary plat as proposed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 19, 2008)
The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the item stating the applicant had provided them with an updated preliminary
plat providing the finished floor elevation for all the proposed lots within the subdivision.
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 recommendations of approval of the variance requests from the
Subdivision Ordinance to allow a reduced lot depth for Lot 65 (Section 31-232(a)), to
allow a reduced front building line for the indicated lots (Section 31-256) and to allow
the creation of a lot without public street frontage (Section 31-231).
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 and 2 absent.
June 19, 2008
ITEM NO.: D FILE NO.: S-1509-A
NAME: Valley Springs Subdivision Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: Located West of Geyer Springs Road and North of Stillman Drive
DEVELOPER:
N and G Construction, Inc.
P.O. Box 1178
Conway, AR 72033
ENGINEER:
Magie Engineering & Land Development, Inc.
803 Harkrider Street
Conway, AR 72032
AREA: 28.0 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 80 FT. NEW STREET: 4,150 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 15 – Geyer Springs West
CENSUS TRACT: 41.06
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1. A variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the development of lots with a
reduced building line adjacent to a collector street (Section 31-256(1)); Lots 4 and
64.
2. A variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow an increased lot depth to width
ratio for Lot 4 (Section 31-232(b)).
3. A variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow Lot 1 to develop with a reduced
lot depth (Section 31-232(a)).
BACKGROUND:
On January 5, 2006, the Little Rock Planning Commission approved a request for a
preliminary plat of this 28.0-acre tract allowing the creation of 79 single-family
residential lots and two lots for future development. An average lot size of
10,454 square feet and a minimum lot size of 7,405 square feet was approved with a
density of 3.27 units per acre.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1509-A
2
The proposal included the development of 4,150 linear feet of new public streets.
Valley Drive was indicated on the Master Street Plan as a collector street and was
proposed with 36-feet of pavement and a 60-foot right of way constructed to Master
Street Plan standard. During the public hearing process, after receiving comments from
the neighborhood and the Commission, the applicant revised the plat to remove the
connections of Stillman and Suzanne Drives through the proposed plat area.
A variance to allow an increased lot depth to width ratio for proposed Lots 47 and
48 was approved with the request.
Section 31-94(e) states a preliminary plat approved by the Planning Commission shall
be effective and binding upon the Commission for two years from the date of approval
or as long as work is actively progressing at the end of which time the final plat
application for the subdivision must have been submitted to the planning staff. Any plat
not receiving final approval within the period of time set forth herein or otherwise
conforming to the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance shall be null and void, and
the developer shall be required to submit a new plat of the property for preliminary
approval subject to all zoning restrictions and the Subdivision Ordinance. The time
period for approval of the previously approved preliminary plat has expired and the
applicant did not request a time extension as set forth by the Subdivision Ordinance.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The developers are now seeking preliminary plat approval to allow the creation of
80 single-family lots. The lots are proposed with an average lot size of
8,250 square feet and a minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet. The lots will be
accessed via new public streets with the extension of a collector street per the
Master Street Plan, Valley Drive, and a new residential street, Alice Springs
Drive.
The proposed preliminary plat indicates the placement of a 25-foot front building
line adjacent to the residential street. The applicant is seeking a variance from
the Subdivision Ordinance to allow Lots 49 and 64 to develop with a 25-foot
building line adjacent to Valley Drive, a collector street, which would typically
require the placement of a 30 foot building line. There is also a variance to allow
Lot 4 to develop with an increased lot depth to width ratio and a variance to allow
Lot 1 to develop with a reduced lot depth.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is tree covered. There are single-family homes located to the north and
south of the site. Along the western boundary of the site is a multi-family
development accessed from Warren Street. There are two churches located in
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1509-A
3
the area, one to the south of the site and one to the north of the site. Northeast
of the site is a high school. Northwest of the site is an elementary school.
Further north of the site, accessed from Baseline Road, is the Southwest
Community Center. Across Geyer Springs, to the east, there are multi-family
units located on Valley Drive.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received an informational phone call from an area
resident. All abutting property owners, Southwest Little Rock United for
Progress, the Santa Monica Neighborhood Association and the Allendale
Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Valley Drive is classified on the Master Street Plan as a collector street. A
dedication of right-of-way of 60 feet will be required.
2. Geyer 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.
3. With site development, provide the design of the street conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct street improvement to these streets including
5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. Valley Drive should be
constructed to a 36 foot wide collector standard including 275 feet minimum
horizontal radii. Construct street improvement to Alice Springs Drive
including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. Alice Springs
Drive should be constructed to a 26 foot wide residential standard including
150 feet minimum horizontal radii. On the previously approved preliminary
plat application, Stillman Drive and Susanne Drive were not required to
connect to Valley Drive.
4. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per
Section 8-283 prior to construction. The current flood study ends just west
of Geyer Springs Road. The majority of the site is located outside the limits
of a detailed flood study.
5. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water
permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the
start of construction.
6. Street Improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic
Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1509-A
4
7. 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 will need to
be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction.
8. On site striping and signage plans should be forwarded to Public Works,
Traffic Engineering for approval with the site development package.
9. Streetlights are required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Provide
plans for approval to Traffic Engineering. Streetlights must be installed prior
to platting/certificate of occupancy. Contact Traffic Engineering 379-1813
(Steve Philpott) for more information.
10. 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).
11. Street names and street naming conventions must be approved by Public
Works. Contact David Hathcock at (501) 371-4808.
12. No fences or any other obstructions are allowed within the 50-foot
drainage/utility easement. This statement should be shown on the final plat.
13. Conduct hydrologic and hydraulic analysis using HEC-RAS analysis to
determine adequacy of drainage ditch and minimum finished floor elevation
of proposed structures. A copy of the model is available from FEMA or the
USCOE for your use.
14. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property.
15. Is the applicant requesting to harvest timber as previously requested?
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements. Contact Little
Rock Wastewater Utility for additional information.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. A water main extension will be
required in order to provide service to this property. A 15-foot-wide easements
paralleling the proposed lot line to allow for connections to the water mains in
Susanne Drive and/or Stillman Drive may be required. This development will
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1509-A
5
have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water
facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department for additional information.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: 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: (March 6, 2008)
The applicant was present. Staff presented an overview of the proposed
subdivision stating the Commission had approved a similar request two years
ago. Staff stated the time had expired and the applicant was seeking preliminary
plat approval for the plat, which was proposed very similar to the previous
approval. Staff requested the applicant provide additional details including the lot
depth for Lots 50 and 51 and the linear feet of new street proposed. Staff also
requested the applicant provide a phasing plan if the development would be
constructed in multiple phases.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated Valley Drive was
classified on the Master Street Plan as a collector street therefore a dedication of
60-feet of right of way and construction of a 36-foot street would be required at
the time of development. Staff also stated Stillman and Susanne Drives were
previously approved to not connect as indicated on the proposed plat. Staff
noted no fences or other obstructions would be allowed within the indicated
50-foot drainage and utility easement. Staff also requested the applicant provide
a hydrologic and hydraulic analysis using HEC-RAS analysis to determine
adequacy of drainage structures and ditches in the area. Staff noted the
minimum finished floor elevation was required to be shown on the proposed plat.
Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies
suggesting the applicant contact the individual agency for additional information.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1509-A
6
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant provided a revised plat to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the March 6, 2008, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has
provided the lot depth for Lots 50 and 51, the linear feet of new public street and
a phasing plan for the development. The applicant has indicated the minimum
finished floor elevation will be provided on the proposed lots. The applicant has
indicated the rights of way and easements will be cleared at the time of
placement of the infrastructure. All trees outside the right of way and easements
will remain until the lots are developed.
The developers are seeking preliminary plat approval to allow the creation of
80 single-family lots with an average lot size of 8,250 square feet and a minimum
lot size of 7,000 square feet. The lots will be accessed via new public streets
with the extension of a collector street per the Master Street Plan, Valley Drive,
and a new residential street Alice Springs Drive.
The proposed preliminary plat indicates Lots 49 and 64 with the placement of a
25-foot front building line adjacent to the Valley Drive, a collector street, which
typically requires the placement of a 30 foot building line. The plat also indicates
a variance to allow Lot 4 to develop with an increased lot depth to width ratio and
Lot 1 to develop with a reduced lot depth. Staff is supportive of the variances as
indicated. Lots 49 and 64 are indicated with an adequate area to comply with
typical ordinance standards but based on the configuration of the lots the
additional five feet will allow for more options of house design and building
placement on the site. The increased lots depth to width ratio for Lot 4 and the
reduced lot depth for Lot 1 are necessary based on the angle of Valley Drive. A
portion of the street is currently in place.
Staff is supportive of the request. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding
issues associated with the request. Staff does not feel the creation of the new
single-family subdivision in this area will significantly impact the area. The plat
was previously approved in a similar configuration as the current development
plan. The applicant has tried to address staff’s concerns based on the current
design and comments raised at the previous public hearing.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
following conditions:
1. Compliance with the comments and conditions as noted in paragraphs D, E
and F of the agenda staff report.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1509-A
7
2. No fences or other obstructions are to be located within the 50-foot drainage
and utility easement. This restriction must be included in the general notes
section of the preliminary plat and the final plat.
Staff recommends approval of the variance request from the Subdivision
Ordinance to allow the development of lots with a reduced building line adjacent
to a collector street (Section 31-256(1)); Lots 49 and 64.
Staff recommends approval of the variance request from the Subdivision
Ordinance to allow an increased lot depth to width ratio for Lot 4 (Section
31-232(b)).
Staff recommends approval of the variance request from the Subdivision
Ordinance to allow Lot 1 to develop with a reduced lot depth (Section 31-232(a)).
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 27, 2008)
The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated a
concern had arisen concerning the right of way for Valley Drive. Staff recommended
the item be deferred to the May 8, 2008, public hearing to allow staff adequate time to
research the available right of way.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for approval for deferral of the request.
The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
Staff has determined the right of way for Valley Drive has not been dedicated to the City
for public use. Based on the street being a private street the developer has redesigned
the proposed subdivision to allow for two accesses to the subdivision as required by the
State Fire Code. The proposed subdivision contains a total of 80 single-family
residential lots with an average lot size of .28 acres and a minimum lot size of .19 acres.
The site plan includes 1.14 acres of open space and 3,594 linear feet of new public
street will be constructed with the proposed subdivision.
The applicant is proposing Valley Drive constructed to collector standard per the Master
Street Plan. The proposed plat indicates the placement of a 30-foot front building line
along the proposed collector street as typically required per the Master Street Plan. The
proposed plat indicates the extension of Stillman Drive from the current terminus to
allow for a second access to the proposed subdivision. Stillman Drive is a dedicated
public street with a 50-foot right of way and currently ends at the applicant’s southern
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1509-A
8
property line. Per the State Fire Code any single-family development in excess of
35 residential lots must provide a secondary access to the subdivision.
The plat indicates the placement of a Neighborhood Park along the western boundary
fronting Valley Drive, a private street. An access easement along the common lot lines
of Lots 47 and 48 has been indicated to provide pedestrian access to the park. The
developer will include in the Bill of Assurance for the Subdivision a mechanism for
maintenance of the park area.
Staff is supportive of the request. The proposed plat has been indicated meeting the
typical standards of the Subdivision Ordinance. The development is proposed as a
residential subdivision at a density of 2.86 units per acre. To staff’s knowledge there
are no outstanding technical issues associated with the request. Staff feels the
development of the subdivision with 80 residential lots and a 1.14-acre tract set aside
for a neighborhood park is appropriate use for this site.
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: (MAY 8, 2008)
The applicant was not present. There were registered objectors present. The chair
asked the applicant to come forward. There was no response from the applicant. The
commission voted to defer the item to the June 19, 2008, public hearing to allow the
applicant to be present for the discussion of the application request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The commission voted to approve the item
for deferral by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
There has been no change in the application request. Staff has contacted the applicant
providing him with the date and time of the public hearing.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 19, 2008)
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.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1509-A
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 9 ayes,
0 noes and 2 absent.
June 19, 2008
ITEM NO.: E FILE NO.: S-1487-A
NAME: The Ridge Estates Revised Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: Located North of Pleasant Hill Road and West of Vimy Ridge Road
DEVELOPER:
Property Development Group
P.O. Box 891
Bryant, AR 72089
ENGINEER:
Laha Engineering
6602 Baseline Road, Suite E
Little Rock, AR 72209
AREA: 59 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 204 FT. NEW STREET: 8500 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 16 – Otter Creek
CENSUS TRACT: 41.04
Variance/Waivers:
1. A variance from Section 36-516(f)(1) to allow the placement of a six foot fence within
the platted setback along Vimy Ridge Road and Pleasant Hill Road.
2. A variance to allow the placement of the sidewalks at the back of curb.
BACKGROUND:
On May 29, 2005, the Little Rock Planning Commission approved a preliminary plat to
allow the subdivision of 59 acres into 198 single-family lots. The approval allowed a
minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet and 8,500 linear feet of new street. The applicant
indicated a tract along Vimy Ridge Road and Pleasant Hill Road to be maintained by the
Property Owners Association designated for buffering of the subdivision from the
adjoining roadways. The applicant also indicated a 25-foot platted building line along
the front yard and side yard and rear yards to meet the minimum ordinance
requirement. A phasing plan was not approved for the subdivision and the development
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1487-A
2
was proposed in a single phase. The improvements for the proposed Phase I portion of
the development have been completed.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The developer is now proposing an amendment to the previously approved
preliminary plat to create a phasing plan for the proposed subdivision. The
development is proposed in five (5) phases with street construction to Vimy
Ridge Road and the internal residential streets corresponding to the phasing
plan. Temporary turn-arounds will be provided to accommodate City service
vehicles.
With the request the developer is seeking approval of the creation of six (6)
additional lots and the removal of the previously indicated tracts along Vimy
Ridge Road and Pleasant Hill Road. The plat previously was indicated with a
large drainage swale which the developer has reduced through channelization
allowing the additional lots to be created.
The lots abutting Vimy Ridge Road and Pleasant Hill Road will be plated with a
10-foot no right of vehicular access easement. The plat also indicates fences
may be constructed within the required rear yard setback of the abutting streets.
The request also includes a variance from the Master Street Plan and the
Boundary Street Ordinance to allow the placement of the sidewalk at the back of
curb along Vimy Ridge Road and along the internal residential streets. The
applicant has indicated the ground at the right of way on Vimy Ridge Road and
on some of the internal lots is eight to ten feet above or below the curb.
According to the applicant the sidewalks would be more likely utilized if the walks
were place at grade with the street.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The majority of the site is tree covered with clearing and basic infrastructure
improvements completed to the northern portion of the tract. North of the site the
uses included residential, commercial and industrial. The area to the west of the
site is vacant and was previously cleared of trees. The Quail Run Subdivision is
located south of the site on Pleasant Hill Road. There is an approved POD
located on Pleasant Hill Road to the southwest of the site. There is an area
zoned MF-6 located on the southwest corner of Pleasant Hill Road and Vimy
Ridge Road.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing staff has received several informational phone calls from area
residents. The Alexander Road Neighborhood Association, the Quail Run
Neighborhood Association, Southwest Little Rock United for Progress and all
abutting property owners were notified of the public hearing.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1487-A
3
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. Pleasant Hill Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a collector
street. A dedication of right-of-way 30 feet from centerline will be required.
3. With the subdivision construction, provide the design of street conforming to
the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvements to Vimy
Ridge Road and Pleasant Hills Road including 5-foot sidewalks with the
planned development. On Vimy Ridge Road the back of curb should be
29.5 feet from the centerline. On Pleasant Hills Road, the back of curb
should be 18 feet from centerline. On both streets, the back of sidewalk
should be placed at the property line or a variance is required to be issued
by the Planning Commission.
4. A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of
Vimy Ridge Road and Pleasant Hills Road.
5. A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of
the internal residential streets.
6. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other
than residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be
submitted and approved prior to the start of construction.
7. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property.
8. Street names and street naming conventions must be approved by Public
Works. Contact David Hathcock at (501) 371-4808.
9. The minimum centerline radius of 150 feet for standard residential streets
must be provided.
10. Long straight street lengths encourage speeding. Measures should be
taken to slow residential traffic.
11. Provide easement along lot lines as needed for storm water conveyance.
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.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1487-A
4
13. All disturbed areas not planned for construction must have vegetation
established prior to reissuance of grading permit to begin construction.
14. Maintenance and improvements of the temporary detention pond(s) and
erosion control devices are required immediately. Silt should be cleaned
out of the ditch along Vimy Ridge Road. All denuded areas not to have
construction in 21 days should be vegetated.
15. 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: Approved as submitted.
Entergy: No comment received.
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: (April 17, 2008)
Mr. Scott Foster was present representing the applicant. Staff presented the
item stating there were few outstanding technical issues associated with the
request. Staff stated the plat was previously approved as a single phase
development. Staff stated the applicant was now seeking approval of a phasing
plan for the subdivision.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1487-A
5
Staff questioned the purpose of an area located between Lots 1 and 204. Staff
requested the applicant provide the average lot size and the minimum lot size in
the general notes section of the proposed plat. Staff also requested the applicant
provide platted building lines along Vimy Ridge Road and Pleasant Hill Road per
the typical ordinance standard. Staff questioned if a fence would be placed with
in the setback of the lots abutting these roadways. Staff stated if fences were
proposed the developer should seek a variance through the plat review process
to allow fencing to be located on the property line.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated Vimy Ridge Road was
indicated on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. Staff stated street
construction and right of way dedication would be required to meet the typical
ordinance requirements. Staff stated Pleasant Hill Road was indicated on the
Master Street Plan as a collector street. Staff stated right of way dedication and
street construction would be required along this roadway as well. Staff noted the
storm water detention ordinance would apply to development of the site. Staff
also stated radial dedications would be required at the intersection of all streets
including Vimy Ridge Road and Pleasant Hill Road. Staff stated long straight
streets encourage speeding. Staff requested the developer provide measures to
discourage excessive speeds through the subdivision.
Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and
agencies. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then
forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing the issues raised
at the April 17, 2008, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has
provided the required building lines, indicated 204 lots and provided the
temporary turn-arounds on the proposed plat. The applicant has also indicated
measures will be taken to discourage speeding along the long straight stretches
of road.
The current request is to allow an amendment to the previously approved
preliminary plat to create a phasing plan for the proposed subdivision and add six
(6) additional lots. Five (5) phases are being proposed with the abutting arterial
street construction being completed with the corresponding phase. The interior
street construction will also be phased with the development.
Fifty-three lots and two tracts for detention are proposed in the first phase along
with the street improvements to Vimy Ridge Road abutting Phase 1. Temporary
turn-arounds will be provided to accommodate City service vehicles on the
interior City streets. During Phase 1 only one access to Vimy Ridge Road will be
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1487-A
6
provided. During the second phase an additional entrance to Vimy Ridge Road
will be constructed along with 23 lots and an additional area of detention. Street
improvements to Vimy Ridge Road will be constructed abutting the Phase 2
portion of the development. Phases 3 and 4 are located along the plats western
boundary and will include internal street construction only. During the final phase
(Phase 5) an additional entrance to Vimy Ridge Road will be constructed. During
this phase improvements to Vimy Ridge Road and Pleasant Hill Road will be
completed to Master Street Plan standard.
With the request the developer is seeking approval of the creation of six (6)
additional lots. The plat previously was indicated with a large drainage swale
which the developer has reduced through channelization allowing the additional
lots to be created. The plat is indicated with a minimum lot size of 7,000 square
feet as typically required by the Subdivision Ordinance.
The lots abutting Vimy Ridge Road and Pleasant Hill Road will be platted with a
10-foot no right of vehicular access easement. The plat indicates the placement
of a 25-foot front yard building line, a 35-foot building line along Vimy Ridge Road
(arterial street standard) and a 30-foot building line along Pleasant Hill Road
(collector street standard). The lots are considered reverse frontage lots which
means a lot designed to be developed with the rear yard abutting a major street
and with primary means of ingress and egress provided on a minor street. Along
arterial streets in proposed subdivisions where it is desirable to limit curb cut
access, building lines shall be established on both frontages of double frontage
lots. Along the line of lots abutting such traffic artery, a restricted access
easement of at least ten (10) feet, across which there shall be no right-of-vehicle
access permitted, shall be provided.
The plat indicates fences may be constructed within the required rear yard
setback of the abutting streets. The ordinance states between a required
building setback line and a street right-of-way, the maximum height shall be four
(4) feet. Other fences may be erected to a maximum height of six (6) feet. The
developer has indicated a desire to allow the construction of a six foot fence
within the rear yard setback of the homes abutting Vimy Ridge Road and
Pleasant Hill Road. Staff recommends all fences at intersections be constructed
as required in Section 36-516(f)(2) which states any fence erected along a
property line corner or within the fifty (50) foot triangle formed by the property line
intersection shall comply with the obstruction provisions of Section 32-8 of the
Code of Ordinances.
The applicant is requesting a variance from the Master Street Plan to allow the
placement of the sidewalks at the back of curb within the proposed subdivision.
According to the applicant the grade of some of the streets is eight to ten feet
above or below the curb and if the sidewalks are placed as proposed the walks
would more likely be utilized. Staff is not supportive of placing the sidewalk at
the back of curb and feels from a safety standpoint the sidewalks should be
located as far away as possible from the driving lanes. The ordinances require
placement of the sidewalks at the back of curb to allow separation of pedestrians
and motorist. Vimy Ridge Road is a well traveled roadway with vehicles traveling
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1487-A
7
at a considerable rate of speed of 40 mph plus. Staff feels it is important to
separate the pedestrians and vehicles.
Staff is supportive of the proposed plat to allow the creation of a phasing plan
and to allow the creation of seven additional lots within the subdivision. Staff is
also supportive of the variance request from Section 36-516(e)(1) to allow the
placement of six foot fences within the platted setback along Vimy Ridge Road
and Pleasant Hill Road. Staff is not supportive of allowing the sidewalk to be
placed at the back of curb. To staff’s knowledge there are no other outstanding
technical issues associated with the request.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda
staff report.
Staff recommends approval of the variance request from Section 36-516(e)(1) to
allow the placement of six foot fences within the platted setback along Vimy
Ridge Road and Pleasant Hill Road. Staff recommends all fences at
intersections be constructed as required by Section 36-516(f)(2).
Staff recommends the sidewalks be placed at the property line as typically
required per various City ordinances.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 8, 2008)
The applicant was not present. There were registered objectors present. The chair
asked the applicant to come forward. There was no response from the applicant. The
commission voted to defer the item to the June 19, 2008, public hearing to allow the
applicant to be present for the discussion of the application request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The commission voted to approve the item
for deferral by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent, 1 recusal (Commissioner Troy Laha).
STAFF UPDATE:
There has been no change in the application request. Staff has contacted the applicant
providing him with the date and time of the public hearing.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1487-A
8
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 19, 2008)
The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated
the applicant had indicated sidewalks would be placed at the back of the right of way
where technically feasible. Staff stated in locations where grades did not allow for the
placement of the sidewalk at the back of the right of way the walks would be placed at
the back of curb. Staff stated they were supportive of the proposed placement. 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 and 2 absent.
June 19, 2008
ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: S-185-AA
NAME: Sage V Foods, Tract E-2, Area 102, Little Rock Port Industrial
Subdivision Site Plan Review
LOCATION: Located South of Frazier Pike, just East of Zeuber Road
DEVELOPER:
Sage V Foods
Mr. Pete Vegas
12100 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 605
Los Angeles, CA 90025
ENGINEER:
Garver Engineering
Mr. Bill Ruck
1010 Battery Street
Little Rock, AR 72203
AREA: 15.9 + acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: I-3
PLANNING DISTRICT: 26 – Port South
CENSUS TRACT: 40.07
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Tract E was acquired from the Little Rock Port Authority in 2007 by Sage
V Foods. It was replatted into two tracts. Tract E-2, the east one-half,
was retained by Sage V Foods. Tract E-1, the west one-half, was “sold” to
the owner’s father as a financing mechanism for the first phase. The
property is zoned I-3 and Sage V Foods is proposing the construction of a
new manufacturing plant on Tract E-2. The project is proposed in two
phases. Phase I will be the initial manufacture and warehouse building
with truck dock in front as shown on the site plan. Also constructed will be
concrete drives to accommodate the truck loading from both entrances off
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-185-AA
2
of Sloane Drive, truck parking area, asphalt paving for employee parking,
street landscaping, interior landscaping, building landscaping and a
concrete drive along the west and south side of the building to allow trucks
access to the south side of the building. The company will manufacture,
package and distribute a rice product. Trucks will bring in raw product and
take out the finished product. The Phase I building will be a structural
steel building with pre-cast concrete tilt-up walls and concrete slab floor.
Phase II will include a future building expansion on the east side of the
Phase I building, an unloading building lying south of the Phase I building,
and railroad access being brought into the unloading building. The
scheduling of Phase II construction is not known. A small office area will
be added on the north end of the Phase I manufacturing building in the
future.
A grading permit has been received from the City and the earthwork has
been completed for lot E-1. Since a separate building is proposed in
Phase II, the project falls under the need of a site plan review for multiple
buildings.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is located in the Little Rock Port Industrial Park near the eastern
edge. There is a new single-family subdivision being developed to the
east of this site, Apple Blossom Subdivision and the College Station
Neighborhood is located further east. The area is primarily industrial uses
or industrially zoned lands. Sloane Drive appears to be have been
constructed as an industrial street with open ditches for drainage.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area property
owners. All property owners located within 200 feet of the site along with
the Apple Blossom Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public
Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-185-AA
3
Other than residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans
must be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction.
2. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water
permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to
the start of construction.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this property.
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 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. Please submit
plans for the fire protection system to Central Arkansas Water for review.
Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of
fire service. Approval of plans by the Arkansas Department of Health
Engineering Division and Little Rock Fire Department is required. Fire
sprinkler systems, which do not contain additives such as antifreeze shall
be isolated with a double detector check valve assembly. If additives are
used, a reduced pressure zone backflow preventer shall be required. This
development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution
system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate
pressure and fire protection.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock
Fire Department for additional information.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is located on CATA bus route #20, the College Station
Route.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-185-AA
4
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape:
1. The site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer
ordinance requirements.
2. The zoning buffer ordinance requires an average fifty-foot (50’) street
buffer along the northern property line, next to the street.
3. Berming is highly encouraged along the street.
4. The landscape ordinance requires the interior islands be a minimum of
seven and one half (7’-6”) in width and a minimum of one hundred and
fifty (150) square feet in area. Some of the interior islands appear to
be below this minimal amount.
5. Currently, it appears that one of the driveways encroaches onto the
adjoining property. A cross access easement is necessary in this area.
6. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be
required.
7. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide
an approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered
Landscape Architect.
8. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many
existing trees as feasible on this site. Credit toward fulfilling
Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving
trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (May 29, 2008)
Mr. Bill Ruck and Mr. Walter Spaul were present representing the request.
Staff presented an overview of the proposed development stating there
were few outstanding technical issues associated with the request. Staff
requested the street name be included on the proposed site plan.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a grading permit
would be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities on the
site. Staff also stated if disturbed area was one or more acres a permit
from Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality would be required.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-185-AA
5
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated a street buffer of
50-feet would be required adjacent to the Sloane Drive. Staff stated
berming was encouraged to screen parking lot areas. Staff noted the
interior landscape islands were required to be a minimum of 7 ½ feet in
width and 150 square feet in area. Staff stated the drive along the
western perimeter encroached onto the adjoining parcel. Staff stated an
access easement was required.
Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and
agencies. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee
then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing the issues
raised at the May 29, 2008, Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised
plan indicates the street name and an access easement for the drive
located along the western perimeter. The revised plan indicates
landscape islands per the typical ordinance standard.
The applicant is seeking a subdivision site plan review to allow Sage V
Foods to construct a new manufacturing plant on this I-3 zoned site. The
construction is proposed in two phases with Phase I being the initial
manufacture and warehouse building with truck dock. Also constructed in
the first phase will be the two entrances from Sloane Drive, the drives to
accommodate the truck loading from both entrances, truck parking area,
asphalt paving for employee parking, street landscaping, interior
landscaping, building landscaping and a concrete drive along the west and
south sides of the building to allow trucks access to the south side of the
building. The facility will manufacture, package and distribute a rice
product. The raw product and finished product will be trucked into and
from the site. The Phase I building will be a structural steel building with
pre-cast concrete tilt-up walls and concrete slab floor.
Phase II will include a future building expansion on the east side of the
Phase I building, an unloading building lying south of the Phase I building
and railroad access being brought into the unloading building. The time
frame for completion of the Phase II building has not been established. A
small office area will be added on the north end of the Phase I
manufacturing building with the future construction.
A grading permit has been received from the City and the earthwork has
been completed for lot E-2.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-185-AA
6
Staff is supportive of the request. The development is proposed for a
Subdivision Site Plan review for multiple buildings. The site is zoned I-3
and the development is proposed meeting the criteria established for this
zoning district. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding technical
issues associated with the request. Staff feels the construction of a new
manufacturing facility on this site as proposed is appropriate.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
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: (JUNE 19, 2008)
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 and 2 absent.
June 19, 2008
ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: S-185-BB
NAME: Man Industries Site Plan Review
LOCATION: Located South of Zeuber Road at Fletcher Road
DEVELOPER:
Man USA, Inc.
c/o Garver Engineering
1010 S. Battery Street
P.O. Box 50
Little Rock, AR 72203
ENGINEER:
Garver Engineering
Mr. Bill Ruck
1010 S. Battery Street
P.O. Box 50
Little Rock, AR 72203
AREA: 160 + acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 3,390 LF
CURRENT ZONING: Area Not Zoned
PLANNING DISTRICT: 26 – Port South
CENSUS TRACT: 40.07
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Man USA is proposing a subdivision site plan review of this property totaling
155 acres, prior to right of way dedication, located south of Zeuber Road. A new
manufacturing plant is proposed for the manufacturing of welded steel pipe. The
new construction will include a pipe mill and coating plant. The pipe mill is
proposed to contain 221,072 square feet and the coating plant will contain
83,662 square feet.
The applicant’s cover letter indicates raw product will be transported from the
Port Industrial Park by rail to the facility. Outbound pipe from 24” to 60” in
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-185-BB
2
diameter will be shipped by rail. A force main will be constructed by Little Rock
Wastewater Utility to the north edge of the property along Zeuber Road. Central
Arkansas Water will extend an existing 16” water main on Zeuber Road to the
site. Zeuber Road will be widened and improved to industrial standard by
Pulaski County.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
Zeuber Road is an unimproved narrow roadway with open ditches for drainage.
The site is cleared and was recently used for agriculture. Fletcher Road is
located midway through the site and is also a narrow unimproved County Road
accessing a few homes and farmland. The site is located in the County just
south of the Little Rock Industrial Port. The City of Little Rock exercises
subdivision control only in this area regulating the division of property and
multiple building site plan review.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area property owners.
All property owners located within 200 feet of the site along with the Apple
Blossom Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Zeuber Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a collector street. A
dedication of right-of-way 30 feet from centerline will be required.
2. With site development, provide the design of street conforming to the Master
Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to Zeuber Road with the
planned development. The street should be built to the local-industrial street
with open drainage standard. Pavement should be provided 14 feet from
centerline with a 6 foot paved shoulder and an open ditch.
3. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed
location for storm water detention facilities on the plan.
4. It should be determined if the property is in the 100 year floodplain. If so,
Pulaski County should be contacted pertaining to requirements for
construction in the floodplain.
5. The railroad crossing should be constructed to AASHTO and MUTCD
standards.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-185-BB
3
6. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water
permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the
start of construction.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Outside the City limits. No comment.
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. Public water main to serve this
property is to be installed by CAW. On site fire protection will be required. Please
submit plans for the fire protection system to Central Arkansas Water for review.
Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of fire
service. Approval of plans by the Arkansas Department of Health Engineering
Division and Little Rock Fire Department is required. Fire sprinkler systems,
which do not contain additives such as antifreeze shall be isolated with a double
detector check valve assembly. If additives are used, a reduced pressure zone
backflow preventer shall be required. 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. This development will have minor impact
on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to
provide adequate pressure and fire protection.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department for additional information.
County Planning: No comment received.
CATA: The site is located on CATA bus route #20, the College Station Route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-185-BB
4
Landscape:
1. The site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
2. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
3. 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.
4. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing
trees as feasible on this site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance
requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or
larger.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (May 29, 2008)
Mr. Bill Ruck and Mr. Walter Spaul were present representing the request. Staff
presented an overview of the proposed development stating there were few
outstanding technical issues associated with the request. Staff requested the
location of Zeuber Road be included on the proposed site plan. Staff also
requested details of the proposed abandonment of Fletcher Road. Staff noted
the road was a County Road and abandonment would take place through the
County.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a grading permit would be
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities on the site. Staff also
stated if disturbed area was one or more acres, a permit from Arkansas
Department of Environmental Quality would be required. Staff noted the railroad
crossing should be constructed to AASHTO and MUTCD standards.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated even though the site was
located outside the City limits in an area the City did not exercise zoning, the
Landscape Ordinance would still apply to the development of the site. Staff
stated a landscape plan stamped with the seal of a registered landscape
architect would be required and automatic irrigation would be required to water
landscaped areas.
Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and
agencies. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then
forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-185-BB
5
H. ANALYSIS:
A revised site plan addressing the concerns raised at the May 29, 2008,
Subdivision Committee has been provided to staff. The applicant has clearly
identified the site layout, the abutting roads and indicated an abandonment
request for Fletcher Road will be sought through Pulaski County. Notes on the
revised site plan indicate the railroad crossing will be constructed to standards as
identified by Public Works and boundary street improvements will be completed
per City standard for an industrial road. According to the applicant, Zeuber Road
will be widened and improved by Pulaski County. A force main will be
constructed by Little Rock Wastewater Utility to the north edge of the property
along Zeuber Road and Central Arkansas Water will extend an existing 16” water
main on Zeuber Road to the site.
The review is for a Subdivision Site Plan Review for the placement of multiple
buildings on this 155-acre tract. Man Industries is proposing the construction of a
new manufacturing plant to be used for manufacturing of welded steel pipe. The
new construction will include two buildings; a pipe mill and coating plant. The
pipe mill is proposed to contain 221,072 square feet and the coating plant with
contain 83,662 square feet. Raw product will be transported from the Port
Industrial Park by rail to the facility and pipe from 24” to 60” in diameter will be
shipped out also by rail. The site plan indicates a 60-foot railroad easement
along the western perimeter and the construction of the railroad spur within the
60-foot easement. The site plan indicates utility easements along the southern
perimeter and a natural gas pipeline easement along the eastern perimeter.
Staff is supportive of the request. The development is proposed for a
Subdivision Site Plan review for multiple buildings. The site is located outside
the City limits but within the City’s Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction in which
the City exercises only Subdivision control. The applicant has addressed all the
technical issues associated with the request. To staff’s knowledge there are no
outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff feels the construction of a
new manufacturing facility on this site as proposed is appropriate.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
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.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-185-BB
6
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 19, 2008)
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 8 ayes,
0 noes, 2 absent and 1 recusal (Jeff Yates).
June 19, 2008
ITEM NO.: 3 FILE NO.: Z-4587-D
NAME: Hunters Green Estates Lot 12 Revised Short-form PD-R
LOCATION: 51 Hunters Green Circle
DEVELOPER:
Frank Withrow
26 Scenic Point
Little Rock, AR 72207
ENGINEER:
White Daters and Associates
24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 0.25 + acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: PD-R
ALLOWED USES: Zero lot line single-family subdivision
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD-R
PROPOSED USE: Add sunroom to the rear of the existing structure
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
On April 18, 1995, the Board of Directors adopted Ordinance #16,872 establishing
Hunters Green PD-R. The approved development included 50 single-family lots and a
large common area. Also included in the development was a six foot high brick fence,
built around the perimeter of the property.
On June 2, 1998, the Board of Directors approved Ordinance No. 17,736 to allow the
revision of the PD-R for the six-foot brick wall behind Lots 9, 10 and 11 (located in the
northeast portion of the development) to be increased to nine feet.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4587-D
2
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The owner/applicant is proposing to revise the previously approved PD-R to
allow for the construction of a sunroom within the previously proposed building
setback. The previous approval allowed for the construction of screened porches
and patios within the building setback but did not allow for the construction of an
enclosed structure. The sunroom is proposed as 12-feet by 17-feet in size and
will be located within the previously identified patio area.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an existing single-family structure accessed by Hunters Green
Circle. The area has developed with single-family homes of approximately
2,500 square feet and roughly 5,700 square foot lots. Hunters Green is fully
enclosed by a brick wall ranging from six to nine feet. There are single-family
homes located to the west of the site. The wall placement screens the view of
the homes located to the north on Coleen Drive.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received a number of informational phone calls from
area property owners. Most have indicated they do not have a concern with the
addition of the sunroom as proposed. 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 Hunters Green 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 property.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: No objection.
Fire Department: No comment
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4587-D
3
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The
Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied
for a revision to a previously approved Planned Residential Development to allow
the placement of a 12’ x 17’ sunroom on the rear of the home.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
Master Street Plan: Hunters Green Circle is shown on the Plan as a Local
Street. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent
properties.
Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes in the immediate vicinity.
Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the Rock Creek
Neighborhood Action Plan, but the plan does not address this issue.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (May 29, 2008)
The applicant was not present. Staff presented the item stating there were no
outstanding technical issues associated with the request in need of addressing.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The request is to allow for a revision to a previously approved Planned
Residential Development to adjust the building envelope to include a proposed
sunroom addition. The site contains an existing single-family home and the
applicant desires to construct a sunroom within the rear yard area previously
identified as the porch area. The previous approval allowed for the
encroachment with screened porches only.
To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff is supportive of the request to amend the existing PD-R
to allow an expansion of the building envelope to allow a sunroom to be
constructed on the rear of the home.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4587-D
4
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 19, 2008)
The applicant was present. There were registered objectors present. Staff stated the
applicant was requesting a deferral of the item to allow time for the property owner to
meet with the opposition. Staff stated the request would require a waiver of the
Commission’s By-laws with regard to the late deferral request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the By-law waiver as indicated by staff. The motion carried by a vote of
9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. A motion was made to defer the item to the August 7,
2008, public hearing. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
June 19, 2008
ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: Z-4923-F
NAME: Shackleford Crossing Revised Long-form PCD (Townplace Suites by Marriot)
LOCATION: Located at Shackleford Crossings on the Southwest corner of I-430 and
Shackleford Road
DEVELOPER:
Clary Development Corporation
Cypress Plaza
2200 N. Rodney Parham Road, Suite 210
Little Rock, AR 72212
ENGINEER:
Development Consultants, Inc.
2200 N. Rodney Parham Road, Suite 220
Little Rock, AR 72212
AREA: 2.2 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: PCD
ALLOWED USES: C-2, Shopping Center District and O-2, Office and
Institutional District
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD
PROPOSED USE: Commercial Office Uses – Add hotel to the southwest portion of the
site and revise the commercial and restaurant uses allowable on the site.
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
The Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 19,237 on November 23,
2004, approving a Conceptual PCD known as Shackleford Crossing Long-form PCD,
which was located at the southwest corner of South Shackleford Road and Interstate
430. The conceptual plan included the north 62 acres being developed with C-2
permitted uses, the south 20 acres being O-2 permitted uses and the middle 15 acres
being a transition area where O-2 and C-2 permitted uses would be allowed. The plan
also showed four out parcels along the Shackleford Road frontage, with three main
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4923-F
2
entry drives from Shackleford Road. The total project would consist of
1,000,000 square feet of gross building area. The applicant noted that the commercial
building area would not exceed 750,000 square feet, with office uses occupying a
minimum of 25% or 250,000 square feet of the total gross floor area of the project.
There would be a maximum of 25,000 square feet of restaurant use within the out
parcels and 35,000 square feet of restaurant use within the interior commercial
development, with a total gross floor area for restaurant use not exceeding
50,000 square feet. The applicant noted that a hotel/convention use would possibly
occupy up to 10 acres of the overall development.
The development of the overall property would be done in phases with the Conceptual
PCD plan, each phase of the development, beginning with the Phase I, would require
review and approval by the Planning Commission and Board of Directors. As a part of
the Conceptual PCD proposal, the applicant submitted a three-page list of development
criteria to be placed on the property. The development criteria included conditions
related to right of way improvements, grading/excavation, landscaping/buffers, public
transportation, signage, outdoor speakers, site lighting, dumpsters, building
design/orientation, as well as other issues. Another condition included in the
development criteria was compliance with a written agreement between the developer
and Camp Aldersgate. (Both reproduced below.)
The site would allow the development of 400,000 square feet of commercial building
area with the existing I-430 entry/exit ramps and overpass conditions. Prior to
additional building area being constructed, the City’s Traffic Engineer and the
applicant’s traffic engineer would review the traffic volume in the area and if the study
indicated failure of the existing entry/exit ramps or overpass, the applicant would install
necessary improvements as agreed between the applicant and the City, prior to any
additional building area being constructed. All boundary street improvements would be
installed on Shackleford Road with the Phase I portion of the development.
The applicant noted that because of the site’s topography, site work for the entire
97 acres would be done with Phase I of the development. An overall
grading/excavation plan would be provided with the Phase I site plan review.
North/south and east/west cross sections would be provided, addressing retaining wall
construction details and areas within the site where trees would be preserved. A
grading permit for the site would not be issued until a building permit for Phase I
construction was issued.
The following list the previously approved criteria/conditions, which were imposed by the
developer and approved by the Board of Directors in the approval process:
Conditions on 97.446 Acres at the Southwest Corner of I-430 and S. Shackleford
Road - October 14, 2004
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4923-F
3
OFFSITE/IMPROVEMENT COSTS:
The building areas of the site will be allowed up to a total of 400,000 square feet of
commercial and office building area with the existing overpass and bridge conditions.
Prior to any additional building areas being added, the applicant’s traffic engineer will
review the volume of traffic with the City Engineer to determine the LOS grading.
Should the volume demonstrate failure of the related exits, entrances and bridge traffic
volumes then the applicant shall install necessary improvements as agreed between
applicant and the city to said intersection before additional commercial space or office
space could be built on the subject site.
RIGHT-OF-WAY ISSUES:
A traffic study must be submitted by the developer and approved by the City’s
Traffic Engineer, with development complying with recommendations of the study
as approved by the Traffic Engineer.
All improvements to Shackleford Road full width required by the Boundary Street
Improvements ordinance shall be constructed with Phase I development. In
addition to those required by the ordinance, the improvements made during
Phase I along Shackleford Road shall also include streetlights, turning lanes at
intersections and entry points and traffic signals at locations as determined by
Little Rock’s Traffic Engineering Department. In addition, a traffic signal shall be
installed on the I-430 north bound off-ramp at the time of the Phase I
improvements.
Phase I Shackleford Road improvements shall include the Comcast frontage.
Provide written agreement with Comcast for dedication of right-of-way and
construction of improvements.
The Highway Department I-430 right-of-way shall remain undisturbed until the
applicant has received approval of any alteration plan with the Highway
Department. The clearing of undergrowth and trees will be restricted to a caliper
of less than six (6”) inches complying with the current practices of the Highway
Department.
GRADING AND EXCAVATION ISSUES:
Provide overall grading plan for the entire property with Phase I site plan review.
Grading plan must note areas within the site where trees will be preserved,
address retaining wall construction details and identify variances from the Land
Alterations Ordinance. Along with the Phase I site plan review, the applicant
shall seek approval of a “phased grading plan” and provide justification for and
seek approval for clearing, excavation and filling areas both inside and outside
the Phase I development area in order to minimize hauling off excess materials
or importing borrow materials.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4923-F
4
North/south and east/west sections and elevations must be provided with grading
plan.
A grading permit will be issued in conjunction with the first building permit that
allows clearing and grading in conformance with the phased grading plan
approved by the Commission. Modifications to the phased grading plan will be
dealt with according to Sections 29-189 (e) & (f) of the Land Alterations
ordinance.
LANDSCAPING AND BUFFER ISSUES:
During Phase I site work, the required land use and street buffers must be
preserved.
Construction fencing must be in place to protect all required buffers prior to the
initiation of any site work.
All portions of the property shall be landscaped in compliance with the City’s
Landscape Ordinance.
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ISSUES:
Prior to submittal of Phase I site plan review to the Planning Commission, the
developer shall meet with Central Arkansas Transit Authority representatives to
discuss opportunities for providing bus facilities (pull-outs, internal circulation,
etc.).
The site development plan for the entire property must be designed to provide
adequate internal pedestrian circulation.
SIGNAGE ISSUES:
All wall and directional signage must comply with the City’s Zoning Ordinance,
unless otherwise approved by the Planning Commission during site plan review.
The commercial portion of the development will be limited to two (2) ground-
mounted signs, one (1) at an entry drive from Shackleford Road and one along
the I-430 Freeway area. Each sign shall have a maximum height of 36 feet and
a maximum area of 320 square feet.
The office portion of the development will be limited to one (1) ground-mounted
sign at the entry drive from Shackleford Road. The sign shall have a maximum
height of six (6) feet and a maximum area of 64 square feet.
Out parcels within the commercial portion of the property shall be restricted to
one (1) monument-type ground-mounted sign per out parcel. Each sign shall
have a maximum height of 10 feet and a maximum area of 100 square feet.
Any retail or retail commercial sign lighting along Shackleford Road or within
200’ feet thereof must be turned off ½ hour after store closing and not be turned
on prior to ½ hour before store opening.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4923-F
5
OTHER SITE DESIGN ISSUES:
Total project shall not exceed 1,000,000 square feet of area.
Commercial/Retail buildings constructed on the property shall not exceed a
total of 750,000 square feet of gross floor area, with a maximum of
25,000 square feet of restaurant uses on out parcels and 35,000 square feet
of restaurant uses on the balance of project with a total maximum restaurant
use for the entire property not to exceed 50,000 square feet.
Buildings constructed containing permitted O-2 uses shall be at least 25%, or
250,000, of the total gross floor area of the project.
Hotel and Convention use available on this site. Project to be in keeping with
design of others on Chenal or Shackleford Road. Size not to exceed
10 acres.
All site lighting must be low-level, directed away from adjacent property,
shielded downward and into the site.
Use of outdoor speaker or sound amplification system shall be prohibited on
the property except for 1/2 hour before and after the advertiser's hours of
being open to the general public. The operation of any such speaker and
system is limited to those that do not emit sound that is plainly audible from
South Shackleford Road or at a distance of two hundred feet or more from
the source of such sound.
Any dumpster or trash receptacle must be oriented away from Shackleford
Road and screened as per the City’s Zoning Ordinance requirements.
Servicing of dumpsters or trash receptacles must be during day light hours
only.
The design of buildings on the site must be approved by the Planning
Commission during the site plan review process.
All service/loading dock doors shall be oriented away from Shackleford and
provide proper screening.
Maximum building height on the property will not exceed 45’ unless approved
by the Planning Commission consistent with the height regulations as
allowed within the O-2 zoning district for the office portion of the
development.
Compliance with the written agreement between the developer and Camp
Aldersgate.
CONDITIONS - CAMP ALDERSGATE – November 8, 2004
1. Water Quality Assurance.
Developer agrees to comply with all current local, state, and federal law
regarding water run off and detention. Prior to the issuance of any grading
permit, Camp Aldersgate or the Developer will obtain from ADEQ or other
appropriate agency and share with one another the watershed affecting Camp
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4923-F
6
Aldersgate. Developer will ensure that the water quality and quantity from the
Property will not adversely affect either the quality or quantity of Camp
Aldersgate’s existing watershed.
2. Shackleford Road Improvements.
This letter agreement is conditioned upon the signatories’ written agreement to
the final specifications of road widening plan for Shackleford Road as approved
by the City of Little Rock. Nonetheless, Developer agrees to widen Shackleford
Road to two through lanes in each direction plus a turn lane as approved by the
City of Little Rock in front of Shackleford Crossings without cost or expense to
Camp Aldersgate. It is understood that Camp Aldersgate will not be required to
dedicate land for the widening of Shackleford Road or for any additional rights-of-
way that may be needed in conjunction with its widening.
3. Lighting and Signage.
Freestanding (lighted or unlighted) pole signs will be permitted only within 50 feet
of the property’s (1) west and northwest boundaries that abut the property
comprising I-430 or its rights-of-way and (2) 500 northern most feet of the east
boundary that abuts Shackleford Road as measured from the intersection of
Shackleford Road and I-430’s right-of-way.
The Property’s parking lot lights shall not exceed 30 feet in height or be directed
towards adjoining properties or roadways. The Property’s parking lot lights shall
be full cutoff, metal halide fixtures that utilize 400 watt or less horizontal bulbs
with flat lenses to control glare and over spill of lighting. No downward lighting
fixtures shall be permitted on the Property except those specifically designed to
light parking areas, service drives, sidewalks, and areas necessary for the
protection of persons or property, and none shall exceed the height or foot
candle specifications of the Property’s parking lot lights.
Signage for the remaining portions of the Property shall comply with Section
36-346(f) and 347 of the Little Rock Code as currently enacted. Any monument
signs erected within 100 feet of Shackleford Road shall be oriented perpendicular
to Shackleford Road. Vertical illumination of any monument signs shall not
exceed 0.1-foot candle measured on a vertical plane.
Any eastern facing signs visible from Camp Aldersgate’s property, except those
freestanding pole signs permitted above, shall remain unlighted except for
½ hour before and after the advertiser’s hours of being open to the general
public.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4923-F
7
4. Use Restrictions.
Developer agrees to place certain restrictions on the Property limiting certain
uses which are currently permitted or conditional uses under the City’s current
C-2 zoning classification, which use restrictions are attached as Attachment “A”.
This requirement shall also apply if Developer elects to self develop any of the
Property.
5. Use of Outdoor Speakers.
Use of outdoor speaker or sound amplification system shall be prohibited on the
Property except for ½ hour before and after the advertiser’s hours of being open
to the general public. The operation of any such speaker and system is limited to
those that do not omit sound that is plainly audible from South Shackleford Road
or at a distance of two hundred feet or more from the source of such sound.
6. Legal Matters and Continuing Cooperation.
Developer agrees to provide a declaration of restrictive covenants consistent with
the terms of this letter and in a form acceptable to Camp Aldersgate that will be
part of the land for future uses and will file said declaration as part of the public
record. Approval of said form shall not be unreasonably withheld.
Developer covenants that in connection with Camp Aldersgate’s pledge of future
cooperation with Shackleford Crossings, that Developer and its consultants will
periodically provide Camp Aldersgate’s Executive Director with reports
concerning the status of development at the site to the extent that such
development touches or impacts Camp Aldersgate. For instance, Developer will
provide Camp Aldersgate with copies of any water quality testing and monitoring
performed by the engineering firm engaged to provide these services in a
reasonably timely manner. Developer shall provide reasonable prior notice of the
commencement of excavation be given to the Executive’s Director in order that
any necessary on-site preparations be made at Camp Aldersgate.
The provisions of this letter shall be incorporated into (1) the final plan of
development and the zoning ordinance amendments approved by the City of
Little Rock and (2) any site plans or building plans to be approved by the City of
Little Rock for any parcel within the Property.
The enumerated restrictions above shall automatically terminate in the event
either Camp Aldersgate is no longer owned by the Women’s Division of the
United Methodist Church or other 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation or its property
is no longer used for purely charitable purposes.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4923-F
8
ATTACHMENT “A”
Excluded Uses from Property’s C-2 Zoning:
a. Bar, lounge, or tavern (except as part of restaurant or hotel use).
b. Cabinet and woodwork shop.
c. College dormitory.
d. College fraternity or sorority.
e. 24 hour Community welfare or health center.
f. Feed store.
g. Group care facility.
h. Lodge or fraternal organization.
i. Mortuary or funeral home.
j. Pawnshop.
k. Private club with dining or bar service.
l. Recycling facility, automated.
m. Taxidermist.
n. Ambulance service post.
o. Auto parts, sales with limited motor vehicle parts installation shall be limited to
Block A provided that building shall be no closer than 200 feet of Shackleford
Road right-of-way. Auto repair bay doors shall not face Shackleford Road
right-of-way. Auto repair bay doors shall not face Shackleford Road.
Enhanced landscaping shall be provided with the parking area fronting the
bay door, which shall include trees at 30 feet on center in the area fronting the
bay.
p. Bus station and terminal.
q. Crematorium.
r. Upholstery shop, furniture.
s. Upholstery shop, auto.
t. Appliance repair, excepting as part of a larger use.
Ordinance No. 19,399 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on September 20,
2005, established revisions to the previously approved PCD. The approval defined the
site plan for Phase I, the Commercial portion of the project and one of the office lots.
With the request, a preliminary plat for the subdivision of the site with sixteen lots and
out-parcels was also approved. The approved site plan included an area previously
excluded containing the Comcast office tract on Shackleford Road and incorporated this
area into the overall project plan.
All the conditions that were a part of the previously approved Conceptual PCD were
incorporated into the submittal with one revision. The one change requested from the
prior conditions was the second bullet point under “Other Site Design Issues” and was
to increase the allowable restaurant square footage and place a minimum parking ratio
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4923-F
9
requirement for restaurants on the site as imposed by the developer as indicated below:
Commercial/Retail buildings constructed on the property shall not exceed a total of
750,000 square feet of gross floor area, with a maximum of 25,000 40,000 square feet
of restaurant uses on out parcels and 35,000 square feet of restaurant uses on the
balance of project with a total maximum restaurant use for the entire property not to
exceed 50,000 65,000 square feet. Additionally, all restaurants shall have a parking
ratio of not less than 12 spaces per 1,000 square feet calculated independently of retail
parking ratios.
The applicant provided as an Attachment a rendered site plan of the intersection of the
“Main Street” portion of the retail development. The applicant stated the rendering was
intended to show the character of the retail development. The developer indicated the
actual building design had not been completed, but the intent was for the buildings to
look as if they had been built over time and by multiple designers to give the look, feel,
and sense of place that is reminiscent of a village, marketplace, or Main Street
atmosphere. According to the applicant the final design would include extensive
hardscape and landscape design that provided for excellent pedestrian circulation
throughout the shopping center.
Ordinance No. 19,699 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on February 20,
2007, revised the PCD to clarify the signage plan, allow dock doors to be oriented to
Shackleford Road and add food store as an allowable use for the site.
On May 8, 2008, the Little Rock Planning Commission recommended approval of a
request to allow a revision to the previously approved PCD for a 2.2-acre parcel located
near the southeastern portion of the site immediately south of the proposed Big Box
retail store. The approval allowed for development of a four story 92 room hotel with
paved drives and parking. The hotel was not proposed with any amenities such as
conference rooms, a restaurant or a bar. The Board of Directors approved the request
on June 3, 2008.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is now proposing a modification to the previously approved PCD to
clarify and amend some of the language in the Conditions and to add a hotel
footprint to the approved site plan. The modifications include the addition of
Conditional Uses in the O-2, Office and Institutional Zoning District to the
allowable uses and to increase the amount of restaurant square footage
approved for the development. The current approval allows for the placement of
40,000 square feet of restaurant space on the out parcels and within the overall
development the restaurant square footage is not to exceed 65,000 square feet.
The revision would allow 55,000 square feet of restaurant space on the out
parcels and a maximum of 80,000 square feet within the overall development.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4923-F
10
The original approval of the PCD allow for the northern portion of the site to
develop with C-2, Shopping Center District uses, a transition area to be
developed with C-2, Shopping Center District and O-2, Office and Institutional
uses and the southern area was to develop with O-2, Office and Institutional uses
to act as a buffer and transition area into the single-family located south of
Shackleford Crossings. The approval indicated a maximum of ten acres would
develop with hotel and convention uses limiting the design and massing of the
projects to the scale of others located on Chenal Parkway and Shackleford Road.
The area for hotel development was not identified on the originally approved
plan. The developers are now locating the hotel uses on the site plan.
The site plan indicates the placement of a hotel on proposed Lot 11 near the
southwest corner of the site. The hotel is indicated with a maximum of four
stories and 87 rooms. The hotel will not have a restaurant or bar associated with
the hotel. The hotel is proposed with a 1,200 square foot meeting room.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The northern commercial development of Shackleford Crossings has been
constructed including the town center, JC Penny’s and Baby’s R Us. A furniture
store is currently under construction. The former Comcast site is currently being
graded and it appears preliminary grading has taken place on this site. Street
construction adjacent to the northern portion of the development has been
completed per the Master Street Plan. The street improvements adjacent to the
southern portion of the development are currently underway.
Camp Aldersgate is located across Shackleford Road to the east. The property
immediately south is wooded and zoned R-2, Single-family. The general area
contains a mix of residential, office and commercial uses.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area property owners.
All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, all residents, who could be
identified, located within 300 feet of the site and the John Barrow Neighborhood
Association were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other than
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4923-F
11
residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be submitted
and approved prior to the start of construction.
2. Provide a Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan required by Section 29-186 (e)
showing top and bottom of all walls and slopes.
3. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water
permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the
start of construction.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Completion of the original project relocating existing sewer required
prior to construction. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 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. Additional on-site fire line(s)
and additional fire hydrant(s) will be required in order to provide service to this
property. 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 systems. This
development will have minor impact on existing water distribution system.
Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire
protection.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department for additional information.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: 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 revision to a previously approved Planned Commercial
Development to increase the total square footage of allowable commercial uses.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4923-F
12
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
Master Street Plan: Shackleford Road is a Minor Arterial on the Plan. 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 Shackleford Road since it is a Minor Arterial. This street may require
dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances
and exits to the site.
Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes in this immediate vicinity.
Neighborhood Action Plan: The John Barrow Neighborhood Action Plan covers
this area. The Business and Commercial Goal states: To enhance the climate
directed towards encouraging new businesses and commercial establishments to
located in the area as well as retention of existing businesses.
Landscape:
1. The site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
2. This development is part of an overall site plan and must comply with all the
previous agreements.
3. There are buffers along two property lines. These buffers will need to be
designated both on the final site plan and on the final landscape plan.
4. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
5. 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.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (May 29, 2008)
Mr. Jeff Maxwell was present representing the request. Staff stated there were
few outstanding technical issues associated with the request. Staff requested
Mr. Maxwell provide details of the proposed signage plan for the hotel. Staff also
questioned if the previously approved hours of dumpster service would apply to
the development of the office portion of the site. Staff stated the site plan
indicated the percentage of building coverage and areas designated for
landscaping in the general notes section of the site plan.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4923-F
13
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a grading permit would be
required prior to any development of the site. Staff also requested the
developers provide a sketch grading and drainage plan showing the top and
bottom of all walls and slopes.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated previous agreements were
made for the overall development of the site. Staff stated buffers were required
along the southern and eastern perimeters of the site. Staff stated a landscape
plan would be required at the time of building permitting.
Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and
agencies. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then
forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised cover letter to staff addressing the issues
raised at the May 29, 2008, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has
indicated the hours of dumpster service will remain as were previously approved
as will the percentage of building coverage and the percentage of landscape
area. The applicant has also provided the proposed building signage for the
proposed hotel and the sketch grading and drainage plan showing the top and
bottom of all walls and slopes. A note on the site plan indicates landscaping will
comply with the previous commitments and approvals.
The requested amendment includes clarification and amendment of some of the
language in the Conditions section of the ordinance. The modifications include
the addition of Conditional Uses in the O-2, Office and Institutional Zoning District
to the allowable uses and to increase the amount of restaurant square footage
approved for the development. The current approval allows for the placement of
40,000 square feet of restaurant space on the out parcels and within the overall
development the restaurant square footage is not to exceed 65,000 square feet.
The revision would allow 55,000 square feet of restaurant space on the out
parcels and a maximum of 80,000 square feet within the overall development.
The area for hotel development was not identified on the originally approved site
plan. The developers are proposing to locate the hotel portion of the
development on the southwestern portion of the site. The original approval of the
PCD allow for the northern portion of the site to develop with C-2, Shopping
Center District uses, a transition area to be developed with C-2, Shopping Center
District and O-2, Office and Institutional uses and the southern area was to
develop with O-2, Office and Institutional uses. The approval indicated a
maximum of ten acres would develop with hotel and convention uses limiting the
design and massing of the projects to the scale of others located on Chenal
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4923-F
14
Parkway and Shackleford Road. Although a hotel is not a by-right use under the
O-2, Office and Institutional Zoning District, a hotel is allowed as a Conditional
Use. The developers are proposing the addition of the Conditional Uses to add
the hotel uses as approved uses for this area of the site.
The site plan also indicates the placement of a hotel on proposed Lot 11 near the
southwest corner of the site. The hotel is indicated with a maximum of four
stories and 87 rooms. The hotel will not have a restaurant or bar associated with
the hotel. The hotel will contain a 1,200 square foot meeting room. A previous
approval allowed for development of a hotel on Lot 12, immediately north of this
proposed lot.
The hotel is proposed with four floors and a maximum building height of 60 feet.
The hotel will contain 87 rooms and no amenities such as a restaurant or bar
within the hotel. A 1,200 square foot meeting facility is planned. The parking
provided on the site is 96 parking spaces. The parking typically required for a
hotel is one space per guest room, plus an additional ten percent of the total of
all parking spaces required for developments larger than twenty rooms to
accommodate employees and non-guest users patronizing meeting rooms,
restaurants and other facilities. Based on the 87 rooms, a total of 95 parking
spaces would typically be required. The parking indicated is adequate to serve
the needs of the hotel.
Signage will comply with the typical standards of the zoning ordinance. Building
signage is proposed on the front of the structures as well as on each end of the
building. The signage will not exceed 10 percent of the façade area where
displayed.
Ground mounted signage is proposed with a maximum height of 36 feet and a
maximum sign area of 160 square feet. The sign is proposed located adjacent to
the interstate along the northern portion of the building. The developer is
requesting to measure the sign height as allowed per Section 36-557(b) which
allows signage adjacent to an interstate or expressway be measured from the
elevation of the centerline of the traffic lanes. Staff is supportive of this request.
A monument sign is proposed at the entrance drive to the development. The
sign is proposed with a maximum height of six feet and a maximum sign area of
64 square feet. Directional signage will be utilized within the development. The
directional signage will comply with the typical standards of Article X of the Little
Rock Code of Ordinances.
50.4 percent of the total site area will be designated to landscaping. The parking
will cover 37.4 percent and the building will cover 12.3 percent of the site. The
site lighting will be low level, directional, directed downward and into the site.
The site plan indicates the placement of a 30-foot buffer along the interstate
frontage as typically required per the Landscape Ordinance and the Zoning
Buffer Ordinance. The developer has indicated a portion of the buffer will be
graded and replanted to meet the typical ordinance requirements. The hotel will
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4923-F
15
be a 24-hour facility. The dumpsters service hours will be limited to daylight
hours.
Staff is supportive of the request. The developers are requesting an amendment
to the previous PCD for Shackleford Crossings to allow the construction of a
hotel facility, to identify the area proposed for the hotel construction and to
increase the allowable square footage of restaurant space for both the out
parcels and within the overall development. The original approval indicated hotel
uses as potential uses for the site and limited the total acreage of hotel
construction to ten acres. The total area proposed for hotel development is
5.64 acres, which is in compliance with the original approval. Staff does not feel
increasing the allowable restaurant square footage from 40,000 square feet of
restaurant space on the out parcels and 65,000 square feet for the total
development to 55,000 square feet of restaurant space on the out parcels and a
maximum of 80,000 square feet within the development will significantly impact
the development. The developer has indicated the parking ratios for all
restaurants will be not less than 12 spaces per 1,000 square feet calculated
independently of retail parking ratios which exceeds the parking typically required
for a restaurant per the zoning ordinance or 10 spaces per 1,000 square feet.
To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding technical issues associated with
the request. Staff does not feel the increase in the allowable restaurant square
footage contained on the site, the addition of the Conditional Uses as allowed per
the O-2, Office and Institutional District or the construction of the hotel as
proposed will significantly impact the development or the area.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 19, 2008)
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 and 2 absent.
June 19, 2008
ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: Z-5099-D
NAME: Lots 9B - 9E Northwest Territory Short-form PCD
LOCATION: Located North of Cantrell Road and South of Chenal Parkway, just West
of the Chenal Parkway/Cantrell Road Intersection
DEVELOPER:
PDC, LLC (Pfeifer Development Company)
16623 Cantrell Road, Suite 2A
Little Rock, AR 72223
ENGINEER:
White Daters and Associates
24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 4.4 + acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 4 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District
ALLOWED USES: General retail
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: C-3, General Commercial District uses, lots less than the two acre
minimum as established by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance
to allow grading of the site with the construction of the first building.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The request proposes four (4) commercial lots served by a private driveway
connecting Highway 10 and Chenal Parkway. The property currently contains
4.4 acres and is located just west of the Shell station located at the intersection
of Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road. The developer is requesting a variation
from the Highway 10 DOD for lot size, and side yard buffers and a reduction in
the front yard landscaped area for one of the proposed lots adjacent to Cantrell
Road.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5099-D
2
According to the applicant over the last 20 years it has been difficult to develop
smaller retail shops and restaurants along the corridor due to the constraints of
the DOD. The plan proposed will allow a clustered style development and the
ability to own the property in fee which has become a key component for these
type users.
The applicant has indicated the lots will develop utilizing C-3, General
Commercial District type uses and with a drive-in style restaurant. The driveway
locations are indicated on the plan. The private drive connection allows patrons
the ability to exit onto Chenal Parkway and travel to the traffic signal at the
intersection of Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road for eastbound travel.
The request includes the placement of two (2) ground mounted monument signs;
one sign located on Cantrell Road and one sign located on Chenal Parkway.
The signage is proposed consistent with development signage per the Highway
10 Design Overlay District or a maximum of ten (10) feet in height and
100 square feet in area.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is located on the north side of Cantrell Road extending from Cantrell
Road to Chenal Parkway. The site slopes upward from Cantrell Road and is
currently tree covered. There are a number of commercial uses and
commercially zoned properties in the area including a convenience store, a big
box retail and a mini-warehouse development. There are single-family homes
located to the southwest of the site on property zoned commercially and
residentially.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area
property owner. 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, the DuQuesne Place Property
Owners Association and the Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association were
notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Cantrell Road is a principal arterial. Dedication of right of way to 55 feet
from centerline will be required.
2. The right of way for Chenal Parkway and all easement appear to be
sufficient.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5099-D
3
3. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the
proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan.
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. A variance is
being requested for advanced grading of lots. Provide a plan showing
Phase 1 and the area of advance grading.
5. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required on both sides of
the private commercial street in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little
Rock Code and the Master Street Plan.
6. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from
AHTD, District VI.
7. Street names and street naming conventions must be approved by Public
Works. Contact David Hathcock at (501) 371-4808. No street name is
proposed.
8. The dimensions of the property lines for the two (2) plans provided do not
match.
9. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water
permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the
start of construction.
10. Private streets must be built to public street standards. The street centerline
grade cannot exceed 12%, intersection curb radius must be at least 25 feet.
The intersecting street must have at most a 5% entry slope.
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. 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).
14. The proposed street must be built per the Master Street Plan to commercial
street standards with a 60 foot right-of-way, 36 feet from back of curb to
back of curb and sidewalks on both sides.
15. With site development, provide design of street conforming to the Master
Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to Chenal Parkway and
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5099-D
4
Cantrell Road including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development.
Ordinance 19,883 was approved by the Board of Directors which deferred
construction of street improvements to Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road
for Lots 1, 2, 3, 5, 6,7,8, and 9A until Lot 9 develops. The specific deferral
is for constructing approximately 4,850 linear feet of widening for one and
one half lanes, curb and gutter, sidewalks, drainage, street lights and
intersection improvements on both sides of Chenal Parkway and the north
side of Cantrell Road for the length of the frontage.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements. 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 connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal
charges. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of the
hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for
installation of the hydrant(s).
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department for additional information.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #25, the Highway 10 Express
Route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Pinnacle Planning District. The
Land Use Plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant has applied
for a rezoning from C-3 General Commercial District to Planned Commercial
Development to allow the creation of four lots created with lot sizes less than the
two acre minimum lot size typically required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay
District.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5099-D
5
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is a Principal Arterial. The primary function of
a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic
generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits should
be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Cantrell since
it is a Principal Arterial. Chenal Parkway 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. These streets may
require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for
entrances and exits to the site.
Bicycle Plan: A Class II is shown along Cantrell Road. A Class II bikeway is
located on the street as either a five foot shoulder or six foot marked bike lane.
Additional paving and right of way may be required. A Class III is shown along
Chenal Parkway. 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.
Landscape:
1. The site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and ordinance
requirements.
2. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
3. 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.
4. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing
trees as feasible on this site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance
requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or
larger.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (May 29, 2008)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff presented an
overview of the development stating there were a number of outstanding
technical issues associated with the request. Staff stated the request was to
allow reduced lot sizes and a reduced landscape strip along the side and rear
property lines. Staff stated the front landscape strip for the eastern lot along
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5099-D
6
Cantrell Road did not comply with the typical overlay standards. Staff stated all
site lighting was to be directed into the site. Staff also questioned the hours of
dumpster service.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the storm water detention
ordinance would apply to development of the lots. Staff stated a grading permit
would be required prior to any clearing on the site. Staff also questioned if a
variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance would be requested to allow the
clearing of Lots 1 – 4 with the initial phase of construction.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated there were several
variations from the Highway 10 DOD proposed with the site plan. Staff also
stated when reviewing the site as a single development plan the total parking
exceed 150 parking spaces therefore the islands would need to be a minimum of
300 square feet in area.
Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and
agencies. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then
forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the May 29, 2008, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has
indicated the hours of dumpster service to limit the hours to daylight hours. The
applicant has requested each of the lots be viewed as individual lots to allow the
landscape islands to be limited to 150 square feet in area. Staff is supportive of
this request.
The site plan indicates the subdivision of this 4+ acre tract into four individual lots
and the construction of a restaurant or commercial building on each of the
individual lots. The request includes C-3, General Commercial District zoning,
restaurants and drive-in restaurants on Lots 9C and 9D as allowable uses.
An access easement will be extended from Cantrell Road to Chenal Parkway to
allow access to the proposed lots from each roadway and eliminate the need for
individual drives along Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway. The drive is
proposed within a 60-foot access and utility easement and the drive is proposed
with 36 feet of paving and sidewalks located on both sides.
The request includes a variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow
grading of the entire site with the development of the first phase. The developer
has indicated to allow the access drive to be developed in the first phase clearing
of the remainder of the lots is necessary to balance the site. Staff is supportive
of the request.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5099-D
7
Order boards are indicated on the site plan and a note has been included stating
the order boards will be screened per the typical ordinance standards. A single
dumpster location has been indicated on each of the four lots. The dumpster
locations indicated along Chenal Parkway should be relocated to the interior of
the site and away from the street right of way. The ordinance typically requires
trash receptacles and pick up to be oriented away from the street side of the
property and adequately screened from view.
The site plan indicates the right of way for Cantrell Road to be dedicated to ½ of
a 90-foot right of way and improved to ½ of a 59-foot street with a 5-foot
sidewalk. Cantrell Road is indicated on the Master Street Plan as a principal
arterial and a right of way dedication to ½ of a 110-foot right of way or 55 feet
from centerline is required. The distances measure adequate to meet the typical
arterial standard but the note on the site plan inaccurately states the right of way
and street construction. Staff recommends the note be corrected to contain the
proper dimension and required street construction.
The ordinance typically requires the placement of a 40-foot landscape strip along
Cantrell Road. The site plan indicates an encroachment into the 40-foot
landscape buffer on Lot 9B. The buffer is being reduced from 40 feet to what
appears to be 12 feet.
The site plan indicates the placement of an 18-foot to 20-foot landscape strip
along the eastern perimeter of the site and a 17-foot landscape strip along the
western perimeter of the site. The ordinance would typically require the
placement of a landscape strip averaging a minimum of 25 feet from the property
line on these perimeters. It does not appear when viewing the lots as an overall
development the 25-foot average is being met along either perimeter property
line.
The site plan indicates the placement of a minimum landscape strip of 15 feet
along Chenal Parkway as typically allowed where a yard abuts a street right and
is adjacent to land zoned for office and residential.
The development is indicated with two development signs. The signage is
proposed consistent with development signage as typically allowed per the
Highway 10 DOD or a maximum of ten feet in height and one hundred square
feet in area. The individual lots are not proposed with ground-mounted signage
and will not be allowed to place signage on the individual lots. Building signage
is proposed consistent with signage allowed in commercial zones or a maximum
of ten percent of the façade area.
The Overlay typically allows a minimum lot size of two acres and a single building
is allowed per two acres. The development proposes to create four lots, which
do not meet the minimum lot size criteria. The applicant is proposing the
construction of four buildings on the site, which also does not meet the building
site criteria of one building per two acres.
The site plan indicates Lots 9B and 9C with potential drive-in restaurants.
Typically drive-in restaurant type facilities desire canopies over the parking stalls.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5099-D
8
Based on the current site plan, if this is the case, the canopies could be located
within the 100-foot building setback. Canopies have not been requested
therefore will not be allowed. Staff occasionally supports variations to the
overlay but staff has typically not supported encroachments within the front
100-foot building setback of the overlay.
Staff is supportive of the request. Staff does not feel the variations from the
Highway 10 DOD to allow reduced lot sizes and a reduced landscape strip along
the perimeters will significantly impact the development or the area. The site is
adjacent to commercially zoned property to the east and west. The eastern
property has developed with a convenience store and the property to the west is
vacant C-3, General Commercial District zoned property. Staff does not feel the
reduction in the front landscape strip will be a significant impact. The AHTD right
of way extends into the site to cover an existing drainage structure. The area will
be maintained as a grassed landscaped area even though the applicant does not
own this area. Staff does not feel the creation of the lots with less than the
two-acre typical minimum lot size will significantly impact the development. The
developers intend to develop the site with smaller restaurant users, which
typically do not require large amounts of land area. The development intends to
serve a need that is currently not being met in this area of Highway 10. The lots
will be developed with an overall development plan to allow a unified
development of the lots. To staff’s knowledge there are no remaining
outstanding technical issues associated with the request. Staff feels the creation
of four lots and the construction of individual buildings on these lots is an
appropriate use for the site.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
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 request to allow advanced grading of the site
with the development of the first phase of construction.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 19, 2008)
Mr. Gene Pfeiffer was present representing the application. 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 of approval of the variance request from the Land Alteration Ordinance
to allow grading of additional phases with the development of the first phase.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5099-D
9
Mr. Pfeiffer stated he would hold his time to address any questions raised by the
opposition.
Ms. Alicia Finch addressed the Commission in opposition of the variances from the
Highway 10 Design Overlay District. She stated she was representing the Coalition of
West Little Rock Neighborhoods and Maywood Manor Neighborhood Association. She
stated there were a number of variances being requested, including the reduced
landscape strip, the two acre minimum lot size, the minimum of one building per two
acres, an encroachment into the front 40 foot landscape strip. She stated in the staff
write-up under the landscape comments there were a number of statements, which
contradicted the staff recommendation. She stated the comments indicated the
landscaping must comply with the Highway 10 DOD but the staff was recommending
approval of a plan that did not meet this requirement. She questioned how trees would
be preserved if the four acre site was allowed to develop with four buildings. She
questioned why four buildings. She stated with two lots and two buildings the
development would more closely comply with the overlay. She stated the
neighborhoods understood the concept of the nodes. She stated the Commission nor
the Board of Directors were adhering to the Highway 10 Overlay, nor the Future Land
Use plan. She stated the Highway 10 Overlay was created to preserve the scenic
beauty of the corridor and the Land Use Plan was created to allow smooth transitions
between the intense commercial uses stepping down to the residential uses. She
requested the Commission not disregard the overlay and deny the request.
Mr. Pfeiffer stated he had fought on the same side as Ms. Finch a number of times. He
stated he was always the first one to request the Commission and Board adhere to the
adopted plans. He stated once a site located near the Taylor Loop Road intersection
which was located in a Transitional zone was rezoned to allow the development of
restaurants his property lost its competitive edge. He stated he only wanted what was
fair. He stated with the allowances of variances and lesser lot sizes on other properties
his property was now being placed at a disadvantage. He stated he was only
requesting to be placed on a level playing field.
The Commission noted at an upcoming informal meeting the discussion of the Highway
10 Overlay would be a topic of discussion. Chairman Taylor questioned public works
staff as to the problems with the access easement and the potential for cut-through.
Staff stated they did not view this as a cut through. Staff stated Highway 300 and the
controlled intersection at the parkway would eliminate the desirability for cutting through.
Commissioner Yates stated he felt it important for the Commission to review the overlay
and its effectiveness. He stated based on staff’s review and analysis he was going to
support staff on the issue.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5099-D
10
Commissioner Pruitt questioned Transition zoned. Staff stated this was a land use
classification. Staff stated the classification allowed for residential and office uses with
low intensity development.
Commissioner Adcock stated it appeared to be the end of the Highway 10 Plan. She
stated the City had a plan but with every rezoning the plan was being busted. She
stated this was not fair to the residents, to the developers or to staff.
Commissioner Nunnley questioned why he should support the development.
Staff stated in most cases they had held the land use and in very few cases had staff
recommended a change to the Future Land Use Plan. Staff stated as far as the Overlay
they typically supported variations on a number of cases for reduced side and rear yard
landscape strips building setbacks and less than two acre lot sizes when there was
justification. Staff stated they felt this was a case to support the reduced lot sizes and
landscape strips. Staff stated the development was located in a commercial node with
commercially zoned and used property to the east and west. Staff stated the
development seamed to fit with the area and they felt the proposal was appropriate for
this location.
Chairman Taylor stated this development was different than some being reviewed. He
stated the site had frontage on two arterial streets. He stated the site was located in a
commercial node and buffering like uses was not as important as buffing of unlike uses
such as commercial to residential.
Commissioner Meyer stated he too felt tree preservation an important issue. He stated
he also felt increased density was not a bad concept.
Dana Carney, Planning staff, stated the agenda write-up would be modified to eliminate
the contradicting landscape comments. He stated the reasoning for the comments were
they were carried forward from the Subdivision Committee comments, which was a
technical review. He stated at the time of the agenda write-up the developers were
requesting variations from these ordinances standards and if the plan was approved
they would not be required to comply with the standards noted. Staff stated since they
were supporting the request they did not expect the site plan to comply with the
standards noted.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval of the variance request from the Land Alteration Ordinance. The variance was
approved by a vote of 7 ayes, 2 noes and 2 absent. A motion was made to approve the
rezoning request to include the modification to the agenda write-up as noted by staff.
The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
June 19, 2008
ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: LU08-08-01
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Central City Planning District
Location: 2410 South Battery Street
Request: Public Institutional to Mixed Use
Source: Kwendeche, AIA, Arymeus
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
A Land Use Plan amendment in the Central City Planning District from Public
Institutional to Mixed Use. Mixed Use represents a possible mixture of
residential, office and commercial uses. Prompted by this Land Use Amendment
request, the Planning Staff expanded the area of review to include the area
located at the southwest, southeast and northwest corners of Summit and
Roosevelt Road. With these changes, the whole corner would be changed from
Single Family to Mixed Use to recognize existing commercial zoning. It is
thought that the additional area would make the boundaries more logical.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The former Mitchell School is zoned R-4 and is vacant. The northwest,
southwest and southeast corners of Summit and Roosevelt Road are zoned C-3
General Commercial. The northwest corner is currently a single family house,
the southwest corner is currently vacant, and the southeast corner is Bernice’s
Beauty Shop. R-4 zoning mostly surrounds this amendment area for single and
two family residences. Immediately east of the Mitchell School site is zoned
Planned Residential Development for an in home daycare.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
Ordinance 19418 changed this amendment site from Single Family to Public
Institutional in 2005 to recognize the Mitchell School.
The application area is shown as Public Institutional on the Future Land Use
Plan. The expanded amendment area is currently shown as Single Family as is
most of the surrounding area. Three blocks west of this site is shown as Public
Institutional. The block immediately east of this site is shown as Public
Institutional also.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU08-08-01
2
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Roosevelt Road is shown as a Principal Arterial. The primary function of a
Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic generators
or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits should be limited
to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Roosevelt since it is a
Principal Arterial. Battery 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 shown in the immediate vicinity.
PARKS:
According to the Master Parks Plan, this area is within eight blocks of a park or
open space. There is a playground on the amendment site and Barton Park is
located a few blocks west of this site.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this
amendment.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little
Rock recognized neighborhood action plan.
ANALYSIS:
This application was originally for the Mitchell School site between Summit and
Battery Streets and north of Roosevelt. Staff expanded this amendment to
include the northwest, southwest and southeast corner of the intersection at
Summit and Roosevelt to recognize existing C-3 General Commercial zoning.
The expansion area is already either zoned or used for non-residential use. The
proposed reuse of the elementary school structure is proposed to include both
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU08-08-01
3
residential and non-residential uses. The applicant is proposing to re-use an
existing structure in a developed part of town. Similar re-uses have been
primarily residential with some non-residential uses. This type of development
would help to maintain the existing neighborhood character by keeping the
original structure.
This part of Roosevelt is surrounded by residential uses to the east and the
fairgrounds to the west. There is currently a small node of Commercial shown on
the plan at the intersection of Dr. Martin Luther King Drive and Roosevelt Road,
but this is already largely developed. There is no other Commercial shown on
the plan until the intersection of Booker and Roosevelt, which is approximately
one mile west of Dr. MLK Drive.
A change to Mixed Use would ensure the staff review of a Planned Development
if the new use would be non-residential in nature. Mixed Use would allow some
non-residential uses that would be appropriate for Roosevelt since it is an
arterial. The vacant lots in the expanded area of the amendment have been
vacant for many years. These and other lots along Roosevelt have the potential
for redevelopment. The amendment site is located in the center of Census Tract
11. There have only been nine new single family building permits issued in the
past six years. Many of the existing single family residences in this area are in
need of minor to major repairs and some have been abandoned. The
redevelopment of this major structure in the neighborhood into a mixed-use
development should help prevent further degradation of the neighborhood and
hopefully help to add more vitality, encouraging further redevelopment and
reinvestment in the neighborhood.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: South End
Coalition and South End Neighborhood Developers. Staff has received one
comment in opposition from an area resident.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is appropriate.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 19, 2008)
Walter Malone of Planning Staff indicated that due to a problem with how staff
sends notification of the Plan expansion only the school site could be considered
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU08-08-01
4
at this hearing. The former school is surrounded with residences to the north and
south. The site has been a school in a developed portion of Little Rock. Other
former school sites have been redeveloped as residential developments with
some office and at times a little commercial in other portions of the City. This
appears to be a successful model for redevelopment. The structure is an
important piece of the urban fabric of the neighborhood. Staff would like to
encourage the redevelopment of the structure. This change in designation with
the Planned Development protection appears to be the best future path of the
site. Mr. Malone turned the presentation over to Donna James for a review of the
related Planned Zoning District. (See item 6.1, Z-5442-C James Mitchell School
POD for a complete summary of the items). By a vote of 9 for, 0 against the item
was approved.
June 19, 2008
ITEM NO.: 6.1 FILE NO.: Z-5442-C
NAME: James Mitchell School Short-form POD
LOCATION: Located at 2410 South Battery Street
DEVELOPER:
Mitchell Elementary LLC
Dr. George T. Blevins, Jr.
1704 West 19th Street
Little Rock, AR 72202
SURVEYOR:
Global Surveying Consultants, Inc.
217 West 2nd Street, Suite 100
Little Rock, AR 72201
ARCHITECT:
Kwendeche, AIA
2124 Rice Street
Little Rock, AR 72202
AREA: 2.502 + acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 zoning lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-4, Two-family District
ALLOWED USES: Single-family and Two-family residences
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: Office and Commercial uses
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT’S STATEMENT:
The overall property located at 2410 S. Battery Street is divided into three basic
areas: 1) the Main Building – the original structure built in 1908 with
approximately 35,000 square feet including an attached addition, called the
Annex; 2) a one story classroom addition with approximately 3,800 square feet;
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5442-C
2
and 3) a single detached classroom building, built in 1970s with approximately
1,000 square feet all totaling approximately 39,800 square feet.
The initial phase of the overall development involves only a portion of the Annex
at the Basement level in the Main Building and the single detached classroom
building, totaling an approximate floor area of 3,300 square feet. The initial use
of the property will be a warehouse/office use. All other areas within the site are
held for future development and uses. The single detached building containing
1,000 square feet will be used for office space and restrooms facilities.
The annex portion of the property will be used as warehouse space for storage of
merchandise for an internet distribution business. No walk-in customers or
customer parking will be required because this is an internet business. All sales
transactions will take place electronically. Metal shelves will be assembled and
arranged in rows to hold the boxed, non-flammable, non-perishable
merchandise. Neither air-conditioning nor heating will be necessary to house the
items stored. The existing loading dock will be used for delivery and pick up
services for shipping merchandise. The owner’s presence in the building will
allow insurance and support the building financially because the internet
business will lease the space.
There will not be any employees stationed at this location other than the owners.
The only on-site functions will be to deliver items, stock shelves, label items for
shipping and pick up by shipping carrier. This will allow for minimal occupancy.
The owner of the business will be present in the premises from 12 noon to 6 pm
daily, Monday through Friday, or as needed for scheduled deliveries and pickups
of merchandise.
The initial phase of the development currently has adequate electric power for
the specific needs of the temporary warehouse space. Overall, all of the
buildings on the property have been surveyed and abated of hazardous materials
(asbestos and mold) by the previous owner.
The potential future development activities include pre-K-12 educational/day care
– supplemental educational services, Saturday academy, summer program,
pre-K program and/or day care, Meeting space for the Wright Avenue
Neighborhood association, internet retail, corporate office space,
retail/commercial office – leasing space to retail businesses, bank, credit union,
professional medical, legal and/or retail estate, institutional/government, health
services and/or workforce services and/or government offices, multi-family
residential – 1, 2, 3 bedroom loft apartments, recreation – fitness center and/or
police athletic league, dance studio/recording studio, meeting/event rental space
– conference/ meetings/ workshop/ wedding receptions and/or parties,
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5442-C
3
community – Wright Avenue Neighborhood Association office and event space,
online bill pay center, eating place inside – café, cafeteria and/or restaurant.
The existing paved parking lots (approx. 53 spaces) on the west side of the
property will be utilized for the above mentioned future development uses for the
site and the existing loading dock area on the east will be removed and replaced
with a paved lot for the handicap parking requirements of the future development.
At the commencement of subsequent phases for future development, the overall
site will be re-landscaped. Finally the owning company (the applicant) is
currently preparing the Determination of Eligibility Application to obtain listing of
this Charles Thompson designed building on the National Register of Historic
Places.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a former elementary school campus. The area is predominately
residential with a scattering of commercial and office uses located along
Roosevelt Road. To the east is a property zoned PCD which was approved for a
daycare facility. To the west along Roosevelt Road is a property zoned C-3,
General Commercial District which is presently vacant.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area
residents and 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 Southend Neighborhood Developers Association, Southend Coalition and
Wright Avenue Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Roosevelt Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial
with special design criteria. Dedication of right-of-way to 35 feet from
centerline will be required.
2. Right-of-way should be dedicated on entire length of South Battery Street to
60 feet from centerline.
3. A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at all intersections.
4. With future development, repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk
that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5442-C
4
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this property.
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 meters are required.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #14, the Rosedale Route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Central City Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Public Institutional for this property. The applicant has
applied for a rezoning from R-4, Two-family District to Planned Commercial
Development.
A change to the Land Use Plan from Public Institutional to Mixed Use is a
separate item on this agenda (LU08-08-01).
Master Street Plan: Roosevelt Road is shown as a Principal Arterial. The
primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect
major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and
exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on
Roosevelt Road since it is a Principal Arterial. Battery 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 shown in the immediate vicinity.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5442-C
5
Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is not covered by a City of Little Rock
Neighborhood Action Plan.
Landscape:
1. The site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
2. With future development including, renovations and expansions, an automatic
irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
3. 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.
4. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing
trees as feasible on this site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance
requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or
larger.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (May 29, 2008)
The applicant was present. Staff presented an overview of the proposed
development stating there were few outstanding technical issues associated with
the request. Staff stated the development included immediate and potential
future uses for the reuse of the Mitchell School. Staff questioned the length of
time proposed for the internet office/warehouse use and the time frame bringing
on-line the future uses. Staff also requested the site plan indicate the location of
the dumpster facilities and if the hours of service would be limited to daylight
hours.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated right of way dedications
would be required on the abutting streets per the Master Street Plan. Staff also
stated a radial dedication would be required at the intersections.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated any future development
and on-site paving would required additional landscaping to be installed.
Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and
agencies. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then
forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5442-C
6
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan indicating the location of the
proposed dumpster facilities. The applicant has indicated radial dedications and
right of way dedications will be provided per the Public Works comments and
conditions.
The applicant is seeking approval of a phased redevelopment plan for the former
elementary school. The initial phase will only occupy a small portion of the entire
building square footage for a total of 3,000 square feet. The initial use of the
property is for an office/warehouse use and is proposed as the sole use for 18 to
24 months. The applicant has indicated within the initial phase additional uses
may be added including the Pre-K-12 educational/day care – supplemental
educational services, the Saturday Academy, the Summer Program and the
Pre-K program and/or day care.
The time frame for adding the public/quasi-public uses to the site has not been
determined. The applicant has indicated the site will be offered as meeting
space for the Wright Avenue Neighborhood Association, institutional or
government, health services and/or workforce services, government office space,
and as community space for the Wright Avenue Neighborhood Association to
house an office and special event center.
The development is proposed with future uses to include retail, office and
residential uses. The development will lease space to retail businesses, bank,
credit union, professional medical, legal and/or retail estate commercial and
office users. The buildings may also be renovated to include a fitness center,
dance studio and/or recording studio. Neighborhood services may include an
online bill pay center. An eating place inside, café, cafeteria and/or restaurant is
being proposed as an allowable future use of the site. The request includes the
ability to rent space within the building for meetings, events, wedding receptions
and/or parties. The hours of operation from the non-residential future uses will
be from 8 am to midnight daily. The applicant has also indicated multi-family as
a potential future use of the site. Multi-family residential units containing 1, 2 or
3 bedroom loft apartments.
The initial use of the property is an internet office use and a warehouse with no
walk-in customers. All sales transactions will take place electronically. The
modifications to the site will include the addition of metal shelving to hold the
boxed, non-flammable, non-perishable merchandise. Neither air-conditioning nor
heating will be necessary to house the items stored. The existing loading dock
will be used for delivery and pick up services for shipping merchandise.
There will not be any employees other than the owners of the internet business
located at this site. The hours of operation will be from 12 noon to 6 pm daily,
Monday through Friday, or as needed for scheduled deliveries and pickups of
merchandise.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5442-C
7
The existing paved parking lots (approx. 53 spaces) on the west side of the
property will be utilized for the future development uses for the site and the
existing loading dock area on the east will be removed and replaced with a paved
lot for the handicap parking requirements of the future development. At the
commencement of subsequent phases for future development, the overall site
will be re-landscaped per the typical ordinance standards.
Staff is supportive of the reuse of the property with the proposed internet
office/warehouse use. Staff does not feel the use of the buildings as proposed
and the limited activity with no employees other than the owners will significantly
impact the area. Staff is also supportive of allowing the site to be used by the
indicated public/quasi-public uses. The site has historically been used as a
public type use and staff feels the proposed public/quasi-public uses will continue
to instill the property into the neighborhood.
Staff has concerns with some of the proposed uses such as the multi-family,
office and commercial uses without the total number of units or the total square
footage designated for the proposed use being established. The applicant is not
to the point of establishing an overall redevelopment plan for the site and is not
ready to commit to locations and square footages for the proposed uses. The
total square footage proposed for the uses is critical to determine the total
number of parking spaces required for the use. Staff feels if and when the
developer has secured a redevelopment plan to include the multi-family, office
and commercial uses, an amendment to the PCD shall be reviewed to determine
the appropriateness of the potential use on the site and the availability of parking
required for the proposed use.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff is not supportive of the request as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 19, 2008)
Dr. Blevins was present represent the request. There were registered objectors
present. Staff presented the item stating they were now supportive of the request. Staff
stated the applicant had provided staff with a letter indicating the future uses of the site
would be reviewed by the City and the Neighborhood Association to determine
appropriateness prior to the use locating on the site. Staff stated the Neighborhood
Association and Dr. Blevins had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding, which
limited the uses and activities on the site. Staff stated this Memorandum of
Understanding would be incorporated into the final ordinance presented to the Board of
Directors for adoption.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5442-C
8
Dr. Blevins stated he had worked with the school district for 10 years trying to keep the
school. He stated the school chose not to stay and he tried to secure the building for
community activities. He stated funding was not in place so he bought the building. He
stated the building would be used for profit but he would allow some neighborhood
activities to take place on the site. He stated the initial business was a for profit internet
office and warehouse. He stated the use would be limited to 3,000 square feet. He
stated there would be no employees of the business other than his wife and himself. He
stated deliveries would be made four to five times per year. He stated shipments would
be made once per day five days per week. Dr. Blevins stated there was a
memorandum of understanding with the neighborhood association. He stated the
agreement limited the uses and activities, which could take place on the site. He stated
the Neighborhood Association could utilize the site for meetings and events. He stated
the venture was a for profit business but the neighborhood association would share in a
percentage of the revenues received from the rentals and leases.
Ms. Gail Burnett addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated the area did not
need a warehouse. She stated the neighborhood needed a community center for the
youth in the area or some use that would benefit the neighborhood.
Ms. Tiffany Burnett addressed the Commission in opposition to the request. She stated
the neighborhood did not need a warehouse. She stated the neighborhood had a
number of children and older persons. She stated the neighborhood needed a facility to
offer activities for the youth and a meeting place for the elderly.
Ms. Evelyn Coleman addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated a
warehouse would bring unwanted traffic into the neighborhood. She stated with traffic
came crime and drugs. She stated the neighborhood was happy with Mitchell School
and did not want to lose the school. She stated the school was not big enough to hold
all the uses being proposed. She stated the school was surrounded by the
neighborhood and with the placement of the warehouse on the site and delivery trucks
accessing the building this would not benefit the neighborhood.
Ms. Louis Cook addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated the neighborhood
did not need a credit union. She stated the uses being proposed would generate traffic
to the area, which already had a great deal of traffic. She stated the neighborhood did
not need a warehouse.
Ms. Marsha Dunnki addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated the area had
a lot of traffic and the addition of the warehouse would add to the existing traffic. She
stated there was a better use for the property than a warehouse such as a community
center for the children and the elderly. She stated she did not think the warehouse
would benefit the community.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5442-C
9
Ms. Valerie Gooden addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated Mitchell
School was a beautiful place. She stated the warehouse would bring unwanted traffic
into the neighborhood. She stated the development was proposed as residential or a
police substation. She stated the owner should determine the use of the property
before requesting a change in zoning.
Ms. Rose Higgs addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated she lived two
blocks from the school and felt the use of the school should be something that benefited
the entire neighborhood. She stated traffic was a concern and would be felt by the
entire neighborhood.
Mr. Albert James, Sr. addressed the Commission in opposition. He stated his concern
with the rezoning of the school for a business, which would then create other business
uses in the area. He stated with business uses the traffic would increase. He stated if
rezoned it should be rezoned to allow activities for children and a place to visit and
enjoy for the elderly.
Ms. Emogene James addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated if the
development benefited the neighborhood she was in support. She stated she did not
feel the current request was a benefit to the neighborhood. She stated the site would
benefit the neighborhood if the site was offered to Little Rock Police Department for a
police substation or as a community center for the youth. She stated the memorandum
of agreement indicated a drug and alcohol free environment. She questioned who
would enforce these conditions.
Mr. Larry Johnson stated he was opposed.
Ms. Dorothy Pearson addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated she was in
favor of any improvements to the neighborhood but if the development was going to
case more anxiety or more traffic to the area she was opposed.
Ms. Tracey Turner addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated the Wright
Avenue Neighborhood Association did not represent her views. She stated there were
400 residents of the area and 40 members of the associations. She stated only
20 persons regularly attended the meetings. She stated notices were mailed to
property owners within 200 feet. She stated the only reason most of the persons were
present this evening was because of a flyer she created and pass out door to door. She
stated the area contained a number of grandparents raising their grandchildren. She
stated the residents had not been given information to make an informed decision of
support of denial. She stated the PCD zoning implied big business. She stated there
were other areas of interest in the neighborhood that would be considered for rezoning
if this site was successful. She stated crime, theft and public intoxication were all spill
over from big business. She stated she was opposed to the request without more
information.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5442-C
10
Mr. Savoy Wiley addressed the Commission in opposition. He stated he did not have
enough information to make an informed decision as to the benefits of the development
to the neighborhood. He stated he also felt the loss of the school. He stated school
helped sustain a neighborhood. He stated if the school had to be closed because of
asbestos and mold how could the building be used for residential or a community
center.
Dr. Blevins addressed the Commission. He stated the school district removed all the
mold and asbestos prior to the sale of the school. He stated the Wright Avenue
Neighborhood Association published a newsletter four to six times per year to keep
residents informed. He stated his reuse plan of the school had been a topic of
discussion at the neighborhood association meetings and if residents came to the
meeting they would be informed. He stated he had identified a number of uses as
potential reuses of the building. He stated once a redevelopment plan was secured he
would then know the square footages for use. He stated a commitment of 80 percent
residential and 20 percent commercial had been established. He stated the warehouse
was only a small portion of the overall development. He stated there would be little
traffic generated from the office warehouse business. He stated the development was a
for profit business. He stated he could not turn the building over as a community center
for the youth without generating an income. He stated the neighborhood association
would benefit from the for profit business and the business had to generate an income
to be viable. He stated if the residents attended the neighborhood association meetings
they would have been informed of the proposed uses and reuse of the building.
Director Erma Hendrix addressed the Commission. She stated the 200-foot notification
was the law and not something Dr. Blevins came up with. She stated the notification
was governed by the City and the Commission and not the applicant. She stated there
were a number of misunderstandings associated with the request. She stated the reuse
of the building would be for the benefit of the neighborhood.
The Minister of Gospel Temple Church located across from the site addressed the
Commission in support of the request. He stated he was very concerned with the
neighborhood and the activities planned for the school. He stated he felt the
redevelopment plan was good for the neighborhood and the church.
Commissioner Adcock questioned what uses would be allowed in the initial approval.
Staff stated the office warehouse business, the public/quasi-public uses and any
non-profit that chose to office at the site. Staff stated the commercial and residential
uses would require review by the Commission and Board of Directors prior to being
allowed. Commissioner Adcock questioned if a ½ way house of rehab center would be
allowed. Staff stated as an office use but not with residential housing.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5442-C
11
Commissioner Nunnley stated he felt the development would stabilize the neighborhood
and promote the neighborhood. He stated there needed to be an understanding of the
proposed reuse of the building by the residents. He suggested Dr. Blevins meet with
the residents to inform them of the proposal.
Commissioner Pruitt stated she was in support of the request. She stated Dr. Blevins
had shown her around the site and she felt he would do the same for anyone who
wanted a tour of the facilities and to review his plans for redevelopment.
Commissioner Yates stated he felt the neighborhood and Dr. Blevins were trying to
achieve the same goal. He stated a number of the speakers had indicated they wanted
what was good for the neighborhood and Dr. Blevins had indicated the same. He
stated he felt the reuse with the for profit and the non-profit activities was a good
integration into the neighborhood.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
June 19, 2008
ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: Z-8042-B
NAME: Lot 10 Northwest Territory Revised Short-form PCD
LOCATION: Located on the Northeast corner of Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway
DEVELOPER:
Eugene Pfeifer, III
16623 Cantrell Road, Suite 2A
Little Rock, AR 72223
ENGINEER:
White Daters and Associates
24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 1.6 + acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: PCD
ALLOWED USES: C-3, General Commercial Uses
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD
PROPOSED USE: C-3, General Commercial Uses, A variation of the Highway 10
Design Overlay District to allow a reduced landscape strip along the northern perimeter
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
On December 4, 2007, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No.
19,884 establishing Lot 10 Northwest Territory Short-form PCD.
The approval allowed the rezoning of this site from C-3, General Commercial District to
PCD for future development of the site inconsistent with the Highway 10 Design Overlay
District. The site plan approved reduced the eastern landscape strip from the typically
required 25-feet to 9-feet. The property adjacent is an Entergy Substation, which has
existed for a number of years.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8042-B
2
A separate ordinance, Ordinance No. 19,883, approved a deferral request for the
construction of Chenal Parkway (approximately 4,150 feet of boundary street
improvements) and Highway 10 (approximately 1,700 feet of boundary street
improvements) required by the Master Street Plan for five (5) years, until a future phase
of development or until adjacent property was developed whichever occurs first for the
Northwest Territory Addition located near the intersection of Chenal Parkway and
Highway 10.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The developer is now proposing to revise the previously approved PCD to allow
a reduced landscape strip along the northern perimeter adjacent to the existing
mini-warehouse development. The request submitted proposes a reduction in
the Highway 10 DOD typically required 25-foot perimeter landscape strip to nine
feet along the northern perimeter. A reduction to nine feet was previously
approved along the eastern perimeter as was a waiver of the required screening
on that perimeter.
The site plan indicates the construction of a 14,460 square foot building rather
than the 10,680 square foot building previously approved. According to the
applicant, with the construction of Chenal Parkway in 1990 and approval of the
overlay district, this property has gotten “squeezed” in width and depth to the
point it has become difficult to develop. Several users have studied the property
over the past few years and discovered that the width and depth hinders the
development due to the 25-foot landscape buffer required by the Highway 10
DOD.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The properties in the area are principally commercial in use and zoning. The
PCD zoned property to the west contains a convenience store with a single bay
car wash. A mini warehouse development is adjacent to the north. A Walmart
Store is located to the south. The site is adjacent to R-2 zoned property to the
east but that property is occupied by a utility substation, not a residence.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area
property owner. 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, the DuQuesne Place Property
Owners Association and the Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association were
notified of the Public Hearing.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8042-B
3
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. With site development, provide the design of street conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to Cantrell Road
and Chenal Parkway including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned
development. A deferral of street improvements Ordinance # 19,833 was
approved by the Board of Directors which deferred approximately
1250 linear feet of widening of one and one half lanes, curb and gutter,
sidewalks, drainage, streetlights, on the east side of Chenal Parkway
between the north property line of Lot 2 and the north property line of Lot 10
until Lot 10 develops.
2. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from
AHTD, District VI.
3. The Cantrell Road driveway and median radiuses should be modified to
keep vehicles from entering from the wrong side and making left turns into
the development.
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.
5. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property.
6. The arrows into the driveway from Cantrell Road should be changed.
7. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with
Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. Access
ramps should be provided to cross Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road.
8. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water
permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the
start of construction.
9. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start
of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way
from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner).
10. Street Improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic
Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction.
11. Coordinate design of traffic signal upgrade with proposed street
improvements. Plans to be forwarded to Traffic Engineering for approval.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8042-B
4
12. Streetlights are required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock Code of
Ordinances. 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.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this property. Easement required to be platted
for existing sewer main. Contact Little Rock Wastewater for additional
information.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: Waterline easement (Inst No. 98-052114) should be
shown. All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request
for water service must be met. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding the
size and location of the water meter. 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).
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department for additional information.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #25, the Highway 10 Express
Route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Pinnacle Planning District. The
Land Use Plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant has applied
for a revision to a previously approved Planned Commercial Development to
allow a reduction in the typically required landscape strip along the rear of the
site adjacent to the existing mini-warehouse development.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8042-B
5
Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is a Principal Arterial. The primary function of
a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic
generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits should
be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Cantrell Road
since it is a Principal Arterial. Chenal Parkway 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. These
streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street
improvements for entrances and exits to the site.
Bicycle Plan: A Class II is shown along Cantrell Road. A Class II bikeway is
located on the street as either a five foot shoulder or six foot marked bike lane.
Additional paving and right of way may be required. A Class III is shown along
Chenal Parkway. 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.
Landscape:
1. The site plan must comply with the City’s landscape ordinance.
2. Building landscaping is required. Approval from the City Beautiful Commission
must be obtained prior to the issuance of a building permit for the elimination of
building landscaping.
3. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
4. 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.
5. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing
trees as feasible on this site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance
requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or
larger.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (May 29, 2008)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff presented an
overview of the development stating there were few outstanding technical issues
associated with the request. Staff stated two variations from the Highway 10
DOD were being requested. Staff stated the landscape strip along the northern
perimeter was being reduced from 25-feet to nine feet and the landscape strip
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8042-B
6
along the east property line was also being reduced from 25-feet to nine feet.
Staff stated the eastern perimeter landscape strip was previously approved at
nine feet. Staff stated all site lighting was to be low level and directional, directed
downward and into the site.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a grading permit would be
required prior to any clearing of the site. Staff also stated the Cantrell Road
driveway and median radius should be modified to keep vehicles from entering
from the wrong side and making left turns into the development. Staff stated the
arrows into the drives from Cantrell Road should be changed. Staff stated
streetlights would be required prior to final platting or the issuance of the
certificate of occupancy.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the required street buffer
along Chenal Parkway per the DOD was seven feet but staff stated to comply
with the landscape ordinance requirements a nine foot minimum buffer was
required. Staff stated building landscaping would be required or a variance from
City Beautiful Commission would be required. Staff also stated a minimum of
eight percent of the paved area was required to be landscaped with interior
islands.
Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and
agencies. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then
forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the May 29, 2008, Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised plan
indicates the driveway and median radius on Cantrell Road in a configuration as
to keep vehicles from entering from the wrong side and making left turns into the
development and provided the arrows into the drives from Cantrell Road as
suggested by staff.
A ground mounted sign located along Cantrell Road and a second sign located
along Chenal Parkway are being proposed. The signage proposed will not
exceed the Overlay standards for the abutting roadway or six feet in height and
seventy-two square feet in area. Building signage is proposed consistent with
signage allowed in office zones or a maximum of ten percent of the façade area.
The building has been indicated consistent with the Highway 10 Design Overlay
standards with regard to building setback. The front setback is proposed in
excess of the 100-foot building setback as established by the Overlay. The side
yard building setback exceeds the 30-foot typical setback and the rear yard
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8042-B
7
setback exceeds the 40-foot typical setback. The site plan does not comply with
the northern and eastern perimeter landscaped strips. The previous approval
allowed the eastern landscape strip to be reduced to nine feet. The current
request would allow the northern landscape strip to be reduced to nine feet as
well. The Overlay typically requires the placement of a 25-foot landscape strip
along these perimeters. Staff is supportive of this request. The northern
perimeter abuts a mini-warehouse development and there is a grade change
between the mini-warehouse development and the applicant’s site with the
applicant’s site being a few feet below the mini-warehouse development. Staff
continues to support the reduced landscape strip request along the eastern
perimeter due to this area being located adjacent to a utility substation.
The previous approval allowed a waiver of the required screening along the
eastern perimeter adjacent to the utility substation. Based on the abutting use
staff is supportive of the elimination of the required screening in this area.
A building totaling 14,460 square feet and 48 on-site parking spaces is proposed.
The ordinance would typically require the placement of 48 spaces for a
commercial use. The proposed parking is adequate to meet the typical minimum
parking requirement.
The site plan indicates the placement of a dumpster in the rear of the building.
The dumpster will be screened per typical minimum ordinance requirements.
The hours of service of the dumpster will be limited to 6 am to 10 pm daily.
The days and hours of operation are seven days per week 24-hours per day.
The site is proposed with C-3, General Commercial District uses which would
allow a 24-hour pharmacy to locate on the site. A drive through window has
been indicated on the site plan to accommodate such a use.
The request includes the continued deferral of the required street improvements
to Chenal Parkway as were approved in Ordinance No. 19,883 adopted by the
Little Rock Board of Directors on December 4, 2007. The street improvements
adjacent to this lot will be completed to Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road with
the development of this site.
Staff is supportive of the request. Although, there is a variation to the Highway
10 Design Overlay District to allow a reduced landscape strip along the eastern
and northern perimeters and the continued waiver of the required screening
along the eastern perimeter, staff does not feel this will negatively impact the
abutting property or this development. As stated, the eastern abutting use is a
utility substation, and the northern abutting use is a mini-warehouse
development. The eastern perimeter is the only perimeter required screening
and the burden is typically placed on the more intense use or in this case the
utility substation. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding technical issues
associated with the request.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8042-B
8
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
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: (JUNE 19, 2008)
The applicant was present. There was a 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 noted landscaping comments would be modified to eliminate any
contradictions as noted in Item 5 (Z-5099-D).
Mr. Gene Pfeiffer was present representing the application. He stated he would hold his
time to address concerns raised by the opposition.
Ms. Alicia Finch addressed the Commission in opposition of the request related to the
variances from the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. Ms. Finch stated her comments
were similar to the comments made on Item 5. She stated the neighborhood was well
aware the location was a major node. She stated this should not allow the Commission
and Board of Directors to ignore the DOD requirements. She stated time after time the
DOD had been tossed out for development and there were inconsistencies with how the
plan was implemented. She stated a later item on the agenda staff was opposed to and
questioned the difference. She stated her neighborhood was located adjacent to a
welding shop. She questioned if buffers would be important in her area once the site
was allowed to redevelop. She stated the neighborhood did not need another Walgreen
Drug Store.
Mr. Joe White addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant. He stated the site
was limited due to the location of Chenal Parkway. He stated if the developer had know
at the time Chenal was being located the impact the road would have on the site the
road more than likely been moved to the west to allow an adequate lot area. He stated
the request was to allow reduced landscape strips along the east and west of the site.
He stated the eastern strip was previously approved. He stated the northern strip was
located adjacent to mini-warehouse, which was a more intense use than being
proposed on the site.
Commissioner Yates stated he echoed his concern from the previous discussion on
Item 5. He stated he was concerned with the implementation of the Highway 10
Overlay. He stated he once again was deferring to staff’s analysis and determination of
appropriateness of the item.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8042-B
9
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for
approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
June 19, 2008
ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: Z-8262-A
NAME: Rowan Village Revised Long-form PCD
LOCATION: Located at the current terminus of Aldersgate Road and East of
Shackleford Road, near the intersection of Old Shackleford Road
DEVELOPER:
Rowan Development LLC
641 Old Hickory Boulevard, #111
Brentwood, TN 37027
ENGINEER:
Crafton, Tull, Sparks
10825 Financial Center Parkway
Little Rock, AR 72211
AREA: 22 + acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 41 FT. NEW STREET: 1,563 LF
CURRENT ZONING: PCD
ALLOWED USES: Single-family, Multi-family, Office and Commercial
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD
PROPOSED USE: Single-family, Multi-family, Office and Commercial
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance
to allow grading of portions of the site with the construction of the first phase.
BACKGROUND:
On November 8, 2007, the Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed a request for the
rezoning of this site from MF-12 to PCD. The Board of Directors approved the rezoning
request at their December 4, 2007, public hearing by the adoption of Ordinance No.
19,867.
The approval rezoned a 22-acre tract of land for a mixed use development. The
development was proposed in three phases. The first phase consisted of five lots of
commercial development located along Shackleford Road. The Phase II portion of the
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8262-A
2
development consisted of residential townhouse units and the third phase indicated
30 lots for detached single-family residences.
The uses approved for the commercial lots were those allowed in C-3, General
Commercial District excluding the following listed uses:
Bar, lounge or tavern (except as part of a restaurant or hotel use), Cabinet or woodwork
shop, College dormitory, College fraternity or sorority, 24-hour community welfare or
health center, Feed store, Group care facility, Lodge or fraternal organization, Mortuary
or funeral home, Pawnshop, Private club with dining or bar service, Recycling facility,
automated, Taxidermist, Ambulance service post, Bus station and terminal,
Crematorium, Upholstery shop, furniture, Upholstery shop, auto, Appliance repair,
excepting as part of a larger use, Auto glass or muffler shop, excepting as part of a
larger use, Beverage store, excepting on primarily marketing wine and/or fine liquor,
Parking, commercial lot or garage, Drive-in theater. Auto parts, sales with limited motor
vehicle parts installation, Auto repair, Service/gas station, Convenience store or retail or
wholesale fuel outlet.
The use of outdoor speakers or sound amplification systems was prohibited on the
property except for one-half hour before and after the owner’s or occupant’s hours of
being open to the general public. The operation of any such speaker and system was
limited to those that did not emit sound that was plainly audible from Camp Aldersgate
or a distance of 200 feet or more from the source of such sound.
The Phase II townhouses were attached structures three stories in height with garages.
The Phase III single-family residences were on lots which average 50-feet in width by
100-feet in depth with an alley system for rear loading garages. Buffers of existing and
enhanced vegetation would be preserved between the development and Camp
Aldersgate as well as adjacent to the skilled nursing facility to the east.
As a part of the application process the City’s Future Land Use Plan (LU07-11-03) was
amended and the alignment for Aldersgate Road was relocated to the north through the
Camp Aldersgate property.
The applicant proposed to dedicate a 60-foot right of way for the purpose of
constructing and dedicating to the City a 36-foot wide collector street off of Shackleford
Road which would loop through the property and extend east to provide access to the
single-family subdivision. The northernmost connection with Shackleford Road would
align with the controlled intersection being built as part of the Shackleford Crossing
Shopping Center development. The southern connection would align with Old
Shackleford Road.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8262-A
3
The single-family subdivision was served by private streets. An emergency access
route from the end of Aldersgate Road to the new 60-foot public street would also be
provided. The terminus of Aldersgate Road which currently dead ends at a barricade
would be constructed to a cul-de-sac by the applicant.
A single development sign was proposed on Shackleford Road. The sign would be a
pylon sign with an overall dimension of 8-feet in width by 18-feet in height.
As part of the approval Camp Aldersgate and the Women’s Division of the United
Methodist Church agreed to support the proposed Planned Commercial Development of
the property subject to the following requirements, in addition to any other requirements
imposed by current local, state and federal law and subject to their approval of the
owner’s landscape plan for the property to be submitted to the City at a later date:
1. Lighting and signage.
No freestanding (lighted or unlighted) pole signs in excess of 20-feet will
be permitted on the property. The property’s parking lot lights shall not
exceed 30 feet in height or be directed towards adjoining properties or
roadways. The property’s parking lot lights shall be full cut off, metal
halide fixtures that utilize 400 watt or less horizontal bulbs with flat lenses
to control glare and over spill of lighting. No downward lighting fixtures
shall be permitted on the property except those specifically designed to
light parking areas, service drives, sidewalks, and areas necessary for the
protection of persons or property, and none shall exceed, the height or
foot-candle specifications of the property’s parking lot lights.
Signage for the remaining portions of the property shall comply with
Section 36-346(f) and 36-347 of the Little Rock Code as currently enacted.
The property’s northern most out parcel shall contain no building mounted
signage facing north or northeast.
2. Use Restrictions.
Owner agrees to place certain restrictions on the property prohibiting
certain uses thereon, with said use restrictions being attached as
Attachment “A”. This requirement shall also apply if owner elected to self
develop any of the property.
3. Security Fencing.
So as to ensure continued perimeter security and buffering, the owner
agrees to install and maintain a black chain-link security fence (the
“Fence”) at least 8 feet in height along the dividing line between the
property and Camp Aldersgate’s property.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8262-A
4
4. Noise Pollution.
Use of outdoor speakers or sound amplification systems shall be strictly
prohibited on the property except for ½ hour before and after the user’s
hours of being open to the general public. The operation of any such
speaker or sound amplification system is limited to those that do not emit
sound that is plainly audible from the dividing line between the property
and Camp Aldersgate’s property.
5. Master Street Plan Amendments.
Owner is aware Camp Aldersgate and others may at some future time
attempt to remove Aldersgate Road as a designated collector street from
the City of Little Rock’s Master Street Plan or to reclassify Aldersgate
Road to a street with a lesser design capacity. Owner has no objection to
any attempt to remove Aldersgate Road as a designated collector street
from the City of Little Rock’s Master Street Plan or to any attempt to
reclassify Aldersgate Road to a street with a lesser design capacity.
6. Legal Matters and Continuing Cooperation.
As to the items in enumerated paragraphs One (1), two (2), and four (4)
above, owner agrees to provide a declaration of restrictive covenants
consistent with the terms of this letter and in a form acceptable to Camp
Aldersgate that will be part of the land for future uses and will file said
declaration as part of the public record prior to its request for a Certificate
of Occupancy for any building on the property. Approval of said
declaration shall not be unreasonably withheld.
Owner covenants that in connection with Camp Aldersgate’s Executive
Director of any change in status of development at the property to the
extent that such development touches or impacts Camp Aldersgate.
Owner shall provide reasonable prior notice of the commencement of
excavation be given to the Executive Director in order that any necessary
on-site preparations be made at Camp Aldersgate.
The provisions of this letter shall be incorporated into (1) the final plan of
development and the zoning ordinance amendments approved by the City
of Little Rock and (2) any site plans or building plans to be approved by
the City of Little Rock for any parcel within the property.
The enumerated restrictions above shall automatically terminate in the event
either Camp Aldersgate is no longer owner by the Women’s Division of the
United Methodist Church or other 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation or its property
is no longer used for charitable purposes.
Signed by the Executive Director of Camp Aldersgate and a representative of the
Women’s Division of the United Methodist Church.”
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8262-A
5
Attachment “A”
Excluded Uses from Property
a. Bar, lounge or tavern
b. Cabinet and woodwork shop
c. College dormitory
d. College fraternity or sorority
e. 24 hour community welfare or health center
f. Feed store
g. Group care facility
h. Lodge or fraternal organization
i. Mortuary or funeral home
j. Pawnshop
k. Private club with dining or bar service
l. Recycling facility, automated
m. Taxidermist
n. Ambulance service post
o. Auto parts sales or new or used auto sales
p. Bus station and terminal
q. Crematorium
r. Upholstery shop, furniture
s. Upholstery shop, auto
t. Appliance repair, excepting as part of a larger use
u. Auto glass or muffler shop, excepting as part of a larger use
v. Beverage or liquor store
w. Parking, commercial lot or garage
x. Service/gas station, convenience store, or retail or wholesale fuel outlet
y. Drive-in theater
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT”S STATEMENT:
The developers are now requesting the following amendments and clarification to
the previously approved PCD:
1. The original Lot 2 has been split into 2 separate lots as shown on the revised
plans. The proposed Lot 2 will contain of a 2-story structure with
15,000 square feet total. The second floor will be at parking lot grade that
faces Shackleford and the first floor will be at parking lot grade that faces east
toward the creek. Lot 1 and Lot 3 will comply with the building square footage
allowed by C-2, General Commercial Zoning District. The lots will also
comply with the City’s minimum landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements. The maximum building height proposed is 27-feet as approved
in the original PCD.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8262-A
6
2. The original Lots 4 and 5 have been combined to make up a single Lot 5.
The proposed Lot 5 will contain of a three (3) story structure with
45,000 square feet. All landscaping buffers will be as were originally
approved.
3. The original Lot 3 will now be called out as Lot 4 and is proposed as a mixed
use building. The building is proposed four stories with the first floor being a
parking garage, the second floor containing office and retail and the third and
fourth being town homes. The building footprint and overall layout have
remained the same.
4. In order to build the streets and lots along Shackleford Road in Phase I,
advanced grading in portions of Phase II and Phase III will be required. The
request includes a variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow
grading of future phases with the initial development.
The overall residential density, allowed uses, agreements, conditions and landscape
buffers that were approved with the original PCD will remain the same.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a wooded site located on the east side of Shackleford Road near the
intersection with Old Shackleford Road. To the east of the site is Good Shepard
Residential facilities with the skilled care nursing facility located along the eastern
boundary of the site. To the west, across Shackleford Road, a 100-acre site is
being developed as a shopping center development with office uses located
along the southern boundary of the development. To the south of the site is
vacant office zoned property and Our Way residential development. North of the
site is Camp Aldersgate.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area property owners.
All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, all residents, who could be
identified, located within 300 feet of the site and the John Barrow Neighborhood
Association were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Shackleford 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. Provide street names for the proposed public and private streets. For
additional information, contact David Hathcock at 371-4808.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8262-A
7
3. With site development, provide the design of street conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to Shackleford
Road including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. A
pedestrian crossing across Shackleford Road should be provided at the
south side of the north intersection.
4. No residential waste collection service will be provided on private streets
unless the property owners association provides a waiver of damage claims
for operations on private property.
5. The driveway locations have not changed and certification of sight distance
was provided with the original application.
6. At the northern driveway 3 exit lanes should be provided: 1 left turn lane,
1 thru lane, and 1 right turn lane.
7. If gates are proposed between public and private streets turn arounds must
be provided for a WB-30 vehicle attempting to enter private portion of the
development. A stacking distance of 30 feet from pavement must also be
provided.
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. The applicant
desires to advanced grade the site. A variance is required to be requested
for advanced grading with construction not imminent on all portions of the
development.
9. A sketch grading and drainage plan has already been provided and
reviewed by staff. If any changes occur a new grading and drainage plan
should be provided.
10. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the
proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan.
11. A cul-de-sac should be provided at the end of Aldersgate Road as shown on
the approved plan.
12. An emergency access should be provided through this development from
Aldergate Road as shown on the approved plan.
13. The proposed public streets should be constructed to commercial street
standards per the Master Street Plan with 5-foot sidewalks on both sides.
14. 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).
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8262-A
8
15. Street Improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic
Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction.
16. Coordinate design of traffic signal upgrade with proposed street
improvements. Plans to be forwarded to Traffic Engineering for approval.
17. On site striping and signage plans should be forwarded to Public Works,
Traffic Engineering for approval with the site development package.
18. 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.
19. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water
permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the
start of construction.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Existing sewer main outfall located on the site. Easements must
be provided on plat and no permanent construction will be allowed within the
easements. Sewer main extension required with easements for all lots not
presently serviced by Little Rock Wastewater. Contact Little Rock Wastewater
Utility at 688-1414 for additional information.
Entergy: Additional easements are required. Contact Entergy for additional
information.
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. An existing waterline
easement, recorded as document 91-02755 in the office of the Pulaski County
Circuit Clerk, should be shown on the plans. A water main extension will be
required in order to provide service to this property. A Capital Investment Charge
based on the size of connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal
charges. 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.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8262-A
9
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contac 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 Use for this property. The applicant has applied for
a revision to a previously approved Planned Commercial Development.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
Master Street Plan: Shackleford Road is a Minor Arterial on the Plan. 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 Shackleford Road since it is a Minor Arterial. This street may require
dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances
and exits to the site.
Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes in this immediate vicinity.
Neighborhood Action Plan: The John Barrow Neighborhood Action Plan covers
this area. The Business and Commercial Goal states: To enhance the climate
directed towards encouraging new businesses and commercial establishments to
located in the area as well as retention of existing businesses.
Landscape:
1. The site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
2. The buffers as indicated on the site plan are as were previously approved.
3. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
4. 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.
5. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing
trees as feasible on this site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8262-A
10
requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or
larger.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (May 29, 2008)
The applicant was present. Staff presented an overview of the proposed
development stating there were few outstanding technical issues associated with
the request. Staff stated the amendment was being requested to increase the
building height for the office building located along the southern perimeter and to
allow grading of the second and third phases with the initial construction. Staff
stated the buffers indicated on the site plan were indicated as the original
approval.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated dedication of right of way
along Shackleford Road was required per the Master Street Plan. Staff stated a
sketch grading and drainage plan had previously been provided and questioned
if there were any changes to the plan previously submitted. Staff stated the
storm water detention ordinance would apply to the future development of the
site. Staff also stated street improvement to the abutting roadways would be
required per the Master Street Plan.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated landscape plans and
automatic irrigation would be required at the time of development of each
individual lot.
Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and
agencies. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then
forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the May 29, 2008, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has
indicated the comments raised at the Subdivision Committee will be adhered to
at the time of development. The current request is to allow a modification to the
previously approved site plan for Rowan Village. There is a slight modification to
the site design for each of the areas identified for development. All landscaping
buffers will be as were originally approved. The previously approved list of uses
and the commitment to Camp Aldersgate will not change with the amendment to
the PCD request.
Lots 1 and 3 will comply with the building square footage allowed by C-2,
General Commercial Zoning District. The lots will also comply with the City’s
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8262-A
11
minimum landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. The maximum building
height proposed is 27-feet as approved in the original PCD.
Lots 1 and 3 are indicated with a single building each. The buildings are
proposed as an office or retail use. The site plan indicates the placement of
drive-through service window which would allow for the development of the lots
with a branch bank or fast food restaurant facility. Other uses of these buildings
include office or retail which do not require the drive through facilities. The
building will be a maximum of two stories and have a maximum height of 40 feet.
Lot 2 will be split into 2 separate lots and be developed with a 2-story structure
totaling 15,000 square feet. The second floor of the structure will be at parking
lot grade on the west side of the building and the first floor will be at parking lot
grade on the east side of the building. The maximum building height is 40 feet.
Previously identified Lot 3 is now identified as Lot 4 and is proposed as a mixed
use building. A 4-story building with the first floor a parking garage, the second
floor office and retail and the third and fourth town homes are proposed. The
building footprint and overall layout have remained the same. The maximum
building height is 65 feet.
The original Lots 4 and 5 have been combined to make up a single Lot 5. A
3-story structure containing 45,000 square feet is proposed. The building will
contain a mix of office and commercial uses. The maximum height proposed is
50 feet.
Town homes are proposed on Lots 6 and 7. The town home portion of the
development will contain a maximum of 60 units. Parking is proposed within the
structure and additional surface parking has been provided to serve as guest
parking.
The site plan includes 33 single-family residential lots. The lots are proposed
with a minimum lot size of 40 feet by 100 feet or 4,000 square feet. Alleys are
proposed along the rear of the structures. The buildings are proposed with a
10 foot front and rear yard setback and five foot side yard setbacks. The
subdivision is proposed with private streets.
Two tracts of open space have been identified on the site plan; both tracts
containing 1.9096 acres. One tract located along the northeast portion of the site
is identified containing walking paths and amenities such as playground
equipment, a pavilion and picnic furniture. The site plan also includes a park or
play area located on Lot 7 of the town home development. This area will also
include amenities such as playground equipment, a pavilion and picnic furniture.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8262-A
12
The dumpsters have been noted on the site plan along with a note indicating the
screening. The applicant has indicated the dumpster will be serviced during
normal business hours.
As was previously approved, screening will be placed along the single-family
portion of the development and potentially along the townhouse development
portion of the development. The northern perimeter screening will be placed in
accordance with agreements made with Camp Aldersgate, the abutting property
owner.
A single development sign will be erected on Shackleford Road. The sign will be
a pylon sign with an overall dimension of 8-feet in width by 18-feet in height. The
individual lots will contain signage per the current ordinance standards for office
and commercial developments or a maximum of six feet in height and sixty-four
square feet in area for office buildings and thirty-six feet in height and one
hundred sixty square feet in area for commercial buildings. Building signage will
comply with the typical ordinance standards or a maximum of ten percent of the
façade area and per the agreement with Camp Aldersgate.
The development is proposed with 3.5 acres of landscape area or 15 percent of
the site excluding landscape buffers. The total building area comprises 4.0 acres
or 18.2 percent and total paved area of 9.5 acres or 43.3 percent. The total
green space on the site is 38.5 percent or 8.45 acres.
The development is proposed as a phased development. Phase I will need to be
sub-phased where Lot 1 and Lot 2 will be the first work initiated including public
access, and utilities to serve the lots. The anticipated progress of work will follow
the progression of public access being Lot 4, Lot 5 and Lot 3. Phase II will be the
town house portion of the development. Phase III is the single-family portion of
the development.
The request includes a variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow
grading of future phases with the initial development. In order to build the streets
and lots along Shackleford Road in Phase I, advanced grading in portions of
Phase II and Phase III will be required. A master grading plan has been
provided. The Phase I lots are mostly fill lots and the public street is mostly in fill.
Hillside material will need to be excavated from Phase II to fill the public street
and lots in Phase I. The master grading plan has identified the area of
excavation in Phase II. According to the applicant all advanced grading will
follow the master grading plan. Areas disturbed not planned for immediate
development will be covered per the requirements of the Land Alteration
Ordinance.
Staff is supportive of the requested revisions to the proposed site plan. The
development is proposed as a mixed-use development containing residential,
office and commercial uses. The development is integrating residential and
commercial/office uses within a single building allowing the development to
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8262-A
13
become a living and working environment. To staff’s knowledge there are no
outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff feels the development of
the site as proposed should not significantly impact the development or the area.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda
staff report.
Staff recommends approval of the variance request from the Land Alteration
Ordinance to allow grading of additional phases with the development of the first
phase.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 19, 2008)
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 Land Alteration Ordinance to allow grading of additional
phases with the development of the first phase.
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 and 2 absent.
June 19, 2008
ITEM NO.: 9 FILE NO.: LU08-01-02
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - River Mountain Planning District
Location: The northeast corner of Black Street and Cantrell Road
Request: Low Density Residential to Commercial
Source: Cindy Loftin, The Sentinel Group, LLC
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
A Land Use Plan amendment in the River Mountain Planning District from Low
Density Residential to Commercial. Commercial represents a broad range of
commercial services. The applicant is proposing to redevelop three lots to
accommodate a swimming pool supply store.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The amendment area and the land south and east of the amendment area are
zoned R-2 Single Family. The land currently has three unoccupied buildings that
have been vacant for many years. A Planned Commercial Development is
immediately west of this site for the Toddy Shop Liquor Store. Another Planned
Commercial Development is directly north of this site for a bank, a dentist office
and a shoe store. To the northeast is zoned Planned Office Development for a
new center which is still being built. Just east of that is zoned R-2 with a
Conditional Use Permit for the Pankey Community Center.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On April 19, 2005, the Plan was changed from Suburban Office and Transition to
Mixed Use north of Cantrell Road, west of Taylor Loop Road, approximately half
a mile to the west. This change was to accommodate future development of the
area.
On November 9, 2004, the Plan was changed from Suburban Office to Mixed
Use and Public Institutional. This change was made south of Cantrell Road near
Rodney Parham Road over a mile to the east of the application area. The
requested change was to allow for future development.
On April 6, 2004, the Plan was changed from Transition to Commercial northwest
of the Taylor Loop and Cantrell intersection. The requested change was made
for future developments.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU08-01-02
2
On October 7, 2003, the Plan was changed from Transition to Mixed Office
Commercial at the southwest corner of Sam Peck Road and Cantrell Road. The
change was to allow for future development.
On August 19, 2003, the Plan was changed from Transition to Commercial to the
west of this application site for future development.
On February 18, 2003, multiple changes were made to the Plan. To the west,
changes from Transition to Suburban Office, Single Family and Commercial were
made. To the east changes from Transition to Office, Low Density Residential,
Single Family and Public Institutional were made. These changes were made to
more accurately reflect existing and likely future development patterns for the
area.
The amendment area is shown as Low Density Residential on the Future Land
Use Plan. Commercial is shown to the west and northwest; Mixed Office
Commercial is shown immediately north; Office is shown to the northeast. The
remaining areas south and east of the application area are shown as Single
Family and Low Density Residential.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial on the Master Street Plan. The
primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect
major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas.
Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and
pedestrians on Cantrell since it is a Principal Arterial. Black Street is shown as 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 this immediate vicinity.
PARKS:
According to the Master Parks Plan, this area is within eight blocks of a park or
open space. There is a playground at Piggee Street, which is southeast of the
amendment area.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU08-01-02
3
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this
amendment.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
This area is covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. While the
Plan does not specifically address commercial development, it does call for
sidewalks and curb and gutter in all new developments.
ANALYSIS:
This application is located on the western edge of the Pankey Community. It is
currently shown on the Future Land Use Plan as Low Density Residential and it
is surrounded on the north and west sides by commercial uses. This Low
Density Residential (LDR) was planned for between Black Street and Wells
Street to provide a buffer between the commercial uses to the west and the
single family residences on the east. The existing Low Density Residential would
also provide an alternative housing option in the area if developed. Both single
family and multi family residences are located close by this area. LDR would
offer more density than single family without the heavy density found in Multi
Family. Pankey is book-ended by LDR on both the west and the east borders to
provide a buffer from the encroaching non-residential uses that have been
developing along Cantrell Road.
While many people desire non-residential uses to front a Principal Arterial such
as Cantrell, this neighborhood proves that it is possible to have single family
residences fronting an arterial roadway. This amendment may be seen by some
as the further stripping out of residential on Cantrell. There have been at least
six land use plan amendments in this area in the past five years. Most of these
amendments changed the plan from residential to non-residential. There is still
quite a bit of Transition and Mixed Use land available west of Taylor Loop. Staff
believes these prior amendments have provided plenty of non-residential uses in
this immediate area. The City of Little Rock has long held the position that the
Pankey community should remain residential.
This applicant is proposing to change part of this LDR to Commercial to allow an
open display swimming pool store. This is a relatively intense use and staff
prefers to keep such intense uses separate from neighborhoods if possible.
Because there is still undeveloped Office and Commercial land available along
Cantrell Road, supply appears to be adequate to meet the area’s needs. The
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU08-01-02
4
intersection of Chenal Parkway and Cantrell Road is an example of a node of
development along Cantrell Road. As Cantrell has developed, the pattern that
has emerged is one of node development. The most intensive uses are
generally focused at major arterial/arterial intersections such as the one at
Chenal and Cantrell Road.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood association: Pankey. Staff has
received no comments from area residents.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is not appropriate.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 19, 2008)
Walter Malone of Planning Staff reviewed the area. In the past City Staff have
been consistent in recommending no change to non-residential uses in Pankey
and this is the western edge of Pankey. Staff believes there are still available
commercial areas to the west. Mr. Malone reviewed the node to the west and
how it has grown together with the adjacent node to create one large node at
Taylor Loop – Pinnacle Valley Road with Cantrell Road. A third reason for lack
of support for the amendment is that this is shown for Low Density Residential
and this residential type is not really present in the area. So it provides a housing
choice that is not currently available in the immediate area. Mr. Malone turned
the presentation over to Donna James for a review of the related Planned Zoning
District. (See item 9.1, Z-8348 - Loftin PCD for a complete summary of the
items). By a vote of 0 for, 8 against, 1 recuse the item was denied.
June 19, 2008
ITEM NO.: 9.1 FILE NO.: Z-8348
NAME: Loftin Short-form PD-C
LOCATION: Located on the Southeast corner of Cantrell Road and Black Street
DEVELOPER:
Desjoyanux Pools of Arkansas
James Randleas
8723 Batesville Pike
Jacksonville, AR 72076
ENGINEER:
The Sentinel Group, LLC
305 Pinnacle Drive
Bryant, AR 72202
AREA: 0.74 + acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 zoning lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential
PROPOSED ZONING: PD-C
PROPOSED USE: Pool Supply Business
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The developers of the property are requesting a rezoning of the site from R-2,
Single-family to Planned Commercial Development to allow the development of a
pool/spa supply store. The store will carry common swimming pool/spa items
such as chemicals, hot tubs, accessories and decorative mailboxes. The
planned hours of operation are from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday
and possibly Saturday if the business dictates. Initially, there will be one person
staffing the store until business and customer traffic develop. The proposed
store will be 60-feet by 30-feet and have access off of Black Street. There will be
four parking spaces. The exterior portion of the site will be extensively
landscaped and manicured and will feature a display pool on the north side within
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8348
2
the 100-foot building setback as established by the Highway 10 Design Overlay
District.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is located on the southeast corner of Cantrell Road and Black Street.
There are three structures on the site in a state of disrepair. The uses in the area
include commercial and residential uses. To the east is the Pankey community
which is primarily a single-family neighborhood. To the north and west of the site
are commercial and office uses including a branch bank, a grocery store, a liquor
store, a carwash facility and a mini-warehouse facility. North of Cantrell is a
large multi-family complex accessed from Highland Drive.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an 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
Pankey Community Improvement Association were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Black Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a collector street. A
dedication of right-of-way 30 feet from centerline will be required. The scale
does not seem to match the dimensions. The 60-foot right-of-way does not
appear to be in place.
2. Per the Master Street Plan where a principal arterial intersects a collector
street, the applicant 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 normally be 250 feet in length measured from
the intersecting right-of-way. At such intersections, the intersecting right-of-
way line shall normally have a radius of 75 to 100 feet.
3. With site development, provide the design of street conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to Black Street
including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. The back of curb
should be located 18 feet from centerline with sidewalk at the property line.
4. Per the Boundary Street Ordinance, Section 30-281, boundary street
improvements shall include one hundred (100) percent bridge and box
culvert construction on streets other than arterial streets. This code would
be met by providing an in-lieu fee for construction of one (1) side of the
bridge.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8348
3
5. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other
than residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be
submitted and approved prior to the start of construction
6. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with
Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan along
Cantrell Road.
7. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the
proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan.
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. From the effective FIRMs along the centerline of Black Street, it appears the
northern boundary of the floodway is approximately 230 feet and the
boundary of the floodplain is approximately 150 feet from the south curb line
of Cantrell Road. The new preliminary FIRMs should be considered when
planning development. Provide accurate location of the floodplain
delineations.
11. Per Chapter 36-341, floodways shall be kept free of structural involvement
including fences, open storage of materials and equipment, vehicle parking
and other impediments to the free flow of floodwater.
12. 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.
13. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
14. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from
AHTD, District VI.
15. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water
permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the
start of construction.
16. Street Improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic
Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction.
17. 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.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8348
4
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available to the property. Easement required to be platted
for existing sewer main.
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 connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal
charges.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department for additional information.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #25, the Highway 10 Express
Route.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Low Density Residential for this property.
The applicant has applied for a rezoning R-2, Single-family to Planned
Commercial Development to allow the development of a pool supply business.
A change to the Land Use Plan from Low Density Residential to Commercial is a
separate item on this agenda (LU08-01-02).
Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is a Principal Arterial. The primary function of
a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic
generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits should
be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Cantrell Road
since it is a Principal Arterial. Black Street is shown as 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.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8348
5
Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the River Mountain
Neighborhood Action Plan. The Infrastructure Goal states: “Ensure that roads
are improved in a manner that is supportive of all modes of transportation
(walking, cycling, automobile, public transit and truck) and help to minimize the
conflicts between the various modes.”
Landscape:
1. The site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements. The site plan must also comply with the Highway 10 Design
Overlay District requirements.
2. The Highway 10 Design Overlay District requires a twenty-five foot wide (25)
landscape strip along the perimeters of the site.
3. The zoning buffer ordinance requires a seventeen-foot (17’) wide land use
buffer to separate this proposed development from the residential property on
southern perimeter of the site. Seventy percent (70%) of these buffers are to
remain undisturbed.
4. The zoning buffer ordinance requires a twelve-foot (12’) wide land use buffer
to separate this proposed development from the residential property on
eastern perimeter of the site. Seventy percent (70%) of these buffers are to
remain undisturbed.
5. 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.
6. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
7. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an
approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape
Architect.
8. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing
trees as feasible on this site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance
requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or
larger.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (May 29, 2008)
The applicant was present. Staff presented an overview of the proposed
development stating there were additional items necessary to complete the
review process. Staff stated screening was required along the southern and
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8348
6
eastern perimeters of the site. Staff requested the applicant include a note on
the site plan concerning the proposed screening mechanism. Staff also
requested the applicant provide the days and hours of operation and the
buildings proposed for salvage on the site details of the proposed front yard
landscaping.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the right of way required
for Black Road per the Master Street Plan was 30-feet from centerline. Staff also
stated a dedication of an additional 10-feet would be required for the construction
of a right turn lane. (Staff has since determined a right turn lane on Black Road
is not required. Since the street does not extend to the north the northbound
lane configuration will be one left turn, one combination through-left lane, and
one right lane. ) Staff also stated the areas identified as floodway did not appear
to be correct. Staff stated an in-lieu contribution for the bridge located at the
southern boundary would be required. Staff also stated street construction per
the Master Street Plan would be required.
Staff stated if the cost of the improvements were in excess of 15 percent of the
total project cost a hardship could be established and an in-lieu contribution
could be accepted for the cost of improvements. Staff stated it was the
developers job to provide staff with the cost estimates for construction of the
project and the cost of the associated street improvements for staff to determine
if the hardship did exist.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the site plan did not
comply with the typical landscape strips along the perimeters of the site. Staff
stated typically a 25-foot landscape strip was required along the perimeter. Staff
also stated typically a 30-foot building setback was required for the side yard
setbacks. Staff noted the site plan indicated a 20-foot setback and landscape
strip.
Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and
agencies. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then
forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the May 29, 2008, Subdivision Committee meeting. The site plan
indicates the placement of an eight foot screening fence along the eastern
perimeter up to the floodway. A screening fence is not proposed along the
southern perimeter since the entire southern perimeter is located within the
floodway. The applicant has indicated the areas located within the floodway will
be screened as allowed per City ordinance and the Public Works Department.
Berming will be used along Highway 10 within the front 40-foot landscaped area.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8348
7
The applicant has indicated the hours of operation will be from 9 am to 6 pm
Monday through Friday initially. As the business grows the hours will be
extended to Saturday from 8 am to 2 pm.
The proposal is to construct a new 1,800 square foot building and maintain one
of the existing buildings located in the southern portion of the site. The applicant
has indicated any modifications to the existing structure will comply with City
standards for rehabilitation of structures within a floodway. The existing building
will be used for storage of pool chemicals and supplies. The new building will
also house pool supplies and a display for hot tubs. Within the front yard
100-foot building setback a 14-foot by 20-foot in-ground pool will be constructed
complete with concrete aprons. The area will be extensively landscaped as a
display area for customers to visualize the product available.
The site plan indicates the placement of four parking spaces and a small loading
area. The ordinance would typically require the placement of six parking spaces.
According to the owner four spaces will serve the needs of the development.
There will be only one employee of the business and customer traffic is expected
to be staggered not generating a great demand for parking.
A portion of the paving for the parking is located within the floodway. The FP,
Floodplain District section of the ordinance states floodways shall be kept free of
structural involvement including fences, open storage of materials and
equipment, vehicle parking and other impediments to the free flow of floodwater
(Section 36-341(2)(d)). The ordinance also requires no building to be placed any
closer than 25-feet form the established floodway line. The building has been
indicated with an adequate setback from the floodway line.
The site plan indicates the placement of a 5-foot side yard setback and
landscaped area along the eastern perimeter. The ordinance would typically
require the placement of a 25-foot landscape strip and a 30-foot building setback.
Along the western perimeter for the first 150-feet the required landscape strip is
seven feet where the site is not proposing the placement of a parking area and is
adjacent to commercially zoned property. The remainder of the site would
require the placement of a 15-foot landscape strip per the Highway 10 DOD. The
site plan is complying with the exception of the proposed parking area. Within
this area based on the Landscape Ordinance requirements a minimum of nine
feet of landscaping is required. Within this area it appears the landscape strip
proposed is zero.
The applicant has indicated site lighting will comply with the typical ordinance
standard of the Highway 10 DOD. All site and parking lot lighting will be low level
and will not spill onto adjacent properties or the corridor.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8348
8
The site plan indicates the placement of a single ground mounted monument
style sign not to exceed six feet in height and seventy-two square feet in area.
Building signage is proposed consistent with signage allowed per commercial
zones or a maximum of ten percent of the façade area. The signage as
proposed complies with the Highway 10 DOD.
Staff is not supportive of the proposed use or the site plan as proposed. The
proposed use of the property is typically allowed as a C-4, Open Display District
use. Although there are other pool supply businesses located on Highway 10,
these businesses do not have outdoor display of product or inventory. Based on
the current land use plan, the commercial uses have been limited to the west
side of Black Road and east of Black Road has been held for residential
including low density residential stepping down to single-family. In addition, there
are a number of variations from the Highway 10 DOD related to the development
of the site. The proposed eastern setback and landscape strip is not adequate to
meet the typical ordinance standard and are proposed at minimal five foot. The
proposed landscape area along Black Road adjacent to the parking area is not
adequate to meet the overlay or the landscape ordinance requirements and is
indicated at or near zero. The site plan also indicates the paving within the
floodway, which is typically prohibited. Based the proposed use of the property
and the inconsistencies with the overlay standards, staff is not supportive of the
request.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends denial of the request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 19, 2008)
Mr. Eric Krebs was present representing the applicant. Staff presented the item stating
they were not in support of the request and presenting a recommendation of denial.
Mr. Krebs stated the site had not been occupied since 2006 and the site had not been
used as residential since the 1960’s. He stated the site was most recently used as
storage and workshop area. He stated the developers intended to construct a display
pool within the front yard area and landscape the site heavily to accent their product.
He stated there were few occupied residences in the area. He stated the site south of
the development was most recently used as a beauty salon. He stated the site would
not likely be used as residential. He stated there were limits on the site with the
floodplain and floodway. He stated the site was also located at the intersection of an
arterial and collector street and once the bridge was replaced and access secured to
the south the street would generated a great deal of traffic.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8348
9
Mr. Jessie Gibson addressed the Commission on behalf of his client Ada Norwood. He
stated Ms. Norwood’s family owned property in the area and were long standing
members of the Pankey Community. He stated Ms. Norwood was concerned with the
placement of a commercial business at this location. He stated she was also concerned
with potential chemicals a pool business might expose the neighborhood to. He stated
the land use in the area was residential and the commercial business would be out of
character with the neighborhood. Mr. Gibson stated there was a concern with the
display pool area and the hazards the pool might impose on the neighborhood. He
stated the development was inconsistent with the Highway 10 Overlay. He stated there
were a number of places both east and west of the site where the development could
occur and not impact the residential areas.
Ms. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated there had been a
long term goal of preserving the Pankey Community. She stated the neighborhood was
established and the City had grown around the community. She stated the area was an
established neighborhood. She stated if the development was proposed in a downtown
neighborhood the Commission would deny the request. She questioned if this area was
different.
There was a general discussion by the Commission of the difficulties for developing the
site and the constraints imposed on the site by the Overlay and the Floodway. The
Commission indicated their desire was to not approve something located in the
floodway. The Commission noted the site was not far from Westchester Subdivision,
which currently had a flooding problem.
Mr. Krebs stated there was no construction in the floodway. He stated only the drive of
the parking lot was located within the floodway. Commissioner Rector stated there was
an existing building located in the floodway. Mr. Krebs stated if it was desired the
developer would remove the building but they did desire to maintain the building for
storage.
Commissioner Hargraves stated the issue was bigger than the floodway. He stated
there were concerns with the land use as well. He stated the request was to rezone the
site from R-2, Single-family to a C-4, Open Display District use. He stated that was a
stretch. He stated there was a structure being placed in the 100-foot building setback.
He stated with all the issues he could not support the development.
A motion was made to approve the rezoning request. The motion failed by a vote of
0 ayes, 8 noes, 2 absent and 1 recusal (Jeff Yates).
June 19, 2008
ITEM NO.: 10 FILE NO.: Z-8349
NAME: John Barrow Neighborhood Association Open Air Market Short-form PCD
LOCATION: Located near 3220 South University Avenue
DEVELOPER:
Fairmont, Inc.
c/o Dickson Flake
P.O. Box 3546
Little Rock, AR 72203
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 1.1663 + acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District
ALLOWED USES: General Retail
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: Open Air Market and C-3, General Commercial District uses
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The John Barrow Neighborhood Association and the property owner, Fairmont,
Inc. request a rezoning of this site from C-3, General Commercial District to
Planned Commercial Development (PCD) to allow the property at 3220 South
University Avenue to be used as an open air market/display. The property owner
has granted John Barrow Neighborhood Association the right to conduct an
open-air market on Saturdays. The request is to allow C-3, General Commercial
District uses as allowable uses for the site. The hours are proposed from 7 am to
4 pm.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8349
2
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a parking lot serving a commercial development. There are a number
of commercial uses in the area including restaurants, a second hand shop and a
drug store. The UALR Campus is located to the east of the site and a
single-family neighborhood is located to the west of the site. Fronting on Colonel
Glenn Road to the south are two large apartment complexes.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received a number of phone calls from area property
owners. Many of the callers have indicated concern with the proposed use of the
property. All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, all residents,
who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site and the John Barrow
Neighborhood Association, the College Terrace Neighborhood Association, the
Broadmoor Property Owners Association, the Fairpark Residents Association
and the Curran Conway 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 available to this property. Existing sewer main on site.
Contact the Little Rock Sewer Department for additional information.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: No objection.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is located near CATA Bus Routes #17 - the Mabelvale-
Downtown Route, #17A - the Mabelvale UALR Route and #21 - the University
Avenue Route.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8349
3
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Boyle Park Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant has
applied for a rezoning from C-3, General Commercial to a Planned Commercial
Development to allow an open air market on an existing parking lot.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
Master Street Plan: 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. This street may require
dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances
and exits to the site.
Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes shown in this immediate vicinity.
Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the Boyle Park
Neighborhood Action Plan. Their Parks and Recreation Goal states: “Construct
facilities which would “draw” more activity to Boyle Park area.” A neighborhood
market could be seen as one such facility.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (May 29, 2008)
The applicant was not present. Staff presented the item stating there were no
outstanding technical issues associated with the request. There was no further
discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full
Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
There were no technical issues in need of addressing raised at the May 29,
2008, Subdivision Committee meeting. The request is to allow a rezoning from
C-3, General Commercial District to Planned Commercial Development (PCD)
for use as an open-air market/display for the John Barrow Neighborhood
Association. The property owner has granted the association the right to conduct
the open-air market on Saturdays. The open-air display is not an activity allowed
under the current C-3, General Commercial Zoning District. The request
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8349
4
includes the allowance of the underlying C-3, General Commercial Zoning
District as allowable uses for the site as well.
Staff is supportive of the request. Staff does not feel the placement of the market
on the site to be approved solely for the John Barrow Neighborhood Association
will significantly impact the development or the area. The use of the market is
limited to Saturday use, and based on the location proposed for the market, staff
does not feel the parking for the existing shopping center will be significantly
impacted. To staff’s knowledge there are no remaining outstanding technical
issues associated with the request.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
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: (JUNE 19, 2008)
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.
Mr. Dickson Flake and Ms Betty Snyder were present representing the request.
Mr. Flake stated the site was zoned C-3, General Commercial District and the request
was to add an outdoor market to the allowable uses. He stated the market would only
be open on Saturdays. He stated the reason for placing the market on University
Avenue was because of the volume of traffic on this arterial roadway. He stated the lot
was being offered to the Neighborhood Association for free. He stated the only paid
employee was the market manager. He stated the stalls would rent for a fee and any
revenues in excess of the market managers salary would then be deposited into an
account and used by the John Barrow Neighborhood Association for activities within
their neighborhood. He stated he had looked for a site for two years and this site
seamed a good location for the market.
Commissioner Adcock raised several questions. She asked who was eligible to
participate in the market. Ms. Snyder stated anyone could rent a stall and sit up on the
lot. Commissioner Adcock then stated the market was not limited to John Barrow
residents. Ms. Snyder stated the market was open to all persons.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8349
5
Commissioner Adcock questioned who would clean up the site. Ms. Snyder stated the
market manager would ensure the site was kept clean and cleaned after each market
event.
Commissioner Adcock questioned the number of vendors. Mr. Flake stated there were
60 stalls available so approximately 40 vendors could set up on the site. He stated
some vendors would take two stalls.
Commissioner Adcock questioned if there would be food. Mr. Flake stated no prepared
food would be allowed. He stated the desire was to bring in customers to the adjoining
businesses. Commissioner Adcock questioned bathroom facilities. Ms. Snyder stated
facilities were not located on the site. She stated the desire was the patrons would buy
from the businesses and then use their facilities. Commissioner Adcock stated the
businesses had raised concerns to her about the use of their facilities and not receiving
any customer benefit from the site. She stated the Association should consider portable
toilets to serve the needs.
Commissioner Adcock questioned how the association would keep vendors from setting
up on a weekday. Mr. Flake stated the parking lot was managed during the week and
the lot was rented as parking for UALR students Monday through Friday.
Commissioner Adcock questioned if UALR had seen the plan and if they approved of
the proposed use. Mr. Flake stated he was not sure if UALR had seen the plan.
Commissioner Adcock questioned how the market fit into UALR’s Master Plan.
Mr. Flake stated he was not sure.
Commissioner Adcock questioned why this location and why not in John Barrow.
Mr. Flake stated he had looked for a site for two years. He stated the site was located
on a major arterial and approximately 34,000 cars per day passed the site. He stated
visibility was important. He stated the desire was to create a multi-ethnic market and
create community tourism into 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 8 ayes,
1 noes and 2 absent.
June 19, 2008
ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z-8350
NAME: Walker Short-form PD-R and Right of way abandonment for Oakwood Road
and Cedar Street
LOCATION: Located at 4001 Oakwood Road
DEVELOPER:
Edward and Danyelle Walker
5105 Kavanaugh Boulevard
Little Rock, AR 72207
SURVEYOR:
James L. Butler
5323 John F. Kennedy Boulevard
North Little Rock, AR 72116
AREA: 0.25 + acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential
PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R
PROPOSED USE: Single-family residential – variation from the Hillcrest Design
Overlay District to allow a reduced rear yard setback.
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is seeking a rezoning of the site from R-2, Single-family to PD-R to
allow a new home to be constructed on the site. The property is located in an
area covered by the Hillcrest Design Overlay District. The applicant is proposing
the new home’s rear building setback less than the typical 25-foot rear yard
setback. The Hillcrest Design Overlay District states the setbacks for the
principal structure shall be as required for the zoning district except for the front-
yard setback which must be aligned with the adjoining residential structures
within 10 percent variation.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8350
2
The request also includes the abandonment of a portion of North Cedar Street
and an unrecorded dedication of Oakwood Road. The portion of Cedar Street to
be abandoned is a 30-foot by 132.11 foot area containing 3,963.30 square feet or
0.087 acres. The abandonment is the west ½ of North Cedar Street. The
eastern ½ was previously abandoned. The area of abandonment would become
the front yard area of the new residence.
The request also includes the abandonment of an 8 foot by 50 foot portion of
street which does not appear to have been previously dedicated to the City.
There is a paved drive approximately eight to nine feet wide extending from the
currently dedicated right of way of Oakwood Road to Cedar Hill Road. The area
of Oakwood Road proposed for abandonment contains approximately
400 square feet and would become the rear yard area for the new home.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is located at the end of Oakwood Road abutting Oakwood Road and
Cedar Hill Road. The site is treed with undergrowth of brush. The topography of
the lot is very steep sloping upward from Oakwood to the south. Oakwood Road
adjacent to the site is a very narrow paved strip approximately nine feet wide.
There are a number of condo developments and apartments in the area. The
area to the east is primarily single-family and the area to the west is a City of
Little Rock Park.
Cedar Street does not exist adjacent to the site. As stated, Oakwood Road is a
narrow unimproved street. Cedar Hill Road is a narrow unimproved street with
open ditches for drainage. There are no sidewalks in the immediate area.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received a number of 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 and the
Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public
Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Drainage easements should be maintained in the right-of-way to convey
storm water from adjacent property.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8350
3
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easement for Lot 6. 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. Contact Central Arkansas
Water regarding meter location. Central Arkansas Water has no existing or
planned facilities located within these roads and rights-of-way and has no
objection to closure and abandonment of easement rights in the area described.
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: This request is located in the Heights Hillcrest Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant
has applied for a short form PD-R to rezone the site from R-2, Single-family to
Planned Residential Development to allow a new single family home to be
constructed on the site with a reduced rear yard setback.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
Master Street Plan: Oakwood Road 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.
Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes shown in the immediate vicinity.
Neighborhood Action Plan: This area is covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood
Action Plan. The Housing Goal states: “a Hillcrest Overlay District that will
require Planned Unit Development for reclassification/redevelopment of land use
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8350
4
(zoning), density, setbacks, of other changes to the existing infrastructure of the
neighborhood.”
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (May 29, 2008)
Mr. and Mrs. Walker and Mr. Tony Curtis were present representing the request.
Staff presented the item stating the request included the right of way
abandonment for North Cedar Street and the abandonment for Oakwood Road.
Staff stated they had review four documents and all contradicted if the right of
way for these roadways were in place. Staff stated the request also involved a
request for a rezoning from R2, Single-family to PD-R to allow the construction of
a new home with a reduced rear yard setback. Staff stated once the right of way
was abandoned for Cedar Street the front of the home would have a 25-foot front
yard setback. Staff stated even with the right of way abandonment for Oakwood
Road, due to the triangular shape of the property, a variance would be required.
There was a general discussion of the item by the Committee members.
Commissioner Rector questioned Mr. Curtis as to the status of the right of way.
Mr. Curtis stated based on the fire maps it appeared the right of way for Cedar
Street did exist. Mr. Curtis stated previously the owner to the east requested and
the City abandoned one-half of the street but it did not appear this section was
ever abandoned. Commissioner Rector stated he felt it important after the City
had completed their process, if Mr. Walker was successful, he should address
the Court for a quiet title of the rights of way abandoned.
Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and
agencies. The Commission suggested the applicant work with staff to clarify the
issues in need of addressing. 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 the additional information requested at the
May 29, 2008, Subdivision Committee meeting. The home is proposed as a
two-story home with a basement which will be used as the garage and an
unfinished crawl space. The height of the home will comply with the DOD and is
proposed with a maximum height of 39 feet.
Residential development standard established by the Hillcrest Design Overlay
District states the residential regulations shall apply to any residential zoned land
within the district boundaries. Although the overlay district does not regulate the
style and character of Hillcrest housing, new construction and additions should
be respectful of the prevailing styles of the neighborhood. The compatible design
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8350
5
of housing contributes to the richness of the history and architectural character of
Hillcrest. Attached, unfinished spaces, such as storage areas and above-ground
basements, shall be included as part of the permitted floor area at fifty (50)
percent of the measured area. Crawlspaces or similar spaces that must be
accessed from outside the main structure are excluded from the permitted floor
area.
The lot contains approximately 11,463 square feet and was a legal lot of record
at the time of adoption of the DOD. The home is proposed with more than one
floor with a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 49.9 percent. Based on the lot size a FAR
of 55 percent is permitted. The mass section limits the maximum lot coverage for
all structures under roof to fifty (50) percent. The lot coverage of the proposed
structure is 20 percent.
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 ten (10) percent variation, but no
structure may be within the setback. The home is proposed with a front yard
setback as typically required per the ordinance. The rear yard setback is
indicated less than the 25-foot typical ordinance standard.
The rear-lot setbacks and accessory building coverage within the twenty-five-foot
setback from the rear property line shall be no more than forty (40) percent of the
area in that section. The applicant is not proposing the placement of any
structure within the rear yard setback, resulting in a rear lot coverage of zero.
The maximum building height shall be thirty-nine (39) feet or two and one-half
(2 1/2) stories, measured from the "grade plane" to the ridge-line of the highest
roof surface. In addition, new buildings and additions shall be constructed to an
elevation that is within one story of the adjacent residential structures. The home
is proposed with two stories and a basement. The maximum height proposed for
the home is 39 feet as measured from the grade plane to the ridgeline of the
highest roof surface.
Retaining walls will be located on the site with a maximum height of six feet. A
decorative fence will be located along the southern perimeter of the site with a
maximum height of six feet.
The request includes the abandonment of North Cedar Street and a portion of
Oakwood Road. The North Cedar Street portion proposed for abandonment is
the west ½ of North Cedar Street contained within a 30-foot by 132.11-foot strip.
The street is currently undeveloped and the previously abandoned eastern ½ is
being used by the property owner as parking for an apartment complex.
Oakwood Road does not appear to have been dedicated but is being used by the
neighborhood as a connection to Cedar Hill Road. The drive is approximately
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8350
6
eight to nine feet wide. The request includes the closure of the area as a public
access. Based on comments received from the various utility companies there is
no objection to the closure of Oakwood Road. The area of North Cedar Street
will be maintained as a drainage and utility easement as requested by the Public
Works Department and the electrical utility company.
Property, if for any reason, that cannot be developed without violating the
standards of the DOD shall be reviewed through the planned zoning district
(PZD) section of the zoning ordinance, with the intent to devise a workable
development plan which is consistent with the purpose and intent of the overlay
standards. The developer is seeing a variation from the year yard setback
requirement through a PRD rezoning as required by the ordinance. The
developer has indicated the reasoning for placing the building as proposed is the
lot shape and the topography of the site. With the placement of the structure as
indicated this will allow for a better building site thus reducing the overall total
height of the home. Staff is supportive of the request. To staff’s knowledge there
are no outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff does not feel the
construction of the new home as proposed with a reduced rear yard setback will
significantly impact the development or the area.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
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 requested abandonment for North Cedar
Street and Oakwood Road subject to the area of North Cedar Street being
maintained as a drainage and utility easement.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 19, 2008)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
stated they could not determine if the right of way for Oakwood Road was ever received
by the City. Staff stated they were continuing to research the right of way issue with
assistance of the applicant to determine the status of the right of way and the need for
abandonment and/or the status of any easements, which may be in place for access on
this drive. Staff stated the applicant had requested and staff felt the request appropriate
for a deferral of the item to the August 7, 2008, public hearing to allow staff and the
applicant time to determine the right of way issue for Oakwood Road.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8350
7
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 and 2 absent.
June 19, 2008
ITEM NO.: 12 FILE NO.: LU08-10-01
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Boyle Park Planning District
Location: The northeast corner of John Barrow and 40th Street
Request: Single Family to Neighborhood Commercial
Source: Tabitha S. Pickett, Sparkles SEDE Beauty Salon
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
A Land Use Plan amendment in the Boyle Park Planning District from Single
Family to Neighborhood Commercial. Neighborhood Commercial represents
commercial services that are limited to small-scale development in close
proximity to a neighborhood. The applicant is also requesting a Planned
Commercial Development to allow a beauty salon.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The amendment site is currently vacant and undeveloped. It is zoned R-3 Single
Family. Most of the surrounding area is zoned R-3 with single family residences.
Immediately south of the amendment area is zoned Planned Office Development
for a church site, but the land is still vacant and undeveloped. Northwest of this
site is zoned Planned Commercial Development for the Warehouse Plaza
Commercial Center. This center has a hair salon, a photo gallery, a clothing
store and an insurance office. At 40th and Tatum is also zoned R-3 but it is the
location for the Bread of Heaven Church.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
This area is shown as Single Family on the Future Land Use Plan. Almost all of
the surrounding area is also shown as Single Family. To the east is shown as
Public Institutional to recognize a church and to the northwest is shown as Mixed
Office Commercial for the Warehouse Plaza Center. There have not been any
amendments to the Future Land Use Plan in this area in almost ten years.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
John Barrow 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. 40th 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
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU08-10-01
2
zoning than duplexes are considered as “Commercial Streets”. These streets
have a design standard the same as a Collector. Entrances and exits should be
limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on John Barrow
since it is a Minor Arterial. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way
and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site.
BICYCLE PLAN:
There are no bike routes within the immediate vicinity.
PARKS:
According to the Master Parks Plan, this area is within eight blocks of a park or
open space. Holt Park is located a few blocks west of this amendment area.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this
amendment.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
This property is covered by the John Barrow Neighborhood Action Plan. The
Business and Commercial Goal states: “To enhance the climate directed
towards encouraging new businesses and commercial establishments to located
in the area as well as retention of existing businesses.”
ANALYSIS:
This application is to change the northeast corner of 40th Street and John Barrow
from Single Family to Neighborhood Commercial. This site is currently
undeveloped and vacant and has two brand new single family homes east and
adjacent to the property. The applicant is requesting a change to Neighborhood
Commercial along with a rezoning to allow a beauty salon.
There have been very few permits issued for commercial development in this
area in the past few years, which shows minimal demand for commercial. Also,
there are still several sites shown on the Land Use Plan for commercial uses
along John Barrow Road and at the intersection of Colonel Glenn and John
Barrow. Most of this have been on the Plan for decades and are not yet fully
developed. Over the years commercial zoning has been moving north along
John Barrow Road from 36th Street. This is creating a ‘strip commercial’ pattern
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU08-10-01
3
along John Barrow Road. The City land use policy is not to allow ‘strip
commercial‘ along arterials, but rather to encourage commercial in nodes,
generally at or near major intersections. Staff wishes to discourage the further
commercialization of lands lining John Barrow Road in keeping with the City land
use policy.
The John Barrow Neighborhood Action Plan has many housing and
neighborhood revitalization goals. It states a need to improve overall
appearance of the neighborhood with an objective of reviewing design standards
for new construction of residential units. There is also an action statement
stating that the design of new residential units should be compatible with existing
architecture in the area. The application area is surrounded by single-family
homes, and area residents have indicated a preference for more single family
developed in the area. Since January 2007, there have been 18 permits issued
for new single family homes in the John Barrow Subdivision. Two of these
permits were located just east of this amendment site at 8704 and 8700 West
40th Street. This shows a clear demand for more single family in this area.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood association: John Barrow. Staff
has received no comments from area residents.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is not appropriate.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 19, 2008)
The applicant requested this item be deferred to July 10. 2008. The item was
placed on consent agenda for deferral to July 10, 2008. By a vote of 9 for and
0 against the consent agenda was approved.
June 19, 2008
ITEM NO.: 12.1 FILE NO.: Z-8351
NAME: Pickett Short-form PCD
LOCATION: Located on the Northeast corner of West 40th Street and John Barrow
Road
DEVELOPER:
Tabitha Pickett
5012 West 31st Street
Little Rock, AR 72204
SURVEYOR:
Donald Brooks
20820 Arch Street Pike
Hensley, AR 72065
AREA: 0.25 + acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 zoning lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential
PROPOSED ZONING: PD-C
PROPOSED USE: Beauty Salon
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Waiver of the required right of way dedication
for West 40th Street.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is proposing the rezoning of the site from R-2, Single-family to
Planned Commercial Development (PCD) to allow the construction of a new full
service beauty salon. The applicant has indicated there will be five operators, a
manicurist and a receptionist. The shop will offer tanning facilities and a fitness
room. The shop will operate from 8 am to 6 pm Monday through Friday and from
7 am to 6 pm on Saturday.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8351
2
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The vacant site is located at the northeast corner of John Barrow Road and West
40th Street. South of the site is a POD zoned property approved for a church.
Northwest of the site is a property zoned PCD which contains a number of uses
including a salon. There are single-family homes located in the area. There are
two new homes located to the east of this site along West 40th Street.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area property owners.
All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, all residents, who could be
identified, located within 300 feet of the site and the John Barrow Neighborhood
Association were notified of the Public Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Due to the proposed use of the property, the Master Street Plan specifies
that 40th Street for the frontage of this property must meet commercial
street standards. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. The
right-of-way is unknown. Provide a current survey of the property.
2. A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of
40th Street and John Barrow Road.
3. John Barrow Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor
arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be required.
The current right-of-way width is unknown. Provide a current survey.
4. With site development, provide the design of the street conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to 40th Street
including 5-foot sidewalks for the entire length of the property with the
planned development.
5. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
6. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other
than residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be
submitted and approved prior to the start of construction.
7. The property to the north already has flooding problems from storm water
draining from the subject property. Provide a Sketch Grading and Drainage
Plan as required per Section 29-186 (e) to eliminate the drainage problem.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8351
3
8. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property if the property is
one (1) acre or greater. Show the proposed location for storm water
detention facilities on the plan.
9. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start
of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way
from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner).
10. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water
permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the
start of construction.
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. Prepare a dimensioned site plan.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this property.
Entergy: No commenter 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 regarding meter size and location.
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: This request is located in the Boyle Park Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has
applied for a short form PCD to rezone the site from R-2, Single-family to
Planned Commercial Development to allow a new beauty salon to be constructed
on the site.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8351
4
A change to the Land Use Plan from Single Family to Commercial is a separate
item on this agenda (LU08-10-01).
Master Street Plan: John Barrow Road is a Minor Arterial on the Plan. A Minor
Arterial provides connections to and through an urban area and their primary
function is to provide short distance travel within the urbanized area. Entrances
and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians
on John Barrow Road since it is a Minor Arterial. This street may require
dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances
and exits to the site.
Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes in this immediate vicinity.
Neighborhood Action Plan: The John Barrow Neighborhood Action Plan covers
this area. The Business and Commercial Goal states: To enhance the climate
directed towards encouraging new businesses and commercial establishments to
located in the area as well as retention of existing businesses.
Landscape:
1. The site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
2. An automatic irrigation system or a water source within 75-feet of the
landscaped area will be required to water the landscaped areas.
3. 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.
4. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing
trees as feasible on this site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance
requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or
larger.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (May 29, 2008)
The applicant was present. Staff presented an overview of the proposed
development stating there were a number of outstanding technical issues
associated with the request. Staff stated the site plan before the Commission
was presented to staff prior to the Committee meeting. Staff stated based on a
quick review there was areas of deficiency. Staff stated the perimeter landscape
strip and the required screening did not appear to comply with typical ordinance
standards. Staff also stated they would review the drives to ensure compliance
with the typical driveway spacing standards.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8351
5
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a survey indicating the
right of way for West 40th Street was required. Staff also stated a radial
dedication at the intersection of John Barrow Road and West 40th Street would
be required.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated prior to the issuance of a
building permit a landscape plan would be required. Staff also stated a water
source within 75-feet of the landscaped areas would be required at the time of
development.
Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and
agencies. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then
forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the May 29, 2008, Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised plan
has indicated the landscape strips per the typical ordinance standards for the
zoning and buffer ordinance and the landscape ordinance. The plan also
indicates screening and driveway spacing per the typical ordinance standards.
The applicant is seeking a rezoning of the site to allow the construction of a
2,210 square foot full service salon with a maximum of five operators, a
manicurist and receptionist. The site plan indicates a total of 3,287 square feet of
landscaping (27.5%), 6,493 square feet of paved area (54.0%) and 2,210 square
feet of building area (18.5%). The building is proposed as metal construction
with a hipped mental roof. The applicant has indicated, within 3 to 5 years, brick
will be added to the façade but the addition of the brick is dependent on the cash
flow of the business.
The site plan contains 12 parking spaces. Based on the typical ordinance
standards for a salon, 11 parking spaces would typically be required. The
proposed parking is adequate to serve the proposed use.
The site plan indicates the placement of a 9-foot landscape strip along the
northern perimeter and a six-foot screening fence. The landscape area to the
east is located adjacent to a platted alley and is proposed at 8.6 feet. The alley
has not been constructed. A six-foot screening fence is also proposed adjacent
to the alley. These areas are located adjacent to residentially zoned and used
property.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8351
6
The dumpster has been located along the eastern perimeter of the building. Staff
has concerns with the dumpster being located adjacent to the residential uses to
the east. The hours of dumpster service have not been limited but due to the
proximity of the residential homes staff would recommend the dumpster hours be
limited.
A waiver of the required right of way dedication for West 40th Street is being
requested. Based on the commercial use of the property the Master Street Plan
would typically require a right of way dedication of 30 feet from centerline for a
commercial street. The existing right of way for West 40th Street is 40-feet total
or 20-feet from centerline leaving a 10-foot deficiency in the required right of way.
Staff is not supportive of the waiver of right of way dedication. Based on the use
of the property and the zoning of the property to the south; zoned POD for future
construction of a church staff feels the full right of way is necessary to allow for
proper lane widths and turning lanes to facilitate traffic movements from these
site.
The request includes building signage consistent with signage allowed per
commercial zones. A ground-mounted sign is not being proposed. Staff
recommends in the future if ground mounted signage is sought the signage be
limited to a maximum of six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area.
Staff is not supportive of the site plan as presented. Staff has concerns with the
dumpster being located adjacent to the single-family homes. Staff also has
concerns with the applicant’s request for a waiver of the required right of way for
West 40th Street. Based on these concerns staff is not supportive of the request.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff is not supportive of the application as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 19, 2008)
The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated
the applicant had contacted them regarding a deferral of the item to the July 10, 2008,
public hearing to allow additional time to meet with staff and discuss options for the site
plan related to the right of way dedication and dumpster placement location. Staff
stated the deferral request would require a waiver of the Commission’s By-laws with
regard to the late deferral request. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of
the deferral request of the item to the July 10, 2008, public hearing.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8351
7
There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to waive the By-laws
with regard to the late deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes
and 2 absent. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by
staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
June 19, 2008
ITEM NO.: 13 FILE NO.: Z-4953-B
NAME: Park Avenue Long-form PCD Update
LOCATION: Located on the Northwest corner of St. Vincent Circle and University
Avenue
DEVELOPER:
Strode Property Company
5950 Berkshire Lane #1600
Dallas, TX 75225
ENGINEER:
Lawrence A. Cates and Associates, LLP
14800 Quorum Drive, Suite 200
Dallas, TX 75254
PLANNER:
Good Fulton and Farrel
2808 Fairmount, Suite 300
Dallas, TX 75201
AREA: 28.39 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 zoning lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District
ALLOWED USES: General Commercial Uses
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: Mixed Use Development – Residential, Retail, Office
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance to allow an increased wall height
along McKinley Street.
The plan shows a mixed use development containing residential, office and retail uses.
The project is indicated with 753,400 square feet of space. The break down of uses is
as follows:
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4953-B
2
Retail/Restaurant 89,400 SF (Max. Rest. 40,000 SF)
Anchor 162,600 SF
Cinema 36,000 SF
Residential: 313,900 SF (Max. including Hotel)
900 SF Avg. 330 Units
Office 31,500 SF
Office Option 120,000 SF
Total: 753,400 SF
The plan indicates two parking structures; utilization of the existing structure and the
construction of a second parking structure near the southeastern portion of the site.
The total parking proposed for the development is 1,802 spaces. Based on parking
standards established by the Overlay for a shopping center development, a maximum of
2,906 and a minimum of 1,453 parking spaces are allowed.
The total building lot coverage proposed is 333,400 square feet or 27.0 percent and the
total parking coverage is 387,400 square feet or 31.3 percent, including the parking
structures. The total open space proposed is 43,400 square feet. As indicated in the
previous write-up, a total of 14,913 square feet of common use area is required.
The existing parking structure contains 679 spaces and the new parking structure is
proposed to contain up to 360 spaces. There are six lots containing varied numbers of
surface parking spaces. The largest surface parking area is the parking area in front of
Anchor 1 which contains 384 spaces and the next is Lot B, the Town Center portion of
the development which contains a total of 276 surface parking spaces. The remaining
lots contain 17 spaces, 39 spaces and 47 spaces. One of the proposed lots does not
contain any surface parking. The parking fields have been broken to limit the visual and
physical impact. Even though located on the same lot, the two parking fields south of
Retail/Restaurant Buildings E and F each contain 70 spaces. This parking area has
been reduced by 1/3 from the previous site plan. The remainder of the parking fields
appear to contain less than the 50 spaces recommended by the DOD.
Along the project edge at the southeastern corner of the site, a Retail/Residential
structure with a maximum of four stories has been located. A total of 13,700 square
feet of ground level retail and 33 residential units are proposed topped with three
additional levels each containing 51 residential units for a total of 168 residential units.
This portion of the site plan also includes the new parking structure. The structure is
proposed with a maximum of four levels with up to 360 spaces. The site plan includes a
courtyard and private open space to serve the residential units. The placement of the
structure at this location recognizes the importance of this intersection to both the area
and the development.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4953-B
3
A 25-foot landscape strip located between the right of way and the building along
St. Vincent’s Circle and a landscape strip ranging from 12 feet to 25 feet along South
University Avenue have been indicated. The Overlay allows for a zero building setback
and not more than 20 feet excepting in those cases where grade changes make such
setbacks impractical. The buildings are being placed consistent with the Overlay
excepting the areas where grades do not allow a zero setback.
The Retail/Restaurant, Buildings A - F and Anchor 4, are located south of the existing
parking structure. Buildings A – F are indicated with a maximum of two stories. The
second story above Buildings E and F is indicated as “flex space” which could function
as live and/or office workspace. Anchor 4, also located in this area, is indicated with
15,500 square feet of ground floor retail space and up to seven (7) levels and 120,000
square feet of office space.
The northern building on McKinley Street is indicated as a residential or hotel structure.
A note on the site plan states, if residential, the structure will be a maximum of four
stories containing 162 units or if developed as a limited service hotel, there will be a up
to seven levels and 127 rooms.
The four entrances to the development are accented with contrasting paving. The
entrances are further accented with lighting, landscaping and pedestrian walkways.
Development center signage is proposed at three of the entrances, on South University
Avenue, on St. Vincent’s Circle, on McKinley Street and at the intersection of
St. Vincent’s Circle and South University Avenue. Development center signage is
proposed as a monument style sign with a maximum height of 35-feet and width of
20-feet. The total sign face is proposed not to exceed 400 square feet in area. The
Overlay states signage integrated into free standing vertical structures whose design
theme and materials are directly related to the primary development may submit for
approval under the PZD process the proposed signage plan. No single elevation or
face of such a structure shall be more than 400 square feet. Although the sign
structures are proposed in excess of the 400 square feet, the sign faces are limited to a
maximum of 400 square feet. The structures are proposed as an architectural element
of the center and will be constructed of materials that are directly related to the
development. The secondary entrance from South University Avenue will contain a
single monument style sign not to exceed six feet in height and 72 square feet in area.
This sign complies with the Overlay standards.
The site plan indicates pedestrian connectivity internally and externally. Connections
have been made between the Town Center portion of the development and the
southern anchors. Inviting pedestrian access has been provided from the entrance
drives into the site. The two surface parking lots located south of the Retail/Restaurant
Building E and F have been reduced, limiting the rows of parking to nine spaces and
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4953-B
4
pedestrian tables have been located at the ends of these lots to facilitate foot traffic
throughout the site. The main anchor has provided a pedestrian table within the center
of the lot to allow a safe passage for both patrons and persons accessing the southern
anchors from the northern retail and residential buildings. All other buildings within the
development are connected via pedestrian tables and 10-foot wide pedestrian walkways
similar to standards identified in the Overlay.
The development is proposed to contain a mixture of residential, office and commercial
space as identified in the ULI Study and the Statement of Expectations and the
development creates a true 24-7 environment. The development is proposed to contain
up to 151,500 square feet or 20 percent of the total square footage as office space.
Buildings E and F have been indicated with residential/office atop retail identified as
“flex space” for a possible live work environment. With the addition of the
residential/retail component at the St. Vincent’s Circle/South University Avenue
intersection, the overall Town Center concept has been expanded through out the site.
By removing Anchor 3, the parking fields located in front of Retail F, K and Anchor 2
have been reduced by 1/3 from the previous submittal thus limiting their visual impact.
The pedestrian movement, both internally and externally, has been designed to allow
easy access into and through the site for residents and patrons of the shopping center.
Although signage is proposed in excess of the typical Overlay standard, staff is
supportive of the design concept. The signage will be an architectural feature
integrating materials directly related to other construction materials used in the center.
The large anchor has not been designed to create the appearance of a front façade on
all the abutting roadways. The developers have indicated this is not technically feasible.
This anchor has a building design that does not lend itself to creating additional
entrances or false entrances. The remainder of the street frontage along St. Vincent’s
Circle and McKinley Street will be developed with design criteria, which allows for
enhanced features to limit the visual impact of the structures on the street sides. Staff
feels the developers have done a good job in trying the meet the spirit of the Mid-Town
Design Overlay District and the Statement of Design and Programming Expectations.
Staff is in full support of the current site plan.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 19, 2008)
Mr. Chuck Keller was present representing the application. There were persons present
with concerns. Staff stated at the direction of the Commission at its May 22, 2008,
public hearing the applicant had met with City staff and others concerning changes to
the site plan related to specific issues raised at the Commission meeting and by staff.
Staff stated modifications had been made to the site plan and staff felt it was important
to brining the current site plan to the Commission for review prior to the item being
reviewed by the Board of Directors.
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4953-B
5
Staff stated the plan now indicated a true mixed use development containing residential,
commercial and now an office component. Staff stated the development was indicated
753,400 square feet of residential, office and commercial space with up to
150,000 square feet of office space. Staff stated a few of the changes to the site plan
included the emphasis of the southeastern project edge with the addition of a four-story
residential building. Staff stated a parking structure had been included in this area to
serve the residential use. Staff stated with the addition of the residential building at this
intersection the Town Center concept had been integrated through out the site. Staff
stated pedestrian accesses and connectivity both internally and externally had been
addressed. Staff stated the entrances to the development had been enhanced and the
design concept of the Town Center had been integrated into these areas as well. Staff
noted the parking fields had been broken and the parking fields located north of Anchor
2 had been reduced by as much as 1/3.
Staff stated the presentation was only a brief summary of the current plan and Mr. Keller
would provide the Commission additional details of the changes.
Staff stated although the site plan did not fully comply with the Mid-town DOD they felt
the developers had done a good job in trying to meet the spirit of the Mid-town District
and the statement of Design Programming Expectations. Staff stated they were in full
support of the project.
Mr. Chuck Keller of Park Avenue Properties addressed the Commission. He stated at
the direction of the Commission the developers did meet with City staff, Craig Berry and
the City’s consultant to discuss options for change to the site plan. He stated Anchor 3
had been removed for the site, which was a significant change. He stated limits were
placed on the developability of the southeast corner due to a large drainage easement
which started somewhere near Park Plaza Mall and emptied somewhere south of the
site. He stated the structure was not located within an easement but the relocation of
the drainage structure was not feasible. He stated all plans had been developed around
the structure and the limits of not being able to build on top of the drainage structure.
Mr. Keller stated the new plan indicated the placement of a four story residential
building on the southeast corner of the site. He stated along with the residential, a
parking deck with up to four stories was proposed and ground level retail. Mr. Keller
stated the drainage structure would serve as the driveway to the parking deck. He
stated on the second level the building would extend over the drainage structure. He
stated with the placement of the parking structure exclusive to the residential should a
condo situation arise in the future the sale of the units would be an easier transition.
Mr. Keller stated connectivity was a concern raised by staff and the Commission. He
stated the current plan indicated sidewalk connections along St. Vincent’s Circle and
McKinley Street to allow access into the site. He stated the walks into the development
were a minimum of 10-feet wide and the area would be landscaped and lighting would
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4953-B
6
be added to enhance these areas. Mr. Keller stated additional pedestrian accesses had
been included through out the site to allow patrons safe access through the site.
Mr. Keller stated the northern buildings, the Town Center buildings, had been
redesigned removing the residential to the southeastern edge of the project. He stated
the Town Center buildings were now proposed as one to two story buildings. He stated
two additional screens had been added to the theater. He stated the second level
above the southern building was proposed as loft space with up to 31,000 square feet of
office space. He stated the intent was to allow this space as flex space or live/work
space where if a person desired to live on site and office on site this could be
achievable. He stated in addition Anchor 4 was indicated with ground level retail and up
to seven levels and 120,000 square feet of office space.
Mr. Keller provided the Commission with three-dimensional views of the site. He stated
based on a one-dimensional drawing it was difficult to visualize the site. He stated the
current plan would be developed with verticality. He stated the parking fields had been
reduced and with the placement of landscaping within the parking fields the visual
impacts would also be lessened. Mr. Keller stated the intent was only to create one
Town Center. He stated with the addition of elements contained within the Town Center
the development was better tied together.
Mr. Keller stated he could not fully comply with the Mid-town Overlay. He stated he
would still need variances to allow the development of Park Avenue.
Ms. Ruth Bell, League of Women Voters, addressed the Commission. She stated the
site plan was much better. She stated the landscaping in the parking lots, the office
component, the retail and residential combined were all good changes but she stated
the plan was not perfect. She stated the pedestrian movement was better with the
exception of the southern entrance from St. Vincent’s Circle. She stated in this area,
where most would enter they would walk past loading docks before entering the
development. She stated bicycle racks had been promised by the developer but bicycle
movement did not appear to be addressed within the development. She requested the
developer provide graphics at the entrance to the development indicating the location of
bicycle routes and bicycle racks to accommodate cyclist accessing the site.
Ms. Bell stated the bigger problem was the four corners and the lack of circulation
between the sites. She stated it was important to begin discussion with all four corners
to create a shuttle service to access these four properties and allow residents of Park
Avenue and customers to access other shopping areas without traveling in their
automobile.
Ms. Bell stated the sign was not what the League was expecting. She stated it was
difficult to find Park Avenue on the sign. She stated based on the proposed signage the
June 19, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4953-B
7
development was the Target Shopping center. She requested the developers place the
name of the center on top of the sign.
Mr. Jim Bell addressed the Commission. He stated the Briarwood Neighborhood
Association was in favor of the mixed use center proposed. He stated if the center was
viable it would only enhance the area and the neighborhood. He stated the signage
was a concern. He stated based on the sign proposed the first thing you saw as a big
Target’s bulls eye. He requested the developer design the sign to indicated the name
of the center being the most prominent. He stated the landscaping was more friendly
and the entrances were well defined. He requested the landscaping be placed and able
to grow to maturity. He requested the developers not install crape myrtles which were
trimmed every year.
Commissioner Nunnley questioned the developer as to why he could not meet the
overlay requirements. Mr. Keller stated he was not sure of all the items not being met
but one item was the entrances on all street sides. He stated the facades would be
broken to break the visual massing of the structure but the retailers did not lend
themselves to multiple entrances. He stated they were not designed to operate multiple
entrances and from a loss prevention standpoint multiple entrances were difficult to
manage. Mr. Keller stated setbacks was another area of non-compliance. He stated
there were areas of the site that did not lend themselves to a zero setback or to the
maximum 20 foot setback due to grades.
Commissioner Nunnley questioned Mr. Craig Berry as to his thoughts on the plan. Mr.
Berry stated he did meet with the developers in Dallas along with City staff and the
City’s consultant and modifications had been made based on the meeting. He stated
the Mid Town Advisory Board had not met so he could not speak on behalf of the Board
members as to their thoughts of the plan. He stated the plan was an improvement.
Commissioner Nunnley stated he felt the plan a better plan. He stated he wanted to
applaud the developers for their efforts and their willingness to work with interested
parties on the site plan and to develop a better plan than previously presented.
Commissioner Pruitt stated she to felt the plan a better plan. She stated the developer
had do a good job in working with all concerned to address issues previously raised.
Chairman Taylor stated he felt the plan an improvement. He stated he had previously
voted against the plan but with the changes he was in support the plan. He stated the
plan was not 100 percent but he felt the plan much better than the plan the Commission
reviewed on May 22, 2008.
There was no further discussion of the item.