Loading...
pc_03 01 2007sub LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION SUBDIVISION HEARING SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD MARCH 1, 2007 4:00 P.M. I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present being nine (9) in number. II. Members Present: Gary Langlais Lucas Hargraves Robert Stebbins Troy Laha Jeff Yates Jerry Meyer Darrin Williams Chauncey Taylor Mizan Rahman Members Absent: Pam Adcock Fred Allen, Jr. City Attorney: Cindy Dawson III. Approval of the Minutes of the January 18, 2007 Meeting of the Little Rock Planning Commission. The Minutes were approved as presented. LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION SUBDIVISION AGENDA MARCH 1, 2007 OLD BUSINESS: Item Number: File Number: Title A. Z-7421-B Mid-Town Shopping Center Revised Long-form PCD, located on the Northeast corner of West Markham Street and University Avenue. B. Z-8152 LPS Properties Short-form PCD, located at 424 North University Avenue. C LU06-08-04 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Central City Planning District for a change from Single Family and Mixed Use to Office and Neighborhood Commercial at 1401 Bishop Street and 1311 Bishop Street. C.1. Z-8101-A Bishop Street Short-form POD and Central Station Commercial Retail Center Short-form PCD, located on the Southwest corner of 14th and Bishop Streets and the Northwest corner of Daisy Gatson Bates and Martin L. King Boulevard. D. S-1495-A Park Circle Subdivision Preliminary Plat, located at the end of Park Avenue, East of Western Hills Avenue. E. S-1554 Herndon Place Subdivision Preliminary Plat, located South of Stagecoach Road, East of Herndon Road. F. LA-0015 Whisenhunt Investments Land Alteration Variance Request, located on the Northwest corner of Chenal Parkway and Kanis Road western intersection. G. Revision of the Midtown Overlay, changes and additions to the required design standards for the district. Agenda, Page Two NEW BUSINESS: I. PRELIMINARY PLATS: Item Number: File Number: Title 1. S-46-DD Overlook Revised Preliminary Plat, located on Overlook, North of Overlook Circle. 2. S-1415-C Bowman Kanis Retail Center Preliminary Plat, located on the Northwest corner of Kanis and Bowman Roads. 3. S-1433-A Foreman Lake Garden Addition Preliminary Plat, located on Leatrice and Alberta Drives. 4. S-1556 Wise Subdivision Preliminary Plat, located at 10329 Mann Road. II. REZONING/PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS: Item Number: File Number: Title 5. Z-4411-G Pleasant Ridge Towne Center Revised Long-form PCD, located on the Southeast corner of Cantrell Road and Pleasant Ridge Road. 6. Z-5742-A C & G Asset Management Short-form PCD, located at 1001 Wright Avenue. 7. LU07-18-01 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Ellis Mountain Planning District at the north side of Kanis Road between Kirby and Asbury Roads from Mixed Office Commercial to Service Trades District. 7.1. Z-6245-A ACME Self Storage Long-form PCD, located on the Northeast corner of Kanis and Kirby Roads. 8. Z-6554-F Bowman Kanis Retail Center Rezoning, located on the Northwest corner of Kanis and Bowman Roads. Agenda, Page Three II. REZONING/PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS: (CONTINUED) Item Number: File Number: Title 9. Z-7695-A Smith Revised Short-form PD-R, located in the 1600 Block of South Battery Street. 10. Z-7699-B Highway 10 Development Short-form POD, located at 16603 and 16623 Cantrell Road. 11. Z-7786-A Dennis Properties Revised Long-form PCD, located at 11421 Stagecoach Road. 12. Z-7991-A Maris Short-form PD-O, located at 3 Pine Mountain Drive. 13. LU07-09-03 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the I-630 Planning District at the southeast corner of 7th and Woodrow Streets from Service Trades District to Mixed Office Commercial. 13.1. Z-7895-A 7th and Woodrow Short-form PCD, located on the Southeast corner of 7th and Woodrow Streets. 14. Z-8140-A ME Seckt LTD Company Short-form POD, located at 4720 West Markham Street. 15. Z-8167 Meyer Short-form PCD, located at West Markham and Kavanaugh. 16. Z-8168 Waters Edge Tract B Long-form PD-R, located North of David O Dodd Road, East of I-430. 17. LU07-09-02 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the I-630 Planning District at 5801 Asher Avenue from Commercial, Industrial and Park/Open Space to Multi Family. 17.1. Z-8169 UALR Student Housing Long-form PD-R, located South of Asher Avenue, East of University Avenue. 18. LU07-29-01 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Barrett Planning District at the northwest corner of Highway 10 and Pleasant Grove Road from Single Family to Office and Commercial. 18.1. Z-8170 Pinnacle at Maumelle Long-form Conceptual PCD, located North of Highway 10 and North and West of Pleasant Grove. Agenda, Page Four III. OTHER MATTERS: Item Number: File Number: Title 19. Z-7585 River Tower Short-form PD-R Time Extension, located on the Northeast corner River Bend and River Front Drive. 20. Z-6062 McAlmont POD Revocation, located at 1814 – 1824 McAlmont Street. 21. Z-3491 Albert Pike Phase II PD Revocation, located at 221 East 7th Street. 22. Z-6554-E Bowman Kanis Retail Center Long-form PCD Revocation, located on the Northwest corner of Kanis and Bowman Roads. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: Z-7421-B NAME: Mid-Town Shopping Center Revised Long-form PCD LOCATION: Located on the Northeast corner of West Markham Street and University Avenue DEVELOPER: Strode Property Company 5950 Berkshire Lane #1275 Dallas, TX 75225 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 10.5 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 zoning lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PCD ALLOWED USES: C-3, General Commercial District Uses PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD PROPOSED USE: C-3, General Commercial District Uses, Revise signage plan VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Several zoning actions have taken place in this area from Board of Adjustment building line variances to actual rezoning action. The most recent was the approval of a PCD for 219 North University Avenue. That request was approved by the Board of Directors on July 16, 2002 (Ordinance No. 18,718). The site was zoned O-3 and the applicant desired to rezone the site to PCD to allow flexibility in order to provide quality tenants to serve the neighborhood area, utilizing the existing building. The PCD outlined specific uses allowed on the site (Z-7233). A second rezoning request was also for a PCD located between “B” and “C” Streets on the east side of University Avenue. The Board of Directors approved the request on March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7421-B 2 August 29, 2000 with Ordinance No. 18,335. The request was to rezone the site from R-3/R-5 to PCD to allow for the construction of a 25,600 square foot commercial building along with 74 parking spaces. The applicant also proposed to realign “C” Street to line up with the Park Plaza access drive on the west side of University Avenue. The applicant proposed the hours of operation to be from 9:00 am to 9:00 pm Monday through Saturday and from 10:00 am to 8:00 pm on Sunday. The Board of Adjustment approved the use of 5909 and 5911 “C” Street as a commercial parking lot on residentially zoned property on June 17, 1991. The parking lot serves employees and patients of Gastroenterology Associates P.A. The proposed parking lot was not a part of the approved PCD. A rezoning request from various zoning classifications to PCD to allow a two phased development located between West Markham Street and “C” Street and Pierce Street and University Avenue was approved by the Planning Commission at their June 26, 2003 Public Hearing. The development was proposed as a mixed-use development complete with residential, office and commercial uses. The request reviewed and the area rezoned was the Phase I portion of the development. The Phase II portion of the development was to be reviewed by the Commission as the development plans became imminent. Phase I consisted of three commercial buildings containing a total of 49,030 square feet of gross floor space. The development also contained 255 parking spaces located on a total of 5.3 acres. The applicant proposed the realignment of “C” Street from the current location to the south to align with the existing traffic signal on University Avenue at the access drive to Park Plaza Mall. The applicant also proposed the abandonment of portions of “A” Street and “B” Street and the portion of “C” Street, which would be realigned. Ordinance No. 19,096 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on May 18, 2004, revised the previously approved PCD. The revision included the development of 10.5 acres with 107,300 square feet of retail space plus 21,800 square feet of restaurant space. The parking was indicated with 586 parking spaces. Portions of A, B and C Street were also closed by the adoption of Ordinance No. 19,177. Three sign locations were approved for the development. Each of the signs were approved with a maximum of fifteen feet in height and one hundred square feet in area. Presently the signs are in place along West Markham Street, C Street and the entrance drive from University Avenue. Building signage was allowed on the front and rear of the buildings with the aggregate sign area limited to ten percent of the front façade area. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7421-B 3 A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a revision to the previously approved PCD related to signage. The previous approval allowed signage on the front and rear facades of the building with the total aggregated sign area square footage not to exceed ten percent of the front facade area. The applicant is now requesting the allowance of additional signage for the building located at the intersection of University Avenue and C Street and the building located at the intersection of Pierce and West Markham Streets. The request is to allow the placement of signage on thee walls of the building. The request also includes an increase in sign height for the sign located at the entrance of the development along West Markham Street. The base of the sign is proposed to be increased by a maximum of four feet for a total sign height of 19-feet B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is developing with the Mid-Town shopping center. A number of the stores have opened with a few presently in tenant finish out. The area contains existing single-family, multi-family and non-residential uses. There is a large multi-family complex located on “C” Street just east of the development. Other uses in the area include the Park Plaza Mall, the University Mall, the I-HOP Restaurant and St. Vincent Hospital. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. All owners of property located within 200-feet of the site and the Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 8, 2007) The applicant was not present. Staff presented an overview of the request indicating there were no outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff stated the request included a modification to the existing signage plan for the shopping center. Staff stated there were no other modifications of the approved site plan proposed. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. E. ANALYSIS: There were no technical issues remaining from the February 8, 2007, Subdivision Committee meeting which needed addressing. The applicant is proposing a revision to the approved PCD to allow additional signage. The request includes the placement of signage on three sides of the building façade for the building located on C Street and University Avenue and the building located on Pierce March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7421-B 4 and West Markham Streets. Each of these buildings have public street frontage on two abutting roadways and the third location is the front of the building which faces into the parking lot. Staff is supportive of the allowance of the additional building signage as proposed. Staff recommends the aggregate of the total signage be limited to ten percent of the front façade as was previously approved. The request also includes the allowance of an increased sign height for the monument sign located on West Markham Street. The approved signage plan allows a sign with a 1’8” cabinet or base and a 13’4” by 7’6” tenant identification panel for a total sign height of 15’0”. The request is to allow the cabinet or base to be increased by 4’ to a maximum of 5’8” to allow the lower tenant identification panels to be visible from west bound West Markham Street. With the increase in the base height the total sign height is 19-feet. No additional tenant identification panels are being requested. The monument signs located along University Avenue will remain as were previously approved with a maximum height of 15-feet. Staff is supportive of this request. Staff does not feel the addition of four feet to the existing sign based or the addition of wall signage on two of the buildings will significantly impact the development or the area. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the revision to the PCD to allow a revision to the existing signage plan subject to the aggregate area of the wall signage not exceeding ten percent of the front façade of the specific building. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 18, 2007) The applicant was not presented. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had failed to provide staff with a completed application. Staff presented a recommendation of deferral of the item to the March 1, 2007 public hearing. Staff stated this would allow the item to be reviewed by the Subdivision Committee at their February 8, 2007, committee meeting. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the revision to the PCD to allow a revision to the existing signage plan subject to the aggregate area of the wall March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7421-B 5 signage not to exceed ten percent of the front façade of the specific building. Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the increased sign height on West Markham Street by increasing the base height of the monument sign. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 recusal (Jeff Yates). March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: B FILE NO.: Z-8152 NAME: LPS Properties Short-form PCD LOCATION: Located at 424 North University Avenue DEVELOPER: LPS Properties, LLC Sam Storthz III, Managing Partner 810 North University Avenue Little Rock, AR 72205 ENGINEER: Edward Smith – White Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 0.96 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: O-3, General Office District ALLOWED USES: General and Professional Office Uses PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: O-3 uses and selected C-3 uses VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A deferral of the required right of way dedication to South University Avenue and Father Tribou Street. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The building located at 424 N. University was originally constructed in 1970 as a masonry construction and contains approximately 11,968 square feet of rental area. The property is currently zoned O-3, General Office District which allows for general office type uses as allowable uses on the site. In addition, the site is allowed a maximum of ten percent of the gross floor area as a listed accessory use as indicated in the O-3, General Office District zoning classification. The applicant is proposing a rezoning of the site to PCD to expand the allowable uses for the site. The site is proposed as a mixed use development and is proposed to contain the following uses either as a single user or a mixture of uses: March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8152 2 A. Keeping the existing permitted uses under the “0-3” General Office District Zoning. B. Keeping the following existing permitted uses under the “0-3” General Office District Accessory Uses Zoning except delete the “shall not exceed ten (10) percent of the total floor area on the site” provision. Antique shop, Barber and beauty shop, Book and stationary shop, Camera shop, Candy store, Clothing store, (including clothing accessories), Custom sewing or millinery, Drugstore or pharmacy, Eating place, (Pick-up Only), Florist shop, Health studio or spa, Hobby shop, Jewelry store, Key shop, Laundry pickup station, Tailor shop. C. Add the following permitted uses in the “C-3” General Commercial District: Appliance sales and repairs, Audio sales and service, Auto parts and accessories, Bakery or confectionery shop, Beauty supply store, Bicycle shop, Beverage shop, (coffee, tea, fruit or health drinks), Card shop, Carpet and flooring store, Catering, commercial, Clock or watch repair, Cosmetic store, Computer sales and repair, Dollar and variety store, Fabric store, Food store, Frame shop, Furniture store and/or rentals and/or repairs, Garden and supply shop (indoor only), Gift shop, Handicraft, ceramic, sculpture or similar artwork store, studio or gallery, Hardware store, Houseware and kitchen store, Interior decorating shop, Job printing, Lithographer, printing or blue printing, Kitchen remodeling store, Linen shop, Luggage store, Medical appliance fittings and sales, Mail services store, Massage therapist, Music store, Office equipment sales and service, Office supply store, Optical shop, Paint and wallpaper store, School supplies, Second hand shop (resale of used goods such as used furniture, clothes, books, etc, ), Shoe repair, Sporting goods store, Swimming pool sales and supplies, Telephone and accessory sales and repair, Television sales and repairs, Toy store, Upholstery shop, Video, DVD, CD’s sales and rentals, Vitamins and health food store. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an office building and associated parking currently being used as a medical office. To the north of the site is a private school and to the south of the site is a residential tower and an office tower is located to the southwest. There is a nursing home located immediately west of the site and east of the site are office uses. Other uses in the area include two shopping centers, Park Plaza and Mid-Towne. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8152 3 C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site, all residents who could be identified, located within 300-feet of the site, the Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood Association and the Briarwood Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. University Avenue is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial. Dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline will be required. 2. The proposed land use would classify Father Tribou Street (Lee Street) on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 3. A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of Father Tribou Street and University Avenue. 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. Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/of additional water meters are required. Fire Department: Approved as submitted County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the West Little Rock Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use for this property. The applicant is March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8152 4 proposing to rezone the site to Planned Commercial District to all additional commercial uses to be available as allowable uses for the site. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Farther Tribou is shown as a Collector on the Master Street Plan and University Avenue is shown as a Arterial street. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. The primary function of a Collector Street is to provide a connection from Local Streets to Arterials. The primary function of an Arterial Street is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within an urbanized area. Bicycle Plan: Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III Bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Mid-Town Neighborhood Action Plan. The Zoning and Land Use goal has these objective(s) relevant to this case: “Improve and increase retail development to meet local demands for goods and services, revitalize declining commercial areas and support smart growth and positive in-fill development. Landscape: No comment. Any future redevelopment of the site may require the addition of landscaping such as perimeter landscaping, parking lot landscaping and building landscaping. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (December 28, 2006) The applicant was not present. Staff stated there were no outstanding technical issues associated with the request. Staff stated they would work with the applicant to ensure all comments were complied with or variances and/or waivers requested. 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 remaining from the December 28, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has met with staff concerning the requested right of way dedication and is seeking a deferral of the required dedication. Staff is not supportive of the deferral request however staff is supportive of a reduced right of way dedication. Staff is supportive of the allowance of a 25-foot right of way dedication along Father Tribou Drive and a 45-foot right of way dedication along South University Avenue. According to the applicant, with the current configuration of the site plan, the full right of way dedication would severely impact the site and present access drives. This being March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8152 5 the case, staff is supportive of the reduced standard for this application request. Staff is not supportive of a deferral of the right of way dedication. Staff feels the right of way should be dedicated as a part of the approval. The rezoning request will potentially increase the activity on the site, creating a commercial development, thus potentially necessitating additional street improvements in the area. The site is located within the Midtown Overlay District. The purpose of the Midtown Overlay District is to create a quality vital atmosphere for businesses, commercial or office and residents. Buildings, parking, signage, landscaping and street furnishings should all be designed to complement and encourage pedestrian use both day and evening. As stated in the purpose and intent section of the Midtown Overlay District proper planning is necessary to ensure visual clutter is avoided. Guideline and strategies must be in place to protect the district from the negative impact of poorly planned or incompatible development has the potential to destroy the attributes that will attract people to the district. The district regulations shall apply to new development, and redevelopment exceeding fifty percent of the structure’s current replacement value and expansion of existing development. The design guidelines shall be implemented when a permit is requested for exterior improvements on buildings or in the public right of way. Routine repairs, maintenance and interior alterations shall not require compliance with the overlay regulations. The applicant is proposing the redevelopment of the site as a mixed use development with no limits placed on the uses proposed. There are no exterior modifications proposed to the existing building or parking. All renovations will be interior renovations only. The building contains 11,968 square feet along with 72 parking spaces. Based on typically minimum parking requirements for a commercial development, 39 parking spaces would be required. Based on typical parking ratios for a mixed use development (1 space per 225 square feet) 53 parking spaces would typically be required. Neither the site plan nor cover letter indicates any signage either existing or proposed. Signage typically allowed in office zones is a maximum of six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area. With regard to signage, the Midtown Overlay District states no pole-mounted signs and no wood, painted signs or pan-faced-style signs are permitted. Staff would recommend if additional signage is approved, the signage conform to signage as allowed per the Midtown Overlay District. Staff has concerns with the proposed use mix and a number of the indicated uses proposed for the site. As stated, the applicant has not placed limits on the proposed use mix of the site; only indicated the site will be redeveloped as a mixed use development. The site is indicated on the City’s Future Land Use Plan as “Mixed Use” which allows for the residential, office and commercial uses to occur. The Land Use classification requires the approval of a planned zoning district if the use is entirely office or commercial or if the use is a mixture of the three. With the current application request, the site could be solely a commercial use as indicated in the Proposal Section above. There are a number of uses staff feels are not appropriate for the site based on the level of activity the proposed uses typically generate. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8152 6 Although there are a number of commercial uses located in the area staff does not feel this site is appropriate for a one hundred percent commercial development. There are residential uses located to the west and south of the site both in a nursing home and a residential tower and office uses located to the south, west and east of the site. A school is located to the northwest of the site. The retail activity has predominately been held south of C Street at the intersections of University Avenue and West Markham Street both classified on the Master Street Plan as arterial roadways. The site is currently zoned O-3 which allows 10 percent of the total floor area to be a commercial type activity as listed in the accessory uses under the O-3 zoning district. Staff feels the presently allowed commercial uses are adequate. Staff feels the use of the property should remain predominately office with the commercial activity being secondary. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 18, 2007) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request dated January 18, 2007, requesting a deferral of the item. Staff stated the deferral request would require a waiver of the Commission’s By-laws with regard to the late deferral request. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to waiver the By-laws with regard to the late deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. STAFF UPDATE: In recognition of the fact that this is a developed site and the applicant proposes only use changes and no changes to the existing building footprint, drives and parking, staff is recommending a reduced right of way dedication on Father Tribou Street (formerly Lee Street) of 25 feet from the centerline (instead of the Master Street Plan requirement of 30 feet) and 45 feet from the centerline of University Avenue (rather than 55 feet). The approximate 5 foot dedication on Father Tribou and University Avenue are required due to the increased intensity of uses for the site with the change from office to commercial uses and the allowance of up to 75 percent of the site being selected C-3 commercial uses by right. With the greater intensity of the use mix, additional traffic is expected which right turn lanes can correct when added to the existing streets, but until such lanes are built, the City will provide the applicant with a franchise to allow the March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8152 7 existing parking to be located in the portion of the right of way to be dedicated. Any future redevelopment of the site will require full right of way dedication and meeting the boundary street ordinance requirements. The applicant expressed concern about the effect of future street widening on access to the site and improvements now located in the portion to be dedicated. For City-funded projects, the City bears the cost of relocating improvements such as driveways, curbing and landscaping which is disturbed in the street widening process. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request dated February 21, 2007, requesting the item be withdrawn from consideration without prejudice. Staff stated they were supportive of the withdrawal request. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for withdrawal. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: C FILE NO.: LU06-08-04 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Central City Planning District Location: Either side of Daisy Bates east of Bishop Street Request: Single Family and Mixed Use to Office and Neighborhood Commercial Source: Ron Woods PROPOSAL / REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the Central City Planning District from Single Family to Office and Mixed Use to Neighborhood Commercial. The proposed Neighborhood Commercial is a quarter block at the northeast corner of Daisy Bates and Bishop Streets and the proposed Office is one lot at the southeast corner of Daisy Bates and Bishop Streets. Neighborhood Commercial includes limited small-scale commercial development in close proximity to a neighborhood. Office represents services provided directly to consumers as well as general offices, which support more basic economic activities. The proposed use of the property is for residential/office and commercial. Staff is not expanding this application because this area was reviewed within the past year. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is urban residential with one single-family residence and two duplexes. It is currently zoned O3 General Office District on the north side of Daisy Gatson Bates Drive and R3 Single Family on the south side of Daisy Gatson Bates Drive. The site is 1 acre ± in size. To the east and southeast of this site is zoned C3 General Commercial and is used for commercial type uses: a beauty parlor, a Church’s Chicken and Uncle T’s Food Mart. To the west is currently vacant, and it is zoned O2 General Office for a new medical clinic and a parking lot. To the southwest is zoned R3 Single Family for single-family residences. Immediately north of this site is zoned R4 Two Family District, but it is a vacant lot. Northeast of the area is zoned R5 and currently is used for multi family housing. The area to the south has a single-family residence on it, and there is very little space between the application area and this house. To the southwest of this site, on the southwest corner of Bishop and Daisy Gatson Bates is a Planned Office Development for a hair salon in a house. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: The application site is currently planned for Mixed Use on the north side of Daisy Gatson Bates Drive. The portion of the application on the south side of Daisy Gatson Bates Drive is planned for Single Family. To the southwest is also planned for Single March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU06-08-04 2 Family Residential. To the east and southeast is planned Neighborhood Commercial, and to the west is Public Institutional. North of this site is planned for Mixed Office Commercial. October 4, 2005, Ordinance 19418 amended multiple locations in this area. Immediately to the west of the application was changed from Mixed Use to Neighborhood Commercial. To the southeast was changed from Mixed Use to Single Family. And north of this site at 13th and Bishop was changed from Mixed Office Commercial to Public Institutional. March 19, 2002, Ordinance 18656 changed multiple areas in this vicinity. Two blocks between Wolfe and Bishop and north of Daisy Gatson Bates were changed from Public Institutional and Mixed Use to Mixed Use and Public Institutional. MASTER STREET PLAN: Bishop Street is shown as a Local Street on the Master Street Plan. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Local Streets that 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. Daisy Gatson Bates Drive is shown as a Collector on the Master Street Plan. 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. BICYCLE PLAN: A Class II route is shown along Daisy Gatson Bates Drive. A Class II bikeway is located on the street as either a 5’ shoulder or six foot marked bike lane. Additional paving and right of way may be required. PARKS: According to the Master Parks Plan, this area is within eight blocks of a park or open space. The application area is located between three different parks: Centennial, Dunbar, and Ninth Street. HISTORIC DISTRICTS: There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this amendment. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU06-08-04 3 CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN: The area is not covered by a city recognized Neighborhood Action Plan. ANALYSIS: The application site is part of an existing residential area in the Central City Planning District. The application site is on the north and south sides of Daisy L. Gatson Bates Drive on the east side of Bishop Street. Daisy Gatson Bates Drive is one of the main entryways into the Central High National Historic District. Central High School National Landmark is also accessed from downtown via Daisy Gatson Bates. As the entryway to this national landmark, this street and its development should be closely scrutinized. Within a half-mile of this application site there are various opportunities for Commercial uses on the Future Land Use Plan. The intersection of 16th Street and Martin Luther King Drive is occupied and planned for Neighborhood Commercial. Half a mile to the south of the application area is Wright Avenue, which is planned for either Mixed Use or Commercial between Summit and Pulaski Streets. This area has several vacant lots that could be developed for commercial use. Currently the portion of the application site on the north side of Daisy Gatson Bates Drive is planned for Mixed Use. A Planned Zoning Development (PZD) is required with the Mixed Use category if the use is entirely office or commercial or if the use is a mixture of the three (residential, office, commercial). A PZD would allow this area to be scrutinized more closely before development while a change to Neighborhood Commercial would allow small-scale commercial development without a PZD. While commercial uses are allowed in both Mixed Use and Neighborhood Commercial, Mixed Use category is preferable for this site because it requires the PZD. Children’s Hospital is developing the site immediately west of the application area. A site plan review for a clinic in O2 zoning was required. One block further west on Daisy Gatson Bates Drive is an old school building that has been converted into apartments. This site was reviewed through the PZD process for a Planned Development-Residential. In essence, the two blocks immediately to the west went through a more intense plan review. In keeping with this trend, this new application site should be required to complete a PZD as required in the Mixed Use category. Another point to consider is that the tract of land just east of this application site, the quarter-block at the northwest corner of Martin Luther King Drive and Daisy Gatson Bates, is already planned for Neighborhood Commercial, zoned C3, and is vacant. While there is still vacant Neighborhood Commercial available with no development pending, a Land Use Amendment without a specific use seems premature. There does not seem to be a high demand in the area for more commercial uses. There are also March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU06-08-04 4 many opportunities for office space to the north of Daisy Gatson Bates Drive. South of Daisy Bates has a land use pattern of single-family residences. North of Daisy Bates is seeing increasing amounts of Children’s Hospital owned property. The medical office uses will most likely continue to dominate this area north of Daisy Bates. The portion of the application site on the south side of Daisy Gatson Bates Drive is planned for Single Family. There is currently a single-family residence on the lot and there are houses next door and across Bishop Street. These houses are the northernmost part of a larger area of housing that expands south to Roosevelt. These houses were built very close together, and there is very little space on the south side of Daisy Gatson Bates between the proposed office and the single-family house on Bishop. Also, these single-family homes face the side streets. This is an aspect of the neighborhood that needs to be protected and strengthened. A design review of development to the north of Daisy Bates can help to protect these side street facing houses. Again, a change to Suburban office instead of Office could be more appropriate since the Suburban Office category requires a PZD for the site. The juxtaposition between the Office and the Single Family needs to be addressed in the bulk, mass, and use of any proposed development. A change to Office on the Land Use Plan would be inappropriate because it would not leave any sort of buffer between the houses and the offices. Also, the Land Use Plan for this area was just reviewed last year, and Ordinance 19418 amended multiple locations in this area. The three acres adjacent to the east of this application site was changed from Mixed Use to Neighborhood Commercial. At the intersection of 15th Street and Dr. Martin Luther King Drive, four acres were changed from Office to Mixed Use. One block further south was changed from Mixed Use to Neighborhood Commercial. All these changes were intended to make the Land Use Plan more reflective of the existing land use, zoning and likely short-term future land use development of the area. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Central High Neighborhood, Inc. and Downtown Neighborhood Association. Staff has not received any comments. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is not appropriate. Staff believes that not only the use but also the design should be reviewed for the entry to a National Landmark Site such as Central High School. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU06-08-04 5 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 28, 2006) At the request of the applicant this item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral. By a vote of 9 for, 0 against the consent agenda was approved. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 9, 2006) The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral at the request of the applicant to December 7, 2006. By a vote of 9 for, 0 against (Rahman, Allen absent) the consent agenda was approved. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 7, 2006) The applicant requested this item be differed to January 18, 2007. The item was placed on consent agenda for deferral. By a vote of 10 for, 0 against the consent agenda was approved. STAFF UPDATE: Part of the application (the portion north of Daisy Gatson Bates) has been withdrawn. The application has been amended to a change from Single Family to Suburban Office on the south side of Daisy Gatson Bates. Staff believes the change is not appropriate. Staff believes that, while Suburban Office is designed to be compatible with surrounding Single Family Residential, this does not mean that Suburban Office change from Single Family is always appropriate. In this case the structures are oriented to the side street. Staff feels that it is inappropriate to introduce a different land use plan category into this block. As has been noted the general neighborhood is a fragile residential neighborhood. There has been some minimal redevelopment of the residential in the area to the south and east. The City wishes to encourage this reinvestment in the residential housing stock of the neighborhood. As part of this effort non-residential uses should be kept to the north of Daisy Bates in this section of Bishop Street. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 18, 2007) The item was placed on consent agenda for deferral at the request of Staff due to an issue on the related PZD application. By a vote of 10 for, 0 against the consent agenda was approved. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU06-08-04 6 STAFF UPDATE: There has been no change to this application. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant requested this item be withdrawn without prejudice. The item was placed on consent agenda for withdrawal. The consent agenda was approved by a vote of 9 for, 0 against with 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: C.1 FILE NO.: Z-8101-A NAME: Bishop Street Short-form POD and Central Station Commercial Retail Center Short-form PCD LOCATION: Located on the Southwest corner of 14th and Bishop Streets and the Northwest corner of Daisy Gatson Bates and Martin L. King Boulevard DEVELOPER: Ron Woods, AIA 2200 South Main Street Little Rock, AR 72206 ENGINEER: Blaylock Threet Engineers, Inc. 1501 Market Street Little Rock, AR 72211 AREA: 0.97 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 Zoning Lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: O-3 and C-3 and R-4 ALLOWED USES: General and Professional Office, General Commercial and Two-family Residential PROPOSED ZONING: PCD and PD-O PROPOSED USE: C-3 uses and Office VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a rezoning of the property located on the northwest corner of Daisy L. Gatson Bates and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Drive from O-3 and C-3 to Planned Commercial Development (PCD) to allow the development of the site with a two story structure of approximately 20,000 square feet in area. The use is mixed retail and office space; with retail approximately 10,076 square feet and office approximately 10,000 square feet. There are fifty-two (52) onsite parking spaces and the developer is currently in negotiations with Arkansas Children’s Hospital to lease thirty (30) additional spaces adjacent to the property to the west. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8101-A 2 The request includes the abandonment of an alley located within the development. The alley is located adjacent to Lots 4 – 6 and Lot 7R Centennial Addition to the City of Little Rock. The property located on the southeast corner of West 14th and Bishop Streets is also proposed for rezoning. The property is currently zoned R-4 and the applicant is seeking approval of a Planned Office Development (PD-O) to allow the site to be utilized as an office use for the management of the retail center proposed for construction. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: There are two sites under consideration for redevelopment. The property at the northeast corner of Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard, Bishop Street and Daisy L. Gatson Bates Drive and a property located at the southeast corner of Bishop Street and Daisy L. Gatson Bates Drive. The northern site is occupied by three (3) single- family residential structures and the lot at the southeast corner is occupied by a single- family residence. There are platted alley rights-of-way along the east side of both properties. There is a mixture of uses in this general area. Arkansas Children’s Hospital property is located immediately north and west of the northern property. The intersection of Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard and Daisy L. Gatson Bates Drive has commercial uses on three of the four corners; these commercial businesses including a barbershop, a strip center and a restaurant. Single-family residential structures and vacant lots are located to the south and southwest. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site, all residents, who could be identified, located within 300-feet of the site, the Downtown and Central High Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Provide notification of all property owners located within 200-feet of the site, complete with the certified abstract list, notice form with affidavit executed and proof of mailing. The notice must be mailed no later than November 22, 2006. The Office of Planning and Development must receive the proof of notice no later than November 30, 2006. 2. Provide a detailed cover letter of the application request. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8101-A 3 3. Provide the proposed zoning classifications of each of the proposed uses (south of Daisy L Gatson Bates and north of Daisy L Gatson Bates). Will the southern property be used as an office for the strip center? 4. The site plan indicates the placement of the green area at the intersection of Bishop Street and not at the intersection of Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. Staff feels this intersection should be enhanced. 5. Provide details of the proposed bus pull off. Will the buses be parked in this area for a length of time? 6. Provide the total square footage of restaurant space and the total square footage of other retail space. The site plan indicates the placement of an outdoor dining area. Provide the total square footage of the outdoor dining area as well. 7. Provide the proposed building elevations for the center. Provide construction materials of the new building being proposed. 8. Will any parking or additional paving be added to the southern property? If so provide a site plan indicating the proposed additional paving. 9. Provide the days and hours of operation for each of the proposed uses. 10. Provide the hours of dumpster service in the general notes section of the site plan. 11. Any additional site lighting must be low level and directed downward and into the site. 12. Provide written agreements for any off site parking. 13. Provide the total percentage of landscaped area, the total percentage of building coverage and the total percentage of parking coverage in the general notes section of the site plan. 14. Provide the maximum building height in the general notes section of the site plan. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: There is an existing 8 inch sewer main located on the property. No construction of any permanent structure within five feet of the existing sewer main. 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 fire hydrant(s) will be March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8101-A 4 required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #11 – the Martin Luther King Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Central City Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family and Mixed Use for this property. The applicant has applied for a rezoning to Planned Office Development and Planned Commercial Development. A land use plan amendment for a change to Suburban Office on the southeast corner of Daisy Gatson Bates and Bishop Street is a separate item on this agenda (LU06-08-04). Master Street Plan: Daisy Gatson Bates is shown as a Collector on the Master Street Plan and Bishop Street is shown as a Local Street. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. The primary function of a Collector Street is to provide a connection from Local Streets to Arterials. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Bicycle Plan: A Class II bike route is shown on Daisy Gatson Bates Drive. A Class II bikeway is located on the street as either a 5 foot shoulder or six foot marked bike lane. Additional paving and right of way may be required. 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. Landscape: 1. Site plan must comply with the City’s minimal landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 2. The proposal appears to be located within the six foot nine inch (6’-9”) wide landscape strip along the northern property line next to the residentially zoned property. This is a requirement of both the zoning buffer ordinance and the landscape ordinance. Seventy percent (70%) of this buffer is to remain March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8101-A 5 undisturbed. A variance from the City Beautiful Commission will be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. 3. A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the northern perimeter of the site. Credit towards fulfilling this requirement can be given for existing trees and undergrowth that satisfies this year-around requirement. 4. A small amount of building landscaping is required. This landscape area is to be located between the parking lot and the building. 5. The landscape ordinance and the street buffer ordinance requires a minimum of six foot nine inches of landscaped area along Daisy L. Gatson Bates. Current proposal does not allow for this minimum requirement. A variance from this minimum requirement will require approval from the City Beautiful Commission prior to the issuance of a building permit. It appears the parking lot can be reduced to help meet this minimum requirement. 6. Street trees may be required in this area. They would also enhance the area and this project. 7. An automatic irrigation system to water the landscaped areas is required. 8. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this tree-covered site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (December 28, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating there were a number of outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff requested the applicant provide a detailed cover letter for the project. Staff questioned the proposed uses for the new strip center and the proposed office use for the residence located south of Daisy L. Gatson Bates. Staff questioned the number of restaurants to locate in the strip center. Staff also questioned how the intersection of Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Daisy L. Gatson Bates would be softened. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated radial dedications would be required at the intersections of the abutting streets. Staff also stated the site plan was not drawn to scale and requested the applicant provide a scalable drawing. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposal appeared to be located within the required land use buffer located along the northern perimeter. Staff stated screening would be required along the northern perimeter. Staff also stated a small amount of building landscaping would be required. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8101-A 6 Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them directly for additional information and clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the December 28, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has submitted a revised site plan which places the building closer to Daisy L. Gatson Bates and places the parking within the rear of the building. The site plan indicates the placement of landscaping and a courtyard at the intersection of Daisy L. Gatson Bates and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Drive to soften the impact on the intersection. The site plan includes the placement of 51 on site parking spaces. The developer has indicated negotiations are underway with an adjoining property owner to lease an additional 30 parking spaces through a long-term lease. The development is proposed with approximately 20,000 square feet of retail and office spaces. Based on the typical minimum parking required for a mixed use development 88 parking spaces would typically be required. Staff is supportive of the parking as proposed provided the applicant secure the additional 30 offsite parking spaces as proposed. The site plan does not include the placement of signage on the site plan. Staff recommends signage be limited to signage as allowed per the commercial zoning district or a maximum of 36-feet in height and 160 square feet in area. Building signage should be limited to building signage as allowed in commercial zones or a maximum of ten percent of the façade area. The hours of operation for the facility have not been indicated. Staff would recommend hours of operation be limited to 6:00 am to midnight seven days per week. The adjacent parking lot has been indicated as a part of the proposed site plan. The parking lot has been indicated with two drive locations along West 13th Street. Staff is not supportive of the placement of the two driveway locations. Typically drives are to be spaced at a minimum of 150-feet from the intersection and 150-feet from the property line. Staff recommends the parking lot access be provided via the existing alley or one drive location be provided to serve the proposed parking lot. With respect to the lot at the southeast corner of Bishop Street and Daisy Bates Drive, staff believes the zoning should remain single family residential. With the exception of the POD zoning immediately west, the properties south of Daisy Bates Drive and west of the C-3 zoned property at the southwest corner of M. L. King Drive and Daisy Bates Drive contain single family/two-family residences and are zoned R-3 and R-4. There are also a number of vacant lots in this area. Staff believes that new home March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8101-A 7 construction could take place in this area in the near future, with renewed interest in the Central High area of Little Rock. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the rezoning request located on the Northwest corner of Daisy L. Gatson Bates Drive and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive from O-3 and C-3 to PCD subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E, F and H of the above agenda staff report. Staff recommends denial of the requested rezoning from R-4 to PD-O located on the Southeast corner of Daisy L. Gatson Bates Drive and Bishop Street. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 18, 2007) The applicant was present. There was one registered objector present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of deferral of the item to the March 1, 2007, public hearing. Staff stated concerns had been raised concerning the proposed parking arrangement and they needed additional time to alleviate this concern. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. STAFF UPDATE: There has been no change in this application request since the previous public hearing. Staff continues to recommend denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a revised site plan and a letter of commitment from Arkansas Children’s Hospital indicating an agreement for the placement of 30 parking spaces on property owned by ACH. Staff also stated the applicant had indicated the closing hour of the development would be 2:00 am to correspond with closing hours of adjacent businesses. Staff stated the applicant had amended the application request removing the POD portion of the request located on the southeast corner of 14th and Bishop Streets. Staff stated they were now supportive of the proposed request. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the proposed PCD zoning subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8101-A 8 There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: D FILE NO.: S-1495-A NAME: Park Circle Subdivision Preliminary Plat LOCATION: Located at the end of Park Avenue, East of Western Hills Avenue DEVELOPER: CL Clifton 608 Nan Circle Little Rock, AR 72211 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 10 Otter Creek Court, Suite A Little Rock, AR 72210 AREA: 7.07 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 30 FT. NEW STREET: 2,500 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT: 10 – Boyle Park CENSUS TRACT: 24.06 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: An application was filed for the July 7, 2005, Planning Commission public hearing to allow the creation of 12 single-family lots from a 3.22-acre tract. The lots were proposed with an average lot size of 60-feet by 120-feet or 7,200 square feet and 600 linear feet of new street was to be constructed to serve the new lots. Staff raised concerns related to access for the proposed development and the Commission deferred the request to their November 10, 2005, public hearing. At the November 10, 2005, public hearing the applicant withdrew the proposed plat request. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now proposing the subdivision of a 7.07-acre site into 30 single- family lots. The proposed plat area has been expanded to the north to include a portion of property previously owned by the Country Club. An average lot size of March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1495-A 2 60-feet by 120-feet or 7,200 square feet is proposed with an overall density of 4.24 units per acre, consistent with single-family development. The developer has indicated the lots will be served by a new 600 linear foot cul-de-sac, Park Circle, extending from Park Avenue, a yet to be constructed street located to the west of the site, which extends from Western Hills Avenue. The developer has indicated Lot 1 Block 3 of the Brookside Park Addition will be reconfigured as right of way to allow Park Avenue to extend into the proposed plat area. The developer has indicated the site is adjacent to the floodway and has indicated a 25-foot access easement adjacent to the floodway for the proposed lots (Lots 1 – 5) to meet the current ordinance requirement. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The property is located to the east of Brookside Park Addition, a recognized plat which was platted a number of years ago, and lots sold, but the streets and infrastructure were never constructed. The Little Rock Board of Directors approved an Improvement District for the Brookside Park Addition to allow funding for water, sewer and street construction. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. All abutting property owners and the Westwood Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. The subject property appears to be out of the 100-year floodplain. 2. Western Hills Drive must be constructed to the full width prior to final platting of the proposed subdivision. 3. A temporary cul-de-sac or turn around must be constructed on the north end of Parkside Circle until the next phase to the north is constructed. 4. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required along Western Hills Drive and the northern portion of Parkside Circle in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1495-A 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. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 6. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. The project would qualify for a contribution in-lieu of construction at the time of platting. 7. With the site development, provide the design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct street improvement to Western Hills Drive and Parkside Circle including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. 8. With the site development, provide the design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to Western Hills Avenue including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. 9. Street Improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction. 10. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Contact Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information regarding streetlight requirements. 11. Obtain permits prior to doing any street cuts or curb cuts. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way. Contact Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield) for more information. 12. Due to an identification problem, the street name "Parkside Circle" cannot be used. The street name Parkside Drive is already used in another part of the City. Using the street name "Parkside Circle" in no close vicinity to "Parkside Drive" creates confusion. Contact David Hathcock at 371-4808 for additional information and assistance with this matter. 13. 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 main extension required with easements. Contact the 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. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1495-A 4 Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Installation of a public waterline and fire hydrant(s) will 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. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 377-1225 for additional information. 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: (December 28, 2006) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. Staff stated the proposed development was a preliminary plat to allow 7.07 acres to be subdivided into 30 single-family lots. Staff questioned access to the proposed subdivision and the time frame for construction of the proposed street to serve the lots. Mr. McGetrick stated Lot 1 Block 3 of the Brookside Park Addition would be dedicated as right of way to serve the indicated lots. Staff also questioned if the development would be constructed in phases. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated minimum floor elevations would be required to be shown on the proposed plat. Staff also stated a dedication of an access easement adjacent to the floodway would be required along the rear of abutting the floodway. Staff requested Mr. McGetrick provide the 100 year floodplain and floodway on the proposed preliminary plat to ensure compliance with existing ordinance requirements. Staff noted a grading permit would be issued for right of ways and drainage easements prior to construction. Staff noted comments from all other reporting departments and agencies suggesting Mr. McGetrick contact them individually for additional information. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1495-A 5 H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the December 28, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has provided the minimum floor elevation for lots abutting the floodplain and indicated a 25-foot access easement along the rear of the lots abutting the floodway. The applicant has also provided a letter indicated the proposed street extending from Western Hills Avenue will be constructed before year end of 2007. The revised plat indicates the lots will be developed in a single phase. The proposal is to allow the subdivision of a 7.07-acre site into 30 single-family lots. The proposed plat indicates an average lot size of 60-feet by 120-feet or 7,200 square feet and an overall density of 4.24 units per acre. The development will be served by a new 600 linear foot cul-de-sac, Park Circle, extending from Park Avenue, a yet to be constructed street located to the west of the site, which extends from Western Hills Avenue. Lot 1, Block 3 of the Brookside Park Addition is proposed to be dedicated as right of way to allow Park Avenue to extend into the proposed plat area. Staff is supportive of the proposed preliminary plat. The developer is not seeking any waivers or variances from the City ordinances to allow the creation of the subdivision as proposed. The lots are indicated with a minimum lot size of 60-feet by 120-feet adequate to meet the typical minimum requirements of the subdivision ordinance. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff feels the development of the subdivision as proposed will have minimum impact on the adjoining properties. 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 above agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 18, 2007) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item requesting a deferral of the item to the March 1, 2007, public hearing. Staff stated a concern had been raised concerning access to the proposed plat area. Staff stated they needed additional time to research information provide. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1495-A 6 STAFF UPDATE: Staff is continuing to review deed documents to determine the existing right of way for Park Circle. Staff will provide the Commission with a full update at the March 1, 2007, public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented a recommendation of deferred of the item to the April 12, 2007, public hearing to allow additional time to resolve staff’s concerns related to the available right of way for Park Street adjacent to the cemetery property. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: E FILE NO.: S-1554 NAME: Herndon Place Subdivision Preliminary Plat LOCATION: Located South of Stagecoach Road, East of Herndon Road DEVELOPER: RED Land, LLC 9107 North Rodney Parham Road Little Rock, AR 72205 ENGINEER: White Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 21.65 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 70 FT. NEW STREET: 2,950 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT: 12 – 65th Street West CENSUS TRACT: 24.05 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 1. A variance to allow Bracey Circle to be constructed to Minor Residential Street Standard. 2. A variance to allow six foot fences within the required building setback of Lots 6 – 12 Block 1. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing the subdivision of 21.65 acres into 70 single-family residential lots. A total of 2,950 linear feet of new street is proposed to serve the new subdivision with access points to Herndon Road. The subdivision is proposed with reverse frontage lots abutting a new street, Bracey Circle, and Stagecoach Road. A 10-foot restrictive access easement has been placed along the rear lot lines of Lots 6 – 12 Block 1 to limit the number of curb cuts to Stagecoach Road as required by the Subdivision Ordinance for reverse frontage March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1554 2 lots. A 35-foot building setback has been indicated along the rear of these lots to comply with minimum development standards for lots abutting an arterial roadway. The proposed plat indicates the placement of a subdivision identification sign located at the intersection of Bracey Lane and Herndon Road. The sign is proposed with a maximum of six feet in height, ten feet in length and a total sign area not to exceed thirty-two square feet in area. Fencing has been identified along the rear lot lines of Lots 6 – 12 Block 1, within the required building setback, not to exceed six feet in height. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a tree-covered site located at the intersection of Herndon Road and Stagecoach Road. The Pecan Lake Subdivision is located to the east of the site and the Greenwood Acres Subdivision is located to the south of the site. Across Stagecoach Road is a church campus and there is a nursing home located to the north of the site. Stagecoach Road has not been constructed to Master Street Plan standard abutting the proposed subdivision. Presently the roadway is a two lane road with no sidewalk and open ditches for drainage. Herndon Road also has not been constructed to Master Street Plan standard abutting the proposed subdivision with no curb and gutter or sidewalk in place. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. All abutting property owners and the Pecan Lake Homeowners Association, the Tall Timber Homeowners Association and the Stagecoach Dodd Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Stagecoach Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial. Dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline will be required. 2. With the site development, provide the design of the street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to Stagecoach Road including 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development. 3. Street Improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1554 3 4. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required along Bracey Circle from Bracey Lane to Bracey Lane in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. 5. No vehicle parking will be allowed in cul-de-sac. 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. Site grading and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 7. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. 8. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Contact Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information regarding streetlight requirements. 9. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan will be required to be submitted per Section 29-186 (e). The plan shows the release of 144.3 cfs discharging in an existing ditch between 2 houses and into a 24-inch pipe under Timberside Road. A 24-inch shows to have a capacity less than 30 cfs. Improvements of the downstream drainage system maybe required. In addition, show on plan the high water mark of the lake. 10. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. 11. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 12. 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 main extension required with easements. Contact the 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. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1554 4 charges. Water main extensions will be required in order to provide service to this property. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. 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 dedicate CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (December 28, 2006) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the item stating there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff requested Mr. White provide a 35-foot platted building line for the lots abutting Stagecoach Road. Staff also questioned the purpose of Tracts A and B and who would be responsible for maintenance of the two tracts. Staff question if fencing would be placed along the property line for lots abutting Stagecoach Road. Staff noted the maximum fence height allowed within the required building setback was four feet. Staff requested Mr. White indicate a note on the proposed plat if fencing was proposed. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated permits would be required from the City and the Highway Department prior to street construction. Staff also stated a grading permit would be required prior to the development of the site. Staff noted the storm water detention ordinance requirements would apply to the development of the site. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them directly for additional information and clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the December 28, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised plat indicates the dedication of right of way on Stagecoach Road per the March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1554 5 Master Street Plan. The plat also indicates the placement of a 35-foot building line along Stagecoach Road and the placement of a six-foot fence on the property line for the lots abutting Stagecoach Road. The developer has indicated a homeowners association will be created and be responsible for maintenance of the indicated tracts. The tracts will serve as detention storage for the proposed subdivision. Staff has concerns with the indicated storm water detention and the pipe capacity exiting the subdivision located on the southeastern portion of the subdivision. The applicant has indicated they will work with staff during the design phase of the subdivision to eliminate any potential for down stream flooding by either increasing the detention storage size, increasing the pipe capacity located on the southeastern portion of the proposed subdivision, diverting storm water to the existing lake located to the north of the proposed subdivision or providing an in-lieu contribution to the City for down stream maintenance to increase pipe size and capacities of the down stream facilities to receive the potential run-off. The proposal is to allow the subdivision of 21.65 acres into 70 single-family residential lots. A total of 2,950 linear feet of new street is proposed to serve the new subdivision with access points to Herndon Road. The subdivision is proposed with reverse frontage lots abutting a new street, Bracey Circle, and Stagecoach Road. A 10-foot restrictive access easement has been placed along the rear lot lines of Lots 6 – 12, Block 1 to limit the number of curb cuts to Stagecoach Road as required by the Subdivision Ordinance for reverse frontage lots. A 35-foot building setback has also been indicated along the rear of these lots to comply with minimum development standards for lots abutting an arterial roadway. The proposed plat indicates the placement of a subdivision identification sign located at the intersection of Bracey Lane and Herndon Road. The sign is proposed with a maximum of six feet in height, ten feet in length and a total sign area not to exceed thirty-two square feet in area. The plat includes a variance request for the placement of fencing along the rear lot lines of Lots 6 – 12, Block 1, within the required building setback, not to exceed six feet in height. Typically fencing within the required building setback is allowed at a maximum height of four feet. Staff is supportive of the variance request. Staff does not feel the placement of a six-foot fence within the required building setback will impact the development or the area. Staff is supportive of the proposed preliminary plat. The plat indicates the creation of 70 lots on this 21.65-acre site resulting in a density of 3.23 units per acre within the allowable density of single-family development. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff does not feel the creation of the single-family subdivision as proposed will significantly impact the area. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1554 6 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 above agenda staff report. Staff recommends the applicant work with staff during the design phase of the subdivision to eliminate any potential down stream flooding. Staff recommends approval of the variance request to allow the placement of a six-foot fence within the required building setback along Stagecoach Road. Staff recommends approval of the variance request to allow Bracey circle to be constructed with a minor residential street standard. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 18, 2007) The applicant was present. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Mr. Tim Daters addressed the Commission as the applicant. He requested the Commission allow the opposition to speak first and he would try to address their concerns. Ms. Nancy Gambill addressed the Commission with concerns. She stated her home was located to the north of the proposed development and her concern was with the water quality of the lake. She stated her background was in hydrology. She stated she was concerned with construction practices and the detention ordinance. She stated silt fences did not appear to work and questioned who to call when fences failed or were not in place. Ms. Mary Rogers addressed the Commission with concerns. She stated the lake was the primary asset of the Pecan Lake Subdivision. She stated presently the lake was having water quality problems and the association was in the process of hiring a firm to renovate the lake. She stated the lake was important to the youth of the subdivision. She stated the lake as proposed did not allow an easement around the lake. She stated the proposed subdivision was located adjacent to the deepest part of the lake. She requested the Commission defer the item to allow the developers and the neighborhood to meet and discuss the proposed development and the potential impacts on the neighborhood lake. Mr. Daters stated he was willing to defer the item to meet with the neighborhood and address their concerns. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1554 7 A motion was made to defer the item to the March 1, 2007, public hearing. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. STAFF UPDATE: Staff and the applicant have meet with the Greenwood Acres Subdivision property owners and are scheduled to meet with the Pecan Lake Property Owners Association on February 22, 2007. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above agenda staff report. Staff also presented a recommendation the applicant work with staff during the design phase of the subdivision to eliminate any potential down stream flooding. Staff stated the applicant had indicated they did not propose to add any drainage area to the 24” pipe to the east or exceed the capacity of the ditch leading to the pipe. Staff stated the developers would construct sufficient detention on the project so that the discharge of a 25 year storm did not exceed the capacity of the existing 18” pipe crossing under Herndon Road. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the variance request to allow the placement of a six foot fence within the required building setback along Stagecoach Road and the requested variance to allow Bracey Circle to be constructed with a minor residential street standard. Mr. Tim Daters addressed the commission on the merits of the request. Mr. Daters stated the developers were agreeable to creating a tract adjacent to the lots abutting the lake located to the north of the site and dedicating the tract to the Pecan Lake Property Owners Association. He stated detention would be provided during the construction phase to contain any potential runoff and silting to protect the adjacent lake. Ms. Mary Rogers addressed the Commission in support of the request. She thanked the Commission for the deferral of the item to allow the developers and the property owners to work out any potential problems. She stated with the dedication to the property owners association they were now in full support of the proposed preliminary plat. Mr. Bill Greenwood addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated he was developing the subdivision to the south of the proposed site and did not feel the street was adequate to serve the proposed subdivision along with the currently approved Greenwood Acres Subdivision. He requested the Commission require the developers to take access from Stagecoach Road. He stated with the development of 82 lots this would generate a minimum of 164 additional cars on the existing City street. He stated the subdivision taking access from Herndon Road would require the new March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1554 8 homeowners to travel approximately two City blocks within the Greenwood Acres Subdivision to access their subdivision. He stated Herndon Road presently had problems with speeding and felt the additional traffic would only increase the problem of speeders on the street. He stated with the additional homes a traffic light would be required to allow residents to exit the subdivision. He stated the subdivision only had one way in and out which created safety concerns for the existing residents. Ms. Mary Ann Wilkerson addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated she was representing the Greenwood Acres Subdivision and the homeowners were opposed to the additional traffic on the existing City street. She stated the development should be required to take access from Stagecoach Road or from Rockwood Road. Ms. Helen Holmes addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated Greenwood Acres was a new neighborhood and the safety of the children was her primary concern. She stated with the current development it was difficult to get in and out of the subdivision. She stated with the new homes this would only increase this already difficult situation. She stated she was not opposed to the subdivision, only the entrance of the subdivision through Greenwood Acres. Mr. Bruce Martin addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated his concern was the entrance proposed for the new subdivision. He stated with 48 homes in Greenwood Acres and the addition of 82 homes in the new subdivision traffic would be increased on the existing street. He requested the developers find a new entrance to the subdivision. Mr. Daters stated the entrance was proposed on an existing City street. He stated the street was a residential street constructed to collector standard. He stated an entrance from Stagecoach Road would create a sight distance problem for any potential access point. Commissioner Laha question if sidewalks would be added to Herndon Road adjacent to the proposed development. Mr. Daters stated a sidewalk would be added along the property frontage. Mr. Daters stated the developers would also improve Stagecoach Road to principal arterial standards for approximately 400 feet along their frontage. He stated there would be no access to Stagecoach Road from the lots abutting Stagecoach Road by the placement of a 10-foot restrictive no right of vehicular access easement. The Commission question staff concerning the placement of an access point on Stagecoach Road. Staff stated access as proposed was the best location. Staff stated with the additional right of way a turn lane could be added to get motorist out of the through traffic to access Herndon Road. Staff also stated Herndon Road was not classified on the Master Street Plan as a collector street but had been constructed to collector street standard. The Commission questioned if current traffic counts for Herndon Road were available. Staff stated current traffic counts were not available. The Commission questioned who had constructed Herndon Road. Staff stated the developer of Greenwood Acres had constructed the road to entire width but this was the developers choice and not a requirement of public works. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for approval of the item. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: F FILE NO.: LA-0015 NAME: Whisenhunt Investments Land Alteration Variance Request LOCATION: Northwest corner of Chenal Parkway and Kanis Road APPLICANT: Whisenhunt Investments APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATIVE: Development Consultants, Inc. AREA: 4.06 acres CURRENT ZONING: C3 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from the Land Alteration Regulations to advance clear and grade with construction not being imminent. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Applicant is requesting a variance from the Land Alteration Regulations to advance clear and grade the property with construction not being imminent. The approximately 4.06 acre property is located on the northwest corner of Chenal Parkway and western leg of Kanis Road. The applicant desires to clear and fill the property with excess dirt from the Fellowship Church site and other undeveloped parcels north of the future extension of Wellington Hills Road. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: This approximately 4.06 acre tree covered C3 zoned property is tract land located on the northwest corner of Chenal Parkway and the western leg of Kanis Road. Developed C3 zoned property is located on the west. The Entergy power substation is located on the northwest. On the north, the property is bordered by a transmission right-of-way and beyond that right-of-way is tree covered undeveloped property zoned C3. The property is bordered to the west by Chenal Parkway and beyond Chenal is tree covered, undeveloped property zoned C3. Kanis Road is located south of the property and beyond Kanis is tree covered undeveloped property. Just south of the tree covered undeveloped property is additional property that will be filled by dirt from the Fellowship Church site off Kirk Road. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any phone calls or letters asking questions or requesting additional information. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0015 2 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: 1. If disturbed area is 1 or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 2. Hauling of fill material on or off site over municipal streets and roads requires approval prior to a grading permit being issued. Contact Public Works Traffic Engineering at 621 S. Broadway, (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield) for more information. 3. Tracking of mud and dirt onto City streets is not permissable on city streets. A tracking pad must be installed at least 250 ft from the Kanis-Chenal intersection. 4. Erosion controls must be installed to reduce discharge of polluted stormwater. 5. Per Little Rock Code Sec. 29-190(14), a perimeter buffer strip shall be temporarily maintained around disturbed areas for erosion control purposes and shall be kept undisturbed except for reasonable access for maintenance. The width of the strip shall be 6% of the lot width and depth. The minimum width shall be twenty-five (25) feet and the maximum shall be forty (40) feet. 6. Vegetation must be established on disturbed area within 21 days of completion of harvest activities. E. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS: (October 5, 2006) The applicant was present. Staff stated the comments as written above. The applicant’s representatives, Doug Robertson of Whisenhunt Investments, stated the clearing and grading will comply with Little Rock code, staff recommendations, and comments. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. F. ANALYSIS: The request is to clear the trees and fill the 4.06 acre property located on the northwest corner of Chenal Parkway and the western leg of Kanis Road with the dirt from the Fellowship Church site and the undeveloped parcels north of the future expansion of Wellington Hills Road. No construction is proposed to proceed after the filling and grading activities are completed. The Land Alteration Regulations (Sec. 29-186(b)) specifically state no land alteration shall be permitted until all necessary city approvals of all plans and permits, except building permit, have been issued and construction is imminent. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0015 3 Imminent construction as defined by code means the installation of a foundation or erection of a structure without unreasonable delay following land alteration activities. With this application, the applicant desires to clear and fill the site but has no plans for construction to proceed after the grading is completed. Per code, a grading permit cannot be issued by staff for the clearing and filling without construction being imminent. The code does provide the Planning Commission with the authority to grant a variance for issuance of a grading permit to clear and grade a multi-lot or multi-phase development where construction is not imminent on all phases of the development. G. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Even though the applicant has agreed to comply with the Public Works comments, staff does not support the clearing of additional trees without imminent construction. The additional clearing and filling does not follow the purpose of the Land Alteration Regulations (Sec. 29-168). The code states the purposes are to prevent the excessive grading, clearing, and filling activities and preserve the natural vegetation which enhances the quality of life of the community. Prior to adoption of the Land Alteration Regulations, the applicant cleared and graded about 11 acres south of Chenal Parkway near the Krogers store that has yet to be developed. Recently, staff supported filling approximately 21 acres south of Chenal Parkway and about 47 acres north or Chenal Parkway as part of the Fellowship Church application because they were nearly treeless. In that same application, staff did not support clearing and filling of the area adjacent to the southwest corner of Chenal Parkway and the western leg of Kanis Road because of the existing trees. The applicant’s site plan is incorrect showing the area adjacent to Kanis Road to be cleared and filled. Being the subject property has trees, staff believes it should not be cleared and filled until construction is imminent. The excess dirt can be taken to the previous approved fill areas. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 26, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item indicating applicant had submitted a request dated October 24, 2006, requesting this item be deferred to the December 7, 2006, public hearing. Staff stated the deferral request would require a waiver of the Commission’s By-laws with regard to the late deferral request. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. 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 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. The chair entertained a motion for placement of March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0015 4 the item on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant has not provided staff with the required information to complete the review process. Staff recommends this item be deferred to the January 18, 2007, public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 7, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had not provided staff with the required information to complete the review process. Staff presented a recommendation of deferral of the item to the January 18, 2007, public hearing. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant has told staff that several individuals had contacted them about developing the property. Staff requested the applicant provide a plan of development for the property with schedules of when construction would begin. At the time of writing, a plan of development has not been provided. With this being the case, staff still does not support the clearing of additional trees on this property without imminent construction as stated in the previous staff recommendation. The excess dirt can be taken to the previous approved fill areas. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 18, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request dated January 8, 2007, requesting the item be deferred to the March 1, 2007, public hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0015 5 STAFF UPDATE: There has been no change in this application request since the previous public hearing. Staff continues to recommend denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated on February 28, 2007, the applicant submitted a request for a deferral of the item to the April 12, 2007, public hearing. Staff stated the deferral would require a waiver of the Commission’s By-laws with regard to the late deferral request. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. 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. A motion was made to place the item on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: G Name: Midtown Design Overlay District Location: Along Markham and University Avenues Request: Modifications to the Design Overlay District Source: Staff, Midtown Redevelopment Advisory Board PROPOSAL / REQUEST: This is a request to update and revise the Midtown Design Overlay District as the result of efforts related to the “Statement of Design and Programming Expectation”. This document was developed by the Midtown Redevelopment District #1 Advisory Board with a resolution of support by the Little Rock Board of Directors (resolution 12,396 of December 5, 2006). The Midtown Advisory Board working with Staff has reviewed the existing overlay regulations and suggests changes in order to help implement the ‘Statement’. The Midtown Design Overlay District was originally approved with Ordinance 19004 on December 2, 2003. This was after a several month process where a group of interested citizens, taking the work done by the Urban Land Institute (ULI) and presented in the Midtown report (2001), attempted to draft a Design Overlay District as a tool to help implement the report. The creation of the Midtown Redevelopment District #1 and the Advisory Board for the district were other efforts of the adhoc group to implement the ULI report. The Midtown Advisory Board wishes to assure that any new development or redevelopment meets the vision presented in the ‘Statement of Design and Programming Expectations’. They believe that this document is a further refinement of the original ULI study. After some initial discussions, it was decided that something additional was needed. Staff reviewed the various proposals with the consultant (the Jamison Group) working with the Midtown Advisory Board. It was felt that a revision to the existing Midtown Design Overlay District was the best approach. The consultant and staff developed suggested revisions to the Overlay and presented these to the Midtown Advisory Board. The Board met twice in January to discuss the Design Overlay District (DOD) issue – January 12 and January 26, 2007. These were both public meetings where citizens were present. Staff completed a mailing to all the potentially effected property owners in mid-January, 2007. This was to notify over 227 owners of this meeting before March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) 2 the Little Rock Planning Commission. The efforts to revise the DOD have been made under a tight timeframe in order to meet the time constraints of a moratorium placed on a large part of the existing overlay area. This moratorium was enacted by the Little Rock Board of Directors to allow time for the development of needed rules for future development and redevelopment of the area. On Friday January 12, 2007 the Midtown Advisory Board reviewed each section of a revised Design Overlay District for the Midtown area. This review included additions, deletions and modifications. From the comments made at that meeting further revisions were made and presented to the Advisory Board at their January 26, 2007 meeting. A few minor revisions were made at the meeting and the Advisory Board voted unanimously to recommend the approval of the changes to the Midtown Design Overlay District. Copies of a ‘mark-up’ of the Midtown Design Overlay District were placed on the City website on January 26, 2007 for property owners and others to review. This same document is attached for the Planning Commission to see the proposed changes to the Design Overlay District. In addition, the ‘Statement of Design and Programming Exceptions’ is included for your assistance. The changes to the Overlay are designed to make it responsive to the ‘Statement of Design and Programming Expectations’ and to further refine it. The ‘large building’ section of the Midtown DOD is removed with the requirements of that sub-section placed on all buildings and sites. A bonus section for building height has been added (based on the Urban Use classification). This is to encourage mixed use and provide an incentive. The projections section and some streetscape elements of the River Market DOD are added to the Midtown DOD to further encourage pedestrian oriented development. Addition elements on linkage and sidewalks are also added for this purpose. A new section on lighting is included to make the overlay easier to use. The boundaries of the DOD have been expanded to include the entire redevelopment district. The current boundaries include only a portion of the redevelopment district. Due to this addition along Markham and University, a sub-section for ‘small buildings’ was added. After some discussion the exception process was changed for going to the Board of Adjustment to using a Planned Zoning District (PZD). This is currently used by many of the existing DODs. A new section ‘Development Process’ was added. This section requires a PZD for any new development whether it meets the DOD standards or not. It also requires any redevelopment that makes an addition of area of 50 percent or more, or where the addition is more than 50 percent the replacement value use a March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) 3 PZD. This is required even if the redevelopment meets the other requirements of the DOD. (Interior alterations, maintenance and routine repairs are exempted) This section also sets requirements for mixed developments, if the area added is greater than 100,000 square feet. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 15, 2007) Mr. Craig Berry, chairman of the Midtown Redevelopment District Board asked that the item be deferred to discuss an issue with a major property owner. The Item was deferred to March 1 by a vote of 7 for, 0 against, 1 recuse (Yates) and 3 absent (Allen, Rahman, Stebbins). STAFF UPDATE: The Midtown Advisory Board shall review possible modifications to the overlay including a boundary change and exemption of single-family use and zoning land at their February 23, 2007 meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The item was placed on consent agenda for deferral to April 12, 2007 at the request of Staff and The Midtown Advisory Board. The consent agenda was approved by a vote of 9 for, 0 against and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: S-46-DD NAME: Overlook Revised Preliminary Plat LOCATION: Located on Overlook, North of Overlook Circle DEVELOPER: Overlook Partners 1319 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 3.86 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 4 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT: 3 – West Little Rock CENSUS TRACT: 22.01 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing the subdivision of this 3.86 acre site into four single- family residential lots. All lots have public street frontage along Overlook Drive. A single access point to Overlook Drive is proposed with the lots being served by a common access and utility easement. The proposal includes the development of the lots utilizing the Hillside Development Standards, Division 8, of the Subdivision Ordinance. The lots are indicated with a slope in excess of 18 percent (Section 31-367) and a lot area in excess of 10,000 square feet (Section 31-369(d)). The proposed preliminary plat indicates the placement of a 15-foot building line adjacent to Overlook Drive as allowed in Section 31-371. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-46-DD 2 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site, previously a park site, is extremely steep, sloping downward to the north. There is a single drive extending from Overlook into the site. Adjacent to the northern property line is a railroad spur serving the Riverdale area and downtown. Rebsamen Park and the newly constructed pedestrian bridge crossing the Arkansas River atop Murray Lock and Dam are located north of the railroad spur. To the east of the site a preliminary plat was recently approved to allow the development of two single-family homes. To the south of the site are single-family homes located on large lots; many developed on lots with a similar topography to the lots being proposed. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. The Overlook Property Owners Association and all abutting property owners were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Turn around must be provided for a WB-30 vehicle attempting to enter development. A stacking distance of at least 30 feet from street curb line must also be provided. The call box median should be redesigned to improve vehicle access. Contact Bill Henry, Traffic Engineering, at 379-1816 for additional assistance. 2. 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. 3. If disturbed area is 1 or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 4. Private access is proposed for these lots. In accordance with Section 31-207, private streets must be designed to the same standards as public streets. A minimum access easement width of 45 feet is required and street width of 24 feet from back of curb to back of curb. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-46-DD 3 E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available to this property. Contact Little Rock Wastewater at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 8, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented the item stating there were few outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff requested the applicant provide the average slope of the indicated lots, the source of title of the landowner in the general notes section of the proposed preliminary plat and the minimum lot size in the general notes section of the proposed preliminary plat. Staff requested the applicant provide a note concerning garbage collection in the general notes section of the proposed preliminary plat. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-46-DD 4 Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated garbage collection would not be provided on the access and utility easement unless the property owner signed a waiver of damage claims for operations on private property. Staff stated the gate turn around should provide for a WB-30 vehicle attempting to enter the development and a stacking distance of at least 30 feet from street curb line. Staff stated the call box median should be redesigned to improve vehicle access. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them directly for additional information and clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the February 8, 2007, Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised preliminary plat indicates the average slope of the indicated lots, the source of title of the landowner and the minimum lot size proposed in the general notes section. The location for garbage collection has also been indicated. The request is to allow the subdivision of 3.86 acres into four (4) single-family residential lots. All the lots have public street frontage along Overlook Drive. A single access point to Overlook Drive is proposed with the lots being served by a 45-foot common access and utility easement. The proposal includes the development of the lots utilizing the Hillside Development Standards, Division 8, of the Subdivision Ordinance. The lots are indicated with a slope in excess of 18 percent (Section 31-367) and a lot area in excess of 10,000 square feet (Section 31-369(d). The lots have slopes averaging 37 percent to 43 percent. The proposed preliminary plat indicates the placement of a 15-foot building line adjacent to Overlook Drive as allowed in Section 31-371. Staff is supportive of the request. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff feels the development of the single- family homes as proposed with lots ranging in size from 0.73 acres to 1.3 acres should have minimal impact on the adjoining properties. 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 above agenda staff report. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-46-DD 5 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) 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 above agenda staff report. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: S-1415-C NAME: Bowman Kanis Retail Center Preliminary Plat LOCATION: Located on the Northwest corner of Kanis and Bowman Roads DEVELOPER: USA Drug 3017 North Midland Drive Pine Bluff, AR 71603 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 13.9 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 7 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District, with conditions and PCD PLANNING DISTRICT: 18 – Ellis Mountain Planning District CENSUS TRACT: 42.10 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 1. A variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow advanced grading of the plat area with the development of the first lot. 2. A variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow an increased cut slope along the western property line up to 40 feet vertical. 3. A variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage. (Section 31-231) BACKGROUND: On October 20, 1998, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,850 rezoning an 11.25-acre tract to O-3 and C-3 on the northwest corner of Kanis and Bowman Roads. The proposal included the development of the site with a 300 foot by 150 foot no build area at the intersection of Kanis and Bowman Roads. The site had limited driveways onto Kanis Road. The eastern drive, located approximately 200-feet west of the Kanis/Bowman Road intersection, was proposed as a right-turn exit only. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1415-C 2 The western driveway, located approximately 300 feet west of the Kanis/Bowman intersection, was to be a service entrance/exit only. The approval also limited the permitted uses to those listed in the “C-2” Shopping Center District. A proposal which included this tract of land was reviewed and approved by the Commission on March 20, 2003, but was not forwarded to the Board of Directors for final action. The applicant proposed to rezone the site from various zoning classifications to PCD to allow the development of a home center on the site. Ordinance No. 18,985 adopted November 18, 2003, established the Bowman and Kanis Retail Center Long-form PCD. The applicant proposed a seven-lot plat through the Planned Development process. Lots 1 - 6 were zoned C-3, General Commercial and Lot 7 was zoned O-3, General Office. The applicant proposed a USA Drug to locate on Lot 1 (an allowable use under the C-3 zoning classification) but the building was proposed to be located within the area previously approved as a no-build zone (300-foot by 150-foot). The applicant indicated only one lot would be developed under the proposed development plan and requested Lot 1 be designated with PCD zoning (with C-3 uses as alternative uses) retaining the C-3 and O-3 zoning on the other six lots. Ordinance No. 19,124 revoked the PCD zoning classification restoring the previously held R-2, O-3 and C-3 zoning classification. The revocation request was considered by the Little Rock Planning Commission at their May 6, 2004, public hearing and the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted the revocation ordinance at their June 15, 2004, public hearing. On October 7, 2004, a site plan review was approved by the Planning Commission to allow the construction of a 16,500 square foot retail building along with 117 parking spaces. Four gas pumps and a kiosk were proposed necessitating the site plan review process. The site plan included the placement of a 300-foot by 150-foot “no build area” as required per the zoning. On January 5, 2006, the Commission approved two requests for the 11.85-acre tract. One request allowed the rezoning of a portion of the site to PCD and the second to rezone a portion of the site to C-3, with conditions. A two-lot plat was also approved as a part of the development plan. Proposed Lot 1 would remain zoned C-3, with conditions allowing a reduction in the previously imposed no build area. The approval allowed future development to be construct nearer the “hard corner” of Kanis and Bowman Roads. The original approval required a 150-foot by 300-foot no build area and the rezoning reduced the no build area to 90-feet by 200-feet. The Board of Directors approved this request by the adoption of Ordinance No. 19,477 on February 7, 2006. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1415-C 3 Lot 2 was rezoned from R-2, O-3 and C-3 to PCD. Lot 2 was proposed for the development with a retail shopping center containing 123,860 square feet and a total of 617 parking spaces. The Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 19,479 on February 7, 2006, establishing Bowman Kanis Retail Center Long-form PCD. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is seeking approval of a preliminary plat for this site to allow the creation of a seven lot plat with shared driveways and a common access easement on the common lot line of Lots 2 and 3 and the common lot line of Lots 3, 4 and 5. The driveways will allow access to Lot 6, a lot being created without public street frontage. Lot 6 will require a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance (Section 31-231) to allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage. Private agreements will be made between the various lots owners to provide cross access and parking within the development. The request includes a variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow advanced grading of the plat area with the development of the first lot and a variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow an increased cut slope along the western property line up to 40 feet vertical. As separate items on this agenda the applicant is requesting a revocation of the current PCD zoning (Z-6554-E) and a rezoning request (Z-6554-F) from R-2, O-3 and C-3 to C-3 and O-3. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The property is located in an area of mixed zoning and extremely varied uses. The intensely commercial Chenal Parkway/Bowman Road intersection is directly north of the site. Uses in this area include a wide variety of retail commercial businesses such as Sam’s, Wal-Mart, Garden Ridge and Best Buy. Across Bowman, at the northeast corner of Kanis and Bowman Road is a PCD, which has developed as an office/warehouse/retail center. The C-3 and PCD zoned properties to the south; contain a variety of uses including offices, office/warehouse and mini-warehouses. The area to the west of the site is vacant and currently zoned POD. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. All owners of property located within 200-feet of the site, the John Barrow Neighborhood Association and the Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1415-C 4 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Kanis Road and Bowman Road are classified on the Master Street Plan as minor arterials. A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be required for each street. At minor arterial intersections, an additional 10 feet of right-of-way measured from the centerline of the right-of-way, for a right turn lane shall be dedicated. This additional right-of-way shall normally be 250 feet in length measured from the intersecting right-of-way. 2. A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of Bowman Road and Kanis Road. 3. With site development, provide the design of the street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvements to these streets including 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development. The street improvements shown on the plan appear to be acceptable. Dual left turn lanes are required to be provided at the intersection on Kanis Road and Bowman Road each providing at least 150 feet for vehicle stacking. 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. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 5. A variance is required to be approved by the Planning Commission since the height of proposed cut exceeds the 30-foot cut/fill limit as required by the Land Alteration Regulations. The proposed cut is shown to be about 40 feet with 4 natural rock terraces or 3 block retaining walls. Per the Land Alteration Regulations, evergreen plants are required to be planted along the flat portion of the terrace. 6. 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) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield). 7. Street Improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction. 8. If disturbed area is 1 or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 9. Driveway locations and widths must meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The width of driveway must not exceed 36 feet. The northern driveway on Bowman Road creates left turn conflicts with the Creekwood Plaza driveway across the street and must March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1415-C 5 be relocated. The minimum driveway spacing on minor arterial streets is 300 feet. 10. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 11. Coordinate design of traffic signal upgrade with proposed street improvements. Plans to be forwarded to Traffic Engineering for approval. 12. Hauling of fill material on or off site over municipal streets and roads requires approval prior to a grading permit being issued. Contact Public Works Traffic Engineering at 621 S. Broadway, (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield) for more information. 13. Driveway locations and widths must meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The width of driveway must not exceed 36 feet. The western driveway on Kanis Road creates left turn conflicts with Cherrybrook Drive and must be moved. The minimum driveway spacing on minor arterial streets is 300 feet. 14. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Contact Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information regarding street light requirements. 15. Provide a sketch grading and drainage plan for this site. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easement for Lot 6. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: Easements are required along South Bowman Road. Contact Entergy for additional information concerning the total width of the easement required. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A water main extension, on-site fire line(s) and additional fire hydrant(s) will be required in order to provide service to this property. If there are facilities that need to be adjusted and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. That work would be done at the expense of the developer. 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 systems. This development will have minor impact on existing water distribution March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1415-C 6 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: (February 8, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating there were three separate items associated with the request on the Commission’s agenda. Staff stated the items were a revocation, a rezoning and a preliminary plat request. Staff noted there were a few outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff stated Lots 3 and 4 should indicate the previously zoned no build area of 90-feet by 200-feet. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed driveway locations and widths must meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. Staff stated the width of driveway must not exceed 36 feet. Staff stated the northern driveway on Bowman Road created left turn conflicts with the Creekwood Plaza driveway across the street. Staff stated the drive should be relocated to eliminate this conflicting movement. Staff stated the western driveway on Kanis Road created left turn conflicts with Cherrybrook Drive and should also be moved. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them directly for additional information and clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the February 8, 2007, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the no build area as conditioned by the zoning of the site, March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1415-C 7 relocated the indicated drive along South Bowman Road and indicated the access and circulation to meet typical minimum ordinance standards. The applicant has not realigned the driveway on Kanis Road to eliminate conflicts with Cherrybrook Drive. Staff indicated previously staff feels the drive should be realigned to eliminate potential conflicts. The applicant is seeking approval of a preliminary plat for this site to allow the creation of a seven lot plat with shared driveways and a common access and utility easements on the common lot line of Lots 2 and 3 and the common lot line of Lots 3, 4 and 5. The driveways will allow access to Lot 6, a lot being created without public street frontage. Lot 6 requires a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance (Section 31-231) to allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage. Private agreements through the Bill of Assurance will be made between the various lots owners to provide cross access and parking within the development. Staff is supportive of the variance request. The development is proposed to create a shopping center environment with multiple uses within the proposed subdivision. The request includes a variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow advanced grading of the plat area with the development of the first lot and a variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow an increased cut slope along the western property line up to 40 feet vertical. Staff is supportive of this variance request. According to the applicant the grading is most practical in this manner to eliminate the need to haul out large amounts of dirt from development of a few of the lots and the haul in dirt for the development of the other lots. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. There are separate items on this agenda requesting a revocation of the current PCD zoning (Z-6554-E) and a rezoning request (Z-6554-F) from R-2, O-3 and C-3 to C-3 and O-3. The site is located at the intersection of two minor arterial streets. Staff feels it is reasonable to create a commercial subdivision at this intersection. At the time of development the access and utility easements will be required to comply with the minimum requirements as stated in Section 31-210(g) Access and Circulation of the Subdivision Ordinance. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues. Staff feels the creation of a commercial and office subdivision at this intersection should have minimal impact on the area and the adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the proposed preliminary plat subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E, F and H of the above agenda staff report. Staff recommends approval of the variance request to allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage. Staff recommends the driveway on Kanis Road be realigned to reduce traffic conflicts with the nearby City street, Cherrybrook Drive. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1415-C 8 Staff recommends approval of the variance request from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow advanced grading of the proposed subdivision with the development of the first lot of the subdivision and the variance request to allow an increased wall height along the western perimeter. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) 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, F and H of the above agenda staff report. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the variance request to allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage. Staff also presented a recommendation the driveway on Kanis Road and Bowman Road be realigned to reduce traffic conflicts with the nearby City streets and adjoining driveways. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the variance request from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow advanced grading of the proposed subdivision with the development of the first lot of the subdivision and the variance request to allow an increased wall height along the western perimeter. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 3 FILE NO.: S-1433-A NAME: Foreman Lake Garden Addition Preliminary Plat LOCATION: Located on Leatrice and Alberta Drives DEVELOPER: Dr. William Humphrey 11215 Herritage Road Little Rock, AR 72211 ENGINEER: White Daters and Associates #24 Rahling circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 1.4 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT: 3 – West Little Rock CENSUS TRACT: 22.03 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 1. A variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the development of lots utilizing private streets (Section 31-207). BACKGROUND: On June 3, 2004, the Little Rock Planning Commission approved a preliminary plat for this site. The property contained 1.4 acres located at the southwest corner of Leatrice Drive and Alberta Drive. The approval allowed the owner to develop two lots on the property. The request included a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the development of the lots with a private street. A driveway would be constructed along the rear of the lots for access to Lot 2. The lots averaged 80-feet by 160-feet or 12,800 square feet. A forty-foot front platted building line was indicated adjacent to the private street. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1433-A 2 Per Section 31-94(e) a preliminary plat approved by the Little Rock Planning Commission shall be effective and binding upon the Commission for two (2) 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 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 approved preliminary plat has expired and the owners are now proposing to reestablish the previously approved plat. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now proposing to reestablish the previously approved preliminary plat. The site contains 1.4 acres and is proposed with the development of two lots for single-family homes and a tract. As with the original submission the application includes a variance to allow the lots to be developed with private streets. A private drive will also be constructed along the rear of Lot 1 for driveway access to both lots. The developer is requesting an in-lieu contribution for storm water detention. Tract A will be included with the plat area and will be used for a drainage easement. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant with a scattering of trees. There are single-family homes in the area located around a large lake. The uses to the north, south, east and west are single-family residences. Lake Shore Drive is a private street ending in a hammer head south of this site. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area resident. All abutting property owners were notified of the public hearing. There is not an active neighborhood association located in the area. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. East Shore Drive is a private access easement that is not maintained by the City. The new plat should label the proposed driveway easement as a private access easement. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1433-A 3 2. 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. 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: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A water main extension and additional fire hydrant(s) will be required in order to provide service to this property. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. 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: (February 8, 2007) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed preliminary plat indicating there were additional items necessary to complete the review. Staff requested the applicant provide the name/address and source of title of the landowner and the zoning classification of the proposed preliminary plat area. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated Shore Drive was a private access easement that was not maintained by the City. Staff stated private March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1433-A 4 streets should be constructed to public street standard. Staff stated the revised plat should label the proposed driveway easement as a private access easement. Staff also stated no residential waste collection service would be provided on the private street unless the property owners association provided a waiver of damage claims for operations on private property. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the February 8, 2007, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the roadway as a private access and utility easement. The applicant has also provided the name/address of the owner along with the source of title of the landowner on the proposed preliminary plat. The zoning classification, R-2, Single-family, has been added to the proposed plat. The property contains 1.4 acres located at the southwest corner of Leatrice Drive and Alberta Drive. The request is to develop two lots from a previously indicated lot located in the Lakeside Heights Subdivision. The request includes a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the development of the lots with private streets. The applicant has indicated a thirty-foot driveway easement across the rear of Lot 1 to serve Lot 2. The drive will be located in this area to eliminate the need for a driveway along Lake Shore Drive. The applicant has indicated the lots will average 80-feet by 160-feet or 12,800 square feet. A forty-foot front platted building line has been included adjacent to the private street. Staff is supportive of the proposed preliminary plat. The requested lot size and development of lots on private streets is consistent with development in the area. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow the lots to develop with private streets. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1433-A 5 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above agenda staff report. Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the requested variance to allow the lots to develop with private streets. Mr. Brad Walker was present representing the owner. He stated the developers were requesting approval of a previously approved development. He stated the proposal was the exact proposal the Commission had approved three years ago. Mr. Tom Clark addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated his property was located to the east of the site and he had concerns with drainage, loss of property values and privacy. He stated his neighbor was also opposed to the development but could not be present at the meeting. He stated the Commission had received a letter from his neighbor Mr. Samuel Gates outlining the concerns. Mr. Clark stated his property and Mr. Gates property drained through the site proposed for development and presently there was a large amount of water running through their properties. He stated with the development of the driveway along the rear portion of the property this would remove the natural drain and cause flooding concerns for him and Mr. Gates. He stated the development would also create concerns for Foreman Lake. He stated the existing private drive was only eight feet wide and did not allow sufficient access for the fire department and City trash collection. He stated the developers should be required to bring the private drive up to a public standard or a minimum paving width as required by the fire department. He stated he felt if the developer was proposing the development of the site he should do so without any variances. The Commission stated the development could not create any additional flooding problems in the area. The Commission stated the drive could not create a dam and flood the adjoining properties. Mr. Walker stated he did appreciate the comments made by Mr. Clark. He stated the site was lower than Mr. Clark’s property and would not create any additional flooding problems. He stated the site had a 45-foot vertical fall. He stated the Commission did right three years ago by approving the development and requested the Commission approve the request once again. The Commission questioned why the development did not occur with the previous approval. Mr. Joe White stated previously the owner had a buyer for the property and this time the owner was going to develop the site himself. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: S-1556 NAME: Wise Subdivision Preliminary Plat LOCATION: Located at 10329 Mann Road DEVELOPER: Marcos Wise 10329 Mann Road Little Rock, AR 72209 ENGINEER: Marlar Engineering 5318 John F. Kennedy Boulevard North Little Rock, AR 72116 AREA: 1.42 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 8 FT. NEW STREET: 210 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT: 15 – Geyer Springs West CENSUS TRACT: 41.05 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. The applicant failed to provide staff with the requested information to move this proposed plat forward. Staff recommends a deferral of the item to the April 12, 2007, public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had failed to provide staff with the requested information to move this proposed plat forward. Staff presented a recommendation of deferral of the item to the April 12, 2007, public hearing. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: Z-4411-G NAME: Pleasant Ridge Towne Center Revised Long-form PCD LOCATION: Located on the Southeast corner of Cantrell Road and Pleasant Ridge Road DEVELOPER: Pleasant Ridge Development LLC 11601 Pleasant Ridge Road Little Rock, AR 72212 ENGINEER: White Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 27.0+ acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 5 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: PCD ALLOWED USES: Shopping Center PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD PROPOSED USE: Shopping Center - Allow additional building signage. VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On December 20, 1994, through Ordinance No. 16,808, the City Board of Directors approved a PCD that would allow the development of a mixed use “Neighborhood Commercial” shopping center and an accompanying office development. The site was a 12.83 acre-tract and of the area, 11.48 acres was proposed to be developed as the shopping center. The proposed structure was 97,680 square feet, and 463 parking spaces were indicated. A 1.35-acre tract was to have 10,000 square feet of office building space with an additional 50 parking spaces. The uses proposed for the shopping center were all by-right C-2 and C-3 zoning district, except that there were to be no service stations, auto glass or muffler shops, convenience stores, or car washes within the scope of the PCD. The uses proposed for the office building were all uses by March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-G 2 right in the O-2 and O-3 zoning district. The applicant proposed the development of this 0.27-acre tract as a convenience store with gas pumps. On January 9, 1997, the Commission reviewed a request for a change in the right-of- way dedication and street improvement requirement to Fairview Road. The developer requested all right-of-way dedication and street improvements be taken from the property located to the east of Fairview Road. The Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,331 on December 3, 1996, which allowed a five-year deferral of street improvements (or until development of the Pleasant Ridge Square PCD) to Fairview Road. The Little Rock Planning Commission granted a three-year time extension for the proposed submission of the final development plan at their December 22, 1997, Public Hearing. The applicant submitted a Final Development Plan for the Pleasant Ridge Square Long-form PCD, which was approved on February 1, 2002. The Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 19,233 on November 9, 2004, establishing a revision to the Pleasant Ridge Town Center PCD. The development is proposed as a 300,000 square foot retail center with restaurant space developed as a “Life-style Center”. The approval allowed the creation of three lots. Ordinance No. 19,281 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on February 15, 2005, revised the previously approved PCD to allow Coulson Oil to add an additional driveway to the site and adjust the southern property line. The site plan indicated the drive would be added to the southwestern corner of the property to adjoin to the proposed driveway for Pleasant Ridge Town Center. The applicant indicated with the adjustment, the existing Coulson PCD would function more appropriately with the approved Pleasant Ridge Town Center site plan. Coulson Oil also proposed the sale of a portion of their lot to the Pleasant Ridge Town Center along the southern perimeter. The sale of the property resulted in a rear yard buffer and landscape strip that was less than the typical minimum required per the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The applicant stated with the approval of the Pleasant Ridge Town Center PCD, the reduced rear yard buffer appeared more reasonable since PCD zonings abutted one another. The Board of Directors adopted an ordinance on November 21, 2006, revising the previously approved PCD for the shopping center to allow the creation of two additional lots for the Pleasant Ridge Town Center. The previous approval allowed for the creation of three lots which have been final platted. The developer proposed the placement of the two additional lots along Cantrell Road within the area identified as future restaurant sites. According to the applicant the restaurant out-parcels were needed to allow the transfer of property to prospective tenants. The approval brought the total available lots on the site to five. There were no other modifications proposed to the previous approval. On December 7, 2006 the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request to allow the western-most drive located along Cantrell Road to become a full service March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-G 3 intersection. The denial of the request has been appealed to the Board of Directors and is scheduled to be heard on February 20, 2006. No other modifications were proposed to the previous approval. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now proposing to revise the previously approved PCD to allow additional sign locations within the development. The request is to allow building signage located on the portion of the flat wall located on the northeast corner and northwest corner of the center building. No other modifications to the approved site plan are proposed with the proposed revision to the PCD. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is currently under construction for the shopping center with the internal “shell buildings” completed and “tenant finish out” underway. A large portion of the paving and landscaping has been installed with the exception of the restaurant out-parcels adjacent to Cantrell Road. These areas have been cleared and grading has taken place but no building construction has begun. The western-most drive located on Cantrell Road is a right-in, right-out only intersection and the main entrance drive allows for left turns from the shopping center along Cantrell Road. There is a single-family home located across Woodland Heights Road on R-2, Single-family zoned property. Office uses located on O-3, General Office District zoned property are located to the east and north of the site. There is a church located to the northeast and a City of Little Rock fire station to the northwest. The Walton Heights Subdivision is also located to the north. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received a number of informational phone calls from area residents. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site, all residents located within 300-feet of the site, who could be identified, along with the Walton Heights-Candlewood Property Owners Association, the Pleasant Forest Neighborhood Association, the Piedmont Property Owners Association and the Pleasant Valley Property Owners Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: No comment. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-G 4 E. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 8, 2007) The applicant was not present. Staff presented an overview of the request indicating there were no outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff stated the request included a modification to the existing signage plan for the shopping center. Staff stated there were no other modifications of the approved site plan proposed. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. F. ANALYSIS: There were no technical issues remaining from the February 8, 2007, Subdivision Committee meeting which needed addressing. The applicant is proposing a revision to the approved PCD to allow additional signage to be included on the approved site plan. The request includes the placement of signage along the flat portion of the wall located at the northeast corner and northwest corner of the center building. Staff is supportive of the allowance of the additional signage. Staff recommends the signage be limited to ten percent of the façade where the sign will be placed. G. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the request to allow additional signage as proposed subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraph F of the above agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request to allow additional signage as proposed subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraph F of the above agenda staff report. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: Z-5742-A NAME: C & G Asset Management Short-form PCD LOCATION: Located at 1001 Wright Avenue DEVELOPER: C & S Asset Management LLC 1001 Wright Avenue P.O. Box 2252 Little Rock, AR 72203 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 0.512 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 Zoning Lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: O-1, Quiet Office District ALLOWED USES: Quiet Office Uses PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: Residential, Office and Commercial VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 16,509 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on October 19, 1993, rezoned this site from R-4A to O-1. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The proposal includes the construction of a single building with a total of 6,336 square feet of space and 23 on-site parking spaces. The building is proposed with various tenants which can be divided into six to eleven units depending on the unit arrangement and the unit size. The unit size will average 647 square feet. Based on combinations and configurations the units could be configured with two units of approximately 647 square feet, one unit of 1,941 square feet March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5742-A 2 and three units of 1,294 square feet. The site plan indicates a parking ratio of four parking spaces per unit for six units to 2.18 parking spaces per unit for eleven units. The site plan indicates a building to land ratio of 32 percent. A wood fence will be constructed for perimeter treatment and screening. An existing solid wood fence extends from the interior southwest corner of the south property line, east approximately 125 feet to 130 feet. A portion of the proposed parking will not be screened and is proposed to be screened by an extension of the fence or the placement of shrubs. Along the western perimeter of the site a wood fence extends approximately 100 feet with 25-feet of the new parking area not screened. This area will also be screened with the extension of the wood fence or the planting of shrubs. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an office building which was originally constructed as a drive- through branch bank and is now being used for a real estate service company. The area contains a number of uses including Philander Smith College, Dunbar Community Center, Dunbar Middle School and a Central Arkansas Library facility. To the south of the site is a PD-C approved as an office use for Mr. Klean’s Carpet and Janitorial service. Single-family homes are located in the immediate area with residences located to the southeast and southwest and to the northwest. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area resident. The Downtown Neighborhood Association, all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the proposed development were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. A 20-foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of Wright Avenue and Chester Street. 2. The sidewalk on the west side of the driveway should be moved to provide better access to the sidewalk on the east side of the driveway. Sidewalk should be placed in public easement. 3. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. Driveway spacing from intersections should be a minimum 250 feet. The existing east driveway should be moved to approximately 10 feet from the south property line. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5742-A 3 E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available to this property. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A 2-inch PVC water main crosses this property in the closed right-of-way of Wright Avenue. Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Central City Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use for this property. The applicant has applied for a Short-form PCD to allow a mixed use development containing residential, office, and commercial on the site. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Wright Avenue is shown as a Minor Arterial on the Master Street Plan and Chester Street is shown as a Collector. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. 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 Wright Avenue since it is a Minor Arterial. The primary function of a Collector Street is to provide a connection from Local Streets to Arterials. Bicycle Plan: A Class II bike route is shown along Wright Avenue. A Class II bikeway is located on the street as either a 5’ shoulder or six foot marked bike lane. Additional paving and right of way may be required. A Class III bike route is shown along Chester Street according to the Master Street Plan bicycle section. A Class III bikeway is a signed route on a street shared with traffic. No March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5742-A 4 additional paving or right-of-way is required. Class III bicycle route signage may be required. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Downtown Neighborhood Action Plan. The Housing Goal states, “Redevelop 153 vacant lots and re-occupy 512 vacant houses and 325 vacant apartments.” The inclusion of residential could advance this goal. The Economic Development Goal is also applicable. It states, “Attract other businesses and services, such as pizza places that make home deliveries, another grocery, another pharmacy, video stores, cafes, a sporting goods store, and more restaurants open after 8 p.m.” Landscape: 1. Site plan must comply with the City’s minimal landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 2. The site appears to be overdeveloped. It is not in compliance with the landscape ordinance. 3. The zoning buffer ordinance requires an eight foot (8) wide land use buffer to separate this proposed development from the residential property on western perimeter of the site. Currently, the site plan is not meeting this minimum requirement. Seventy percent (70%) of these buffers are to remain undisturbed. 4. A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the western perimeter of the site. Credit towards fulfilling this requirement can be given for existing trees and undergrowth that satisfies this year-around requirement. 5. The landscape ordinance requires a minimum of six foot nine inches (6’-9”) along all property lines. Currently, this proposal encroaches into this minimum amount on all four sides of the property. A variance from the City Beautiful Commission must be granted prior to the issuance of a building permit. 6. The zoning buffer ordinance requires a minimum six foot nine inch wide (6’- 9”) wide street buffer along Chester Street and along Wright Avenue. The Planning Commission must approve a variation from this typical minimum requirement. 7. The landscape ordinance requires a minimum of a three foot wide (3) landscape strip to be located between the parking lot and the building. This requirement also appears to be below the minimum allowed. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5742-A 5 8. A water source must be located within seventy-five foot (75) of all landscaped areas. 9. These calculations take into account the proposed development is located within a designated mature area of the city. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 8, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating there were a number of concerns related to the proposed site plan. Staff stated the site plan did not allow for typical building setbacks, landscaping or parking to meet the typical minimum requirement for a mixed use development. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the sidewalk on the west side of the driveway should be moved to provide better access to the sidewalk on the east side of the driveway. Staff stated the sidewalk should be placed in a public easement. Staff also stated the indicated driveway locations and widths did not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. Staff stated driveway spacing from intersections should be a minimum 250 feet. Staff stated the existing east driveway should be moved to approximately 10 feet from the south property line. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated a variance from the City Beautiful Commission would be required to allow the reduced street buffer as indicated. Staff also stated the indicated land use buffer did not meet the typical minimum ordinance requirements and would require Commission approval of the reduced buffer area. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them directly for additional information and clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the February 8, 2007, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated landscaping sufficient to meet typical minimum ordinance requirements, indicated the proposed use mix and relocated the proposed drive to the southern property line on Chester Street. The revised site plan indicates the placement of an eight foot landscape strip along the southern and western perimeters and a six foot nine inch landscape strip along Chester Street. In two areas the parking spaces encroach into the landscape strip. Along the southern perimeter adjacent to the relocated driveway the site plan indicates the placement of a parking space abutting the property line March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5742-A 6 and near the northern drive a parking space has been indicated at 3.5 feet from the property line. Staff feels the spaces in these two areas which encroach into the landscaping should be removed. In addition, the back out space located at the intersection of Wright and Chester Streets has been indicated encroaching into the landscaped area. Staff feels the parking space located nearest the intersection, heading into Wright Avenue, should be removed and the back out space reduced to increase the landscaping at the hard corner. Areas of the street buffer along Wright Avenue do not fully comply with the typical minimum requirements of the zoning ordinance for street buffer widths. Staff is supportive of allowing the reduced buffer as proposed. The development is proposed as a mixed use development proposed with 65 percent office and 35 percent retail. The request also includes the ability to add residential as an allowable use by the addition of a second floor, if the second floor is cost feasible. The proposal would allow the addition of two to four units. The site plan indicates the placement of a 6,336 square foot building and 23 parking spaces. The development is proposed with 4,118 square feet of office space and 2,218 square feet of retail. Based on the office, retail and residential development potential, 23 parking spaces would typically be required. As indicated previously staff recommends three of the indicated spaces be removed to accommodate landscaping leaving the site with a total of 20 parking spaces. The site plan has not indicated signage. Staff recommends signage be limited to signage as allowed in office zones or a maximum of six feet in height and sixty- four square feet in area. Building signage should also be limited to signage as allowed in office zones or a maximum of ten percent of the façade area. The applicant has not defined retail uses. Staff recommends the retail uses be limited to those uses as allowed in the C-1, Neighborhood Commercial zoning classification. The site plan indicates inadequate parking to meet the typical minimum parking demand. Staff is supportive of the indicated parking but recommends the use mix of the development match the available parking on the site. Staff has not been provided with building elevations or proposed construction materials. Staff recommends the site be developed in a manner to protect the adjacent single-family homes and the neighborhood. The building materials should be limited to wood, brick or a material that resembles wood and the roof pitch must exceed 4:12. Staff is supportive of the development of a mixed use development on the site as indicated based on the previous comments. The site is presently zoned O-1 and has historically been used as an office use. Staff feels the development should be considerate of the adjoining residential uses when designing the building with regard to massing, construction materials and landscaped areas. Staff feels with the removal of the parking spaces as noted, this will enhance the landscaped areas and provide an additional setback adjacent to the residential uses to the south and west of the site. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff feels the development of a mixed use development on the site should have minimal impact on the adjoining properties or the area. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5742-A 7 I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E, F and H of the above agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) 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, F and H of the above agenda staff report. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: LU07-18-01 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Ellis Mountain Planning District Location: the north side of Kanis Road between Kirby and Asbury Roads Request: Mixed Office Commercial to Service Trades District Source: Joe White, White-Daters PROPOSAL / REQUEST: The applicant has requested that this item be deferred to April 12, 2007. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant on February 15, 2007 requested this item be deferred to the April 12, 2007 Planning Commission Hearing. The item was placed on consent agenda for deferral. The consent agenda was approved by a vote of 9 for, 0 against with 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 7.1 FILE NO.: Z-6245-A NAME: ACME Self Storage Long-form PCD LOCATION: Located on the Northeast corner of Kanis and Kirby Roads DEVELOPER: LGR Investment, LLC 404 E. Kiehl Avenue North Little Rock, AR 72020 ENGINEER: White Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 5.6 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: C-1, Neighborhood Commercial and R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Neighborhood Commercial uses and Single-family Residential PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: Mini-warehouse VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. On February 15, 2007, the applicant requested a deferral of this item to the April 12, 2007, public hearing. Staff is supportive of the deferral request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated on February 15, 2007, the applicant submitted a requested for deferral of the item to the April 12, 2007, public hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: Z-6554-F NAME: Bowman Kanis Retail Center Rezoning LOCATION: Located on the Northwest corner of Kanis and Bowman Roads DEVELOPER: USA Drug c/o Collier Dickson Flake Partners 400 West Capitol, Suite 1200 Little Rock, AR 72202 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 13.09 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 7 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, O-3, C-3 ALLOWED USES: Single-family, Office and Commercial PLANNING DISTRICT: 18 – Ellis Mountain CENSUS TRACT: 42.10 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North – Commercial; zoned C-3 South – Office, Commercial, Mini-warehouse; zoned C-3, PCD East – Commercial; zoned PCD West - Vacant; zoned POD March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6554-F 2 A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1. Kanis Road and Bowman Road are classified on the Master Street Plan as minor arterials. A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be required for each. At minor arterial intersections, an additional 10 feet of right-of-way measured from the centerline of the right-of-way, for a right turn lane shall be dedicated. This additional right-of-way shall normally be 250 feet in length measured from the intersecting right-of-way. 2. A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of Bowman Road and Kanis Road. B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION: As of this writing staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. All owners of property located within 200-feet of the site, the John Barrow Neighborhood Association and the Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D. LAND USE ELEMENT: Planning Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Community Shopping for this property. The applicant has applied for a rezoning from R-2, O-3 and C-3 to C-3 and O-3. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Kanis and Bowman Roads are both shown as Minor Arterials on the Master Street Plan. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. 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. Bicycle Plan: Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III Bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan. The Office and Commercial Development goal states: “Aggressively use Planned Zoning March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6554-F 3 Districts (PZD’s) to influence more neighborhood-friendly and better quality developments.” E. STAFF ANALYSIS: USA Drug owns this 13.90 acre site located on the northwest corner of Kanis and Bowman Roads. The property is currently zoned C-3 (9.84 acres), O-3 (1.18 acres) and R-2 (2.88 acres) and USA Drug is requesting to rezone the property to C-3, General Commercial District and O-3, General Office District. The rezoning is proposed to allow the future development of the property with office and commercial uses. The property is currently undeveloped. The site was a plant nursery for a number of years but the business relocated and the building were removed two to three years ago. The hard corner of the property is relatively flat but west and north of the hard corner there is a significant topography change sloping upward. The property is located in an area of mixed zoning and extremely varied uses. The intensely commercial Chenal Parkway/Bowman Road intersection is directly north of the site. Uses in this area include a wide variety of retail commercial businesses such as Sam’s, Wal-Mart, Garden Ridge and Best Buy. Across Bowman, at the northeast corner of Kanis and Bowman Road is a PCD, which has developed as an office/warehouse/retail center. The C-3 and PCD zoned properties to the south; contain a variety of uses including offices, office/warehouse and mini-warehouses. The area to the west of the site is vacant and currently zoned POD. The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as “Community Shopping”. A Land Use Plan Amendment is not necessary for the rezoning of the site. Staff is supportive of the proposed rezoning request. The Community Shopping Land Use designation allows for shopping center development with one or more general merchandise stores. The property immediately west of the site is shown as MOC or Mixed Office Commercial which provides a mixture of office and commercial uses. The C-3 rezoning expands the existing commercial located at the intersection of the two arterials. The C-3 rezoning contains 1.31 acres (O-3 to C-3 – 1.18 acres and R-2 to C-3 - .13 acres) and the O-3 rezoning contains 2.75 acres (R-2 to O-3). Staff views the request as reasonable. Staff feels the rezoning of the limited commercial area and the western portion of the site to office allows the site to develop as indicated on the Land Use Plan and allows a transition or stepping down of intensity along Kanis Road transiting into the MOC property to the west. Staff feels the proposed rezoning of the property is appropriate and should have no adverse impact on the surrounding properties and the general area. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6554-F 4 F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the requested rezoning from O-3 to C-3 and from R-2 to O-3 and C-3. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the requested rezoning from O-3 to C-3 and from R-2 to O-3 and C-3. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 9 FILE NO.: Z-7695-A NAME: Smith Revised Short-form PD-R LOCATION: Located in the 1600 Block of South Battery Street DEVELOPER: Shelby Smith 2700 Shelly Drive Little Rock, AR 72210 SURVEYOR: Donald Brooks 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.44 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PD-R and R-3, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Five unit Multi-family and Single-family and non-conforming four-plex PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R PROPOSED USE: Five unit multi-family in two buildings VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On August 26, 2004, the Little Rock Planning Commission recommended approval of a site plan to allow the rezoning of a portion of this site from R-3 to PD-R to recognize an existing four-plex and allow the addition of a fifth unit in the attic area of the existing building. The Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 19,200 on October 5, 2004, establishing Smith Short-form PD-R. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7695-A 2 A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: In August of 2006, the applicant purchased the apartment building located at 1604 Battery Street. The plans include the remodeling of the building in a manner keeping with the adjacent property located at 1600 Battery Street which is also owned by the applicant. When completed, the facility will house five units as the applicant intends to renovate the attic space to accommodate an efficiency apartment. Other improvements include installation of new windows, new roofing, resurface parking, new exterior paint and landscaping. Fencing and gates will be added to the site. The proposal is to extend the existing decorative iron fence along the street side to the southern property line and add a gate at the drive locations with Battery Street. The existing wood fence along the southern property line of 1600 South Battery Street will be relocated to the southern property line of 1604 Battery Street. A patio area located between the two buildings will be restored including a cobblestone walk and fountain. The applicant is requesting the rezoning of the property to bring it into compliance with city ordinance regarding the use of the property. To facilitate the parking for the fifth unit, the applicant is proposing the placement of a 20-foot by 20-foot parking pad along Battery Street. The parking pad located along the rear of the property will be resurfaced and with the allowance of stacking will accommodate eight vehicles. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: There are two existing multi-family structures located on the site (one building was previously zoned PD-R). To the west of the site is a mixture of single-family and two-family homes most of which have been renovated and are occupied. To the north of the site across West 16th is a funeral home with single-family homes located further north. To the south of the site are single-family and two family homes. East of the site are also residential uses. There is a city park located to the northeast of the site. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: The Central High Neighborhood Association, the Wright Avenue Neighborhood Association, the Downtown Neighborhood Association, all owners of property located within 200-feet of the site and all residents located within 300-feet of the site who could be identified were notified of the public hearing. As of this writing staff has not received any comment from area residents. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. From an initial inspection, it March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7695-A 3 appears the existing sidewalk and curb along Battery Street is damaged and in need of repair. 2. All driveways aprons shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance and built per City detail. 3. The proposed new parking pad for 2 vehicles, which backs out onto Battery Street, should be removed. This parking configuration will cause vehicles to back out onto Battery Street creating unsafe driving conditions. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available to this property. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Central City Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a rezoning to recognize an existing multi family development. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Battery Street is shown as a Local Street on the Master Street Plan. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Bicycle Plan: Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III Bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7695-A 4 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. Landscape: 1. Site plan must comply with the City’s minimal landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 2. Some additional landscaping may be required in conjunction with any new parking areas. 3. The landscape ordinance requires a minimum of six foot nine inches (6’-9”) along all property lines. Currently, this proposal encroaches into this minimum amount on both the southern and the western perimeters. A variance from the City Beautiful Commission must be granted prior to the issuance of a building permit. 4. The zoning buffer ordinance requires a six foot nine inch (6’-9”) wide land use buffer to separate this proposed development from the residential property on southern and western perimeters of the site. Currently, the southern perimeter is not meeting this minimum requirement. 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 western and northern perimeters of the site. Credit towards fulfilling this requirement can be given for existing trees and undergrowth that satisfies this year-around requirement. 6. The landscape ordinance requires a minimum of a three foot wide (3) landscape strip to be located between the parking lot and the building. This requirement also appears to be below the minimum allowed. A variance from this minimum requirement must be obtained from the City Beautiful Commission. 7. A water source must be located within seventy-five foot (75) of all landscaped areas. 8. These calculations take into account the proposed development is located within a designated mature area of the city. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 8, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating there were a number of outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff questioned how garbage collection would be handled and if a dumpster was being proposed. Staff also March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7695-A 5 stated the site plan indicated large areas of new parking. Staff stated the survey indicated most of the area was previously paved and requested the applicant provide the location of new paving and existing paving. Staff stated they felt the parking should be redesigned tying the two developments together allowing access from West 16th Street exiting to South Battery Street. Staff stated this would allow adequate parking to serve the development without the need for stacking to meet the typical parking demand. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the indicated parking backing into Battery Street should be removed. Staff also stated all driveway aprons were required to be concrete aprons per City Ordinance and built per City detail. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the buffer ordinance and the landscape ordinance required a minimum of six foot nine inch landscape strip along all property lines. Staff stated currently, the proposal encroached into the minimum amount on both the southern and the western perimeters. Staff stated a variance from the City Beautiful Commission was required to satisfy the landscape ordinance requirements. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them directly for additional information and clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the February 8, 2007, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has redesigned the parking as requested by staff. The applicant has also indicated there will not be a dumpster located on the site. The revised site plan indicates an access drive from West 16th Street entering the site and the placement of thirteen angled parking spaces heading into the buildings. The site plan also indicates the placement of two parking spaces along the access drive near Battery Street and four parking spaces backing into Battery Street. Two of the parking spaces which back into Battery Street are existing and two are proposed. Staff is not supportive of the addition of parking spaces which back into Battery Street. The site plan indicates a total of seventeen parking spaces. A total of fifteen parking spaces would typically be required for a multi-family development containing ten residential units. The indicated parking is more than adequate to meet the typical minimum parking required. The applicant is requesting a deferral of the proposed parking plan. The previous approval allowed residents to enter from West 16th Street and double stack cars in the four stalls which were existing from the initial construction of the building. The southern building has a similar parking field located in the rear of March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7695-A 6 the building as well. Presently a ribbon drive extends from Battery Street to the rear area which is entirely paved. The request includes the ability to upgrade the current asphalt and the allowance of this parking arrangement for one year. After which time the parking will be reconfigured as indicated on the proposed site plan. Staff is supportive of this request. The request includes a revision to the existing PD-R which was approved for rehabilitation of an existing four unit apartment building and the addition of a studio apartment in the attic area. The current request is a mirror building located to the south which presently contains four units and the applicant is requesting the allowance of a fifth unit in the attic area. The building footprints are to remain in the current configuration. The only modifications will be cosmetic changes to the interior and exterior of the structures and the addition of paving and fencing. Decorative iron fencing is proposed along the street sides of the development and along the southern perimeter tying into the existing wood fence. The applicant has indicated if the adjoining property owner removes the existing fence he will install a new fence along the southern perimeter. A gate is proposed at the entrance from Battery Street. The site plan does not comply with the typical minimum ordinance standards with regard to land use buffers along the western and southern perimeters. The site is existing, presently there is no landscaping in place and most of the southern and western yard areas are paved. Staff is supportive of the landscaping as proposed. The site plan does not include the addition of signage. There is an existing sign located within the landscape area at the intersection of West 16th Street and Battery Street. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The applicant has requested the rezoning to recognize an existing four unit apartment building and to add a fifth unit to the attic area. The applicant has indicated the placement of seventeen parking spaces on the site which is sufficient to meet the typical minimum ordinance requirements for a multi-family development. There is a mixture of uses in the area including single-family, two-family and multi-family residences and staff does not feel the rezoning of this property to PD-R will have a significant impact on the adjoining properties. To staff’s knowledge there are no other outstanding 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 one-year deferral request of the parking area as proposed. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7695-A 7 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the one-year deferral request of the parking area as proposed. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 10 FILE NO.: Z-7699-B NAME: Highway 10 Development Short-form POD LOCATION: Located at 16603 and 16623 Cantrell Road DEVELOPER: Hart Lazenby Commercial 11500 Rodney Parham, Suite 15 Little Rock, AR 72212 ENGINEER: Rickett Engineering, Inc. 78 Aberdeen Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 AREA: 2.33 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 zoning lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family and POD ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential and O-3, General Office District uses PROPOSED ZONING: POD PROPOSED USE: O-3, General and Professional Office VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: The Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 19,202 on October 5, 2004, establishing the Highway 10 Development Short-form POD. The applicant proposed to construct a 5,600 square foot two story office building and associated parking on a 0.44 acre lot. Fourteen parking spaces were proposed. The proposed site plan indicated signage consistent with signage allowed in the Highway 10 Design Overlay District or a ground mounted monument style sign a maximum of ten feet in height and one hundred square feet in area. The applicant indicated O-3, General Office uses would be utilized as uses for the site. The office hours were proposed as 8:00 am to 5:00 pm Monday through Friday. The maximum March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7699-B 2 building height proposed was 30-feet. The site plan included the placement of a dumpster on the site along the eastern boundary. The building has been constructed. On February 16, 2006, the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request to revise the previously approved POD to expand the developed area to the east by 1.89 acres and to allow the construction of two additional buildings. The proposal included the construction a single story office/retail building containing 8,456 square feet and a two story office building containing 7,000 square feet. The site plan indicated a total building square footage of 21,056 square feet for all three buildings with 12,600 square feet of office and 8,456 square feet of retail. Ninety (90) parking spaces were proposed. The site contained a total of 101,495 square feet with 61,642 (63.2%) square feet of impervious area and 39,853 (36.8%) square feet of green space. The applicant’s proposed uses for the site were as follows: Existing Building: O-3 uses only, no accessory uses. Proposed Building A: O-3 uses, unlimited accessory uses and the following additional commercial uses: small commercial establishments selling gifts, electronics, phones movies or games, home décor including paint and wallpaper, sporting goods, liquor sales, furniture and tanning Proposed Building B: O-3 uses only, no accessory uses. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to construct three additional buildings similar to the one already built adjacent to the west and a single story building adjacent to Cantrell Road. The original development, which had limited parking and only eight suites, will be expanded on approximately 1.89 acres just to the east and will be comprised of office suite, varying in size with approximately 90 parking spaces. Two of the buildings will back up to a small pond which is located east of the development. The request includes O-2 uses as allowable uses for the buildings. The developers have indicated a reduced side yard setback on the eastern boundary of the property to allow the buildings to move away from the residential property located to the south and west. According to the cover letter all lighting will point away from the homes and originate from the buildings. No pole lighting is proposed within the development. The existing entrance will be widened to a maximum of 36-feet. The applicant has indicated the site presently drains into an adjoining pond and is requesting the adjoining natural feature be taken into consideration when requiring storm water detention. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7699-B 3 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a single-family residence and shop building formerly used as a small sandblasting business. There are non-residential uses, office and commercial, located to the west of the site located in the converted single-family structures. To the east of the site is a large vacant tract abutting Cantrell Road and the west leg of Taylor Loop Road. The area south of the site is a newly developing single-family subdivision accessed from South Katilus Road. There have been homes constructed along the western and southern boundary of the site. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area resident. The Johnson Ranch Neighborhood Association, the Chevaux Court Property Owners Association, the Westchester Property Owners Association, all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the proposed development were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Cantrell Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial. Dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline will be required. 2. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. 3. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. 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. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 5. Provide a sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Section 29-186 (e). 6. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 7. If disturbed area is 1 or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7699-B 4 8. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The lots must share a single driveway access centered on the property line. The width of driveway must not exceed 36 feet. A minimum spacing distance of 300 feet is required between driveways on a principal arterial street. The eastern drive does not meet this standard. 9. Old curb cuts along Cantrell Road should be closed with curb and gutter per AHTD standards. 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: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. 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. A water main extension, on-site fire line(s) and additional fire hydrant(s) will be required in order to provide service to this property. The facilities on-site will be private. When meters are planned off private lines, private facilities shall be installed to Central Arkansas Water's material and construction specifications and installation will be inspected by an engineer, licensed to practice in the State of Arkansas. Execution of Customer Owned Line Agreement is required. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #25 – the Highway 10 Express Route. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7699-B 5 F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Transition for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Office Development to allow O-2 uses. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial on the Master Street Plan. Cantrell Road may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Cantrell Road since it is a Principal Arterial. Bicycle Plan: Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III Bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. 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. Landscape: 1. Site plan must comply with the City’s minimal landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 2. Site plan must comply with the Highway 10 overlay district requirements. 3. Berming is encouraged along Highway 10. 4. The Highway 10 overlay district requires a twenty-five foot wide (25) land use buffer. The proposed plan encroaches into this area. 5. The zoning buffer ordinance requires a twenty-four foot (24’) wide land use buffer to separate this proposed development from the residential property on southern perimeter of the site. Currently, the southern perimeter is not meeting this minimum requirement. Seventy percent (70%) of these buffers are to remain undisturbed. 6. The zoning buffer ordinance requires a twelve foot (12’) wide land use buffer to separate this proposed development from the residential property on western and eastern perimeters of the site. Currently, these perimeters are not meeting this minimum requirement. Seventy percent (70%) of these buffers are to remain undisturbed. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7699-B 6 7. 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, western, 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. 8. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. 9. 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. 10. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this tree covered site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 8, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating there were a few technical issues associated with the request which were outstanding. Staff stated the site plan did not comply with the Highway 10 Design Overlay District in a number of areas. Staff also stated the indicated parking was excessive to serve an office development and questioned the need for the number of spaces proposed. Staff questioned if the developers were requesting the utilization of the 10 percent accessory uses as listed in the O-2 zoning district. Staff also questioned the phasing plan for the development. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the eastern most drive did not meet the minimum ordinance standards for driveway spacing. Staff also stated the old curb cuts along Cantrell Road should be closed with curb and gutter per AHTD standards. Staff stated prior to any grading activities on the site permits would be required. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the site did not appear to meet the typical minimum ordinance requirements of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. Staff also stated berming along Highway 10 was encouraged to screen parking lots. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them directly for additional information and clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7699-B 7 H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the technical issues raised at the February 8, 2007, Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised site plan indicates a single drive shared between the two properties and indicated the existing drive will be closed at the time of development. The development is proposed as 100 percent office with no allowance for commercial or the 10 percent accessory uses as listed in the O-2 zoning district. The site plan indicates the expansion of the previously approved POD to increase the area by 1.89 acres and allow the construction of four additional buildings. The site plan indicates the construction of a single story office building located adjacent to the existing office building and three two story office buildings located along the eastern perimeter and at the southwest corner of the site. A single dumpster has been located on the site along the eastern perimeter of the site. The applicant has indicated a note concerning the required screening and the dumpster will be serviced during business hours only. The site plan indicates a total area of 19,800 square feet, a building footprint area of 11,400 (20.8%) square feet, parking area of 43,040 (42.4%) square feet and landscaped area of 39,853 (36.8%) square feet. The site plan includes the placement of 90 parking spaces. Based on the minimum parking required for an office development 49 parking spaces would typically be required. According to the applicant the site will be developed with three buildings of eight (8) suites each and a building of four suites. Each suite could employ three (3) persons, requiring 84 parking spaces. Additionally, the existing building to the west is under-parked by approximately ten (10) spaces and overflow parking would utilize the additional spaces created. The applicant has indicated the parking and the rear three buildings will be constructed in a single phase with a pad set for construction of the single story building located along the northwestern perimeter. The buildings are proposed as stucco, stone and siding. A total building height of 32-feet is proposed. The site plan does not include the placement of any additional signage. The previous approval allowed for the construction of a ground mounted monument style sign not to exceed ten feet in height and one hundred square feet in area. Building signage is to comply with signage allowed in office zones or a maximum of ten percent of the façade area. The revised site plan indicates interior landscape islands adequate to meet the minimum ordinance requirement and a landscape strip around the perimeter complying with the Highway 10 Design Overlay District requirements with the exception of the eastern perimeter. The proposal includes a 100-foot building setback adjacent to Cantrell Road, a 40-foot rear yard setback, a 30-foot side March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7699-B 8 yard setback along the western perimeter and a 15-foot building setback along the eastern perimeter. The indicated setbacks comply with the minimum setback requirements to the Highway 10 Design Overlay District standard with the exception of the setback along the eastern perimeter. The Highway 10 Design Overlay District typically requires the placement of a 30-foot side yard building setback. Landscaping per the Highway 10 Design Overlay District should include a 40-foot front yard landscape strip, a 25-foot average landscape strip around the remaining perimeters. The site plan indicates the placement of the 40-foot front yard landscape strip, a 30-foot landscape strip along the western perimeter and a 28.25 foot landscape strip along the southern perimeter. The landscaping in these areas exceeds the typical minimum ordinance standards. The landscaping strip along the eastern perimeter is indicated at 15-feet which does not comply with the typical minimum ordinance standards. In addition, the Design Overlay District typically allows the maximum of one building for every two acres. The proposal includes the development of four buildings on a 2.33 acre site. Staff is supportive of the development if consideration is taken to lessen the impact of the development on the adjacent residential uses. The site is designated as Transition on the City’s Future Land Use Plan which allows for residential, both single-family and multi-family, and office uses. Historically office developments in the transition classification have been constructed in the suburban office style, by limiting the massing and maintaining a residential character. Staff feels the buildings should be constructed of residential style materials and architectural elements resembling single-family construction. Staff also feels the perimeter landscaping along the southern and southwestern perimeters should be evergreen trees such as Leyland Cypress, planted with a larger caliper tree than typically required, such as a three inch caliper, and spaced to provide screening to the adjoining residences. Otherwise to staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff feels the development of this site with an office development, if developed as recommended, should have minimal impact on the adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E, F and H of the above agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7699-B 9 request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E, F and H of the agenda staff report. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z-7786-A NAME: Dennis Properties Revised Long-form PCD LOCATION: Located at 11421 Stagecoach Road DEVELOPER: Dennis Properties LLC 2791 Hilldale Road Alexander, AR 72202 ENGINEER: Black Corley and Owens, PA Architects 219 West South Street Benton, AR 72015 AREA: 20.074 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: PCD ALLOWED USES: Office, Showroom with Warehouse (with retail sales enclosed) PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD PROPOSED USE: Office, Showroom with Warehouse (with retail sales enclosed) and add additional retail uses as allowable uses. VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On April 5, 2005, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 19,293 establishing Dennis Short-form PCD. The applicant proposed the rezoning of the site located at 11421 Stagecoach Road from R-2, Single-family to PCD to allow the development of an office/warehouse development on the site. The site plan included the development of two buildings in two phases with 29,688 square feet of office/warehouse in the first phase and 39,688 square feet in Phase 2. The buildings were proposed as metal buildings with a glass office entry door and warehouse entry of overhead door in the front and in the rear of the buildings for each unit. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7786-A 2 All units would face Stagecoach Road and would have large parking areas and large areas for business vehicles to access the front and back of the building for material pick up or delivery. The sizes of the rental units would vary depending on the tenant’s need. Office, showroom, warehousing with retail sales was approved as an allowable use. The applicant indicated the site would be marketed to end-users with a need for warehouse and office space from individuals to corporations. The applicant indicated the primary use of the site would be for storage, warehouse, distribution, manufacturing of goods or those that need more office and operating space with a storage area. The perspective tenants proposed (but not limited to) were general contractors, construction companies of different trades, material supply companies and those who have products to sell to the public such as an electrical supply business both wholesale and retail, plumbing supply both wholesale and retail or paint and wallpaper store both wholesale and retail. The approval also included tool and equipment rental with no outdoor display. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing an amendment to the previously approved PCD to add additional uses as allowable uses to the site. There are no other modifications proposed with the amendment. The following list the additional requested allowable uses for the site: Ambulance post, Animal clinic, enclosed, Appliance repair, Auto glass muffler shop, Auto parts and accessories, Eating place without drive in or dine in service, enclosed, Storage company, moving company, Job printing, Light fabrication and assembly, Office general and professional, Plumbing, electrical, heat and air shop, Studio, broadcasting, recording, Studio, art, music and dance, Cabinet shop, Furniture repair, Fire station, Machine or welding shop, Machine sales and service, Photo studio, Swimming pool sales and supply, Taxidermist, Hardware, sporting goods, Glass shop, installation and repair, Antique shop, Medical appliance and fitting sales, Tire sales and installation, Paint and wall paper store, Flooring sales, Material suppliers. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: Phase I of the development as been constructed with an office/warehouse building. The remainder of the site is vacant and grass covered. Stagecoach Road is a two lane state highway adjacent to the site with open ditches for drainage. The eastern portion of the site is located in the floodway and a large power transmission line is located in this area. To the west of the site is an apartment development and northwest of the site is a city park. Other uses in the area include residential and non-residential uses. There is a strip center and mini-warehouse development located to the northeast. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7786-A 3 C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Southwest Little Rock United for Progress, the Otter Creek Homeowners Association, all property owners located within 200-feet of the site and all residents who could be identified located within 300-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. As of this writing staff has received one informational phone call for an area resident. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: No comment. E. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 8, 2007) The applicant was not present at the Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff stated the revision to the PCD was to allow additional uses within the previously approved buildings. Staff stated there were no other modifications proposed with the amendment. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. F. ANALYSIS: No technical issues remained from the February 8, 2007, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant is proposing to add additional allowable uses to be considered as tenants for the site. The allowable uses of the site are Office/Showroom/Warehouse with limited retail sales, materials supplies and tool equipment rental with no outdoor display. The request includes the addition of the following uses as allowable uses for the site: Ambulance post, Animal clinic, enclosed, Appliance repair, Auto glass muffler shop, Auto parts and accessories, Eating place without drive in or dine in service, enclosed, Storage company, moving company, Job printing, Light fabrication and assembly, Office general and professional, Plumbing, electrical, heat and air shop, Studio, broadcasting, recording, Studio, art, music and dance, Cabinet shop, Furniture repair, Fire station, Machine or welding shop, Machine sales and service, Photo studio, Swimming pool sales and supply, Taxidermist, Hardware, sporting goods, Glass shop, installation and repair, Antique shop, Medical appliance and fitting sales, Tire sales and installation, Paint and wall paper store, Flooring sales, Material suppliers. As in the original approval staff feels all the allowable uses of the site should be maintained indoors with no outdoor storage area of equipment, product, merchandise or inventory. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7786-A 4 The applicant has amended the request to eliminate the request for a restaurant with dine-in service and be allowed a restaurant without dine-in service. Based on the existing parking a restaurant with dine-in service would severely impact the parking for the site. The site plan was approved for the placement of 71,779 square feet of building space and 108 parking spaces. Based on typical minimum parking requirements for a commercial development 191 parking spaces would typically be required. Staff is supportive of allowing an eating place to locate on the site with no tables for dine-in service and the use provide a “take and go” service such as a pizza or sandwich shop. Otherwise to staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff feels the additional uses as proposed should have minimal impact on the development and the area. G. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraph F of the above agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraph F of the above agenda staff report. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 12 FILE NO.: Z-7991-A NAME: Maris Short-form PD-O LOCATION: Located at 3 Pine Mountain Drive DEVELOPER: Chris Maris P.O. Box 56560 Little Rock, AR 72215 ENGINEER: Marlar Engineering Company 5318 John F. Kennedy Boulevard North Little Rock, AR 72215 AREA: 0.32 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PD-O PROPOSED USE: Office - Appraisal company VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On March 2, 2006, the Planning Commission was scheduled to hear a request to allow this structure to be utilized by Metropolitan Emergency Medical Services (MEMS) as an ambulance substation. Prior to the Commission hearing, the applicant submitted a request to withdraw the item from consideration. The proposal included the widening of the existing drive from 12-feet to 17-feet. All other exterior features were to be maintained to maintain the residential characteristics of the structure. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant has a small appraisal company that performs residential real estate appraisals. The office is a small office consisting of three appraisers, including March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7791-A 2 the owner, and a secretary. The request is to convert the existing house located at 3 Pine Mountain Road into an office use for the appraisal company. The house is the first structure on Pine Mountain from Pinnacle Valley Road. As an appraisal office, there is limited customer traffic and signage is not necessary to identify the business. The hours of operation of the business are 7:30 am to 5:00 pm Monday through Friday. The site will be utilized as it presently exists with the exception of increasing the driveway width six to eight feet to accommodate the employee’s vehicles. According to the applicant the proposed office use will not disrupt the neighborhood. The type of business, the small number of employees and the limited public traffic will be a suitable use for the property. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The property is located in an area of mixed zoning and uses. The PCD zoned property to the east contains a landscape service company; mini-warehouses and commercial uses. A PD-O zoned veterinary clinic is located slightly west of the site. Cantrell Road and the new alignment of Pinnacle Valley Road area located to the south. A variety of commercial uses extend west of the intersection. Single-family homes are located along Pine Mountain Road. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area resident. The Pinnacle Valley Neighborhood Association, the Westchester Property Owners Association, the Westbury Neighborhood Association, all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the proposed development were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. The proposed land use would classify Pine Mountain Road on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 2. In the future if improvements or expansion of the structure or parking area is proposed, provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to Pine Mountain Road including 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development. 3. The existing structure is located in the 100-year floodplain. Any new additions to the structure must comply with the current floodplain regulations. If any improvements to the existing structure or expansion to the existing structure exceeds 50% of the appraised value of the existing structure, then the entire structure must comply with the current floodplain regulations. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7791-A 3 E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available to this property. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Transition for this property. The applicant has applied for a rezoning from R-2 to Planned Office Development to allow the existing structure to be utilized as an office use for an appraisal company. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Pine Mountain is shown as a Local Street on the Master Street Plan. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Bicycle Plan: Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III Bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The neighborhood plan does not address this issue. Landscape: 1. Site plan must comply with the City’s minimal landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7791-A 4 2. Some additional landscaping may be required in conjunction with any new parking areas. 3. The landscape ordinance requires a minimum of nine foot (9) landscape area along all property lines. 4. The zoning buffer ordinance requires a nine foot (9) wide land use buffer to separate this proposed development from the residential property on the northern and southern perimeters 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 northern and southern perimeters of the site. Credit towards fulfilling this requirement can be given for existing trees and undergrowth that satisfies this year-around requirement. 6. A water source must be located within seventy-five foot (75) of all landscaped areas. 7. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on tree covered sites. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 8, 2007) The applicant was not present. Staff stated the request was to convert an existing single-family structure into an office use for an appraisal company. Staff stated the goal of the developer was to maintain the residential integrity of the structure. Staff stated the only modification to the site would be widening of the existing drive six to eight feet to allow for additional parking. 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 remaining technical issues associated with the request remaining from the February 8, 2007, Subdivision Committee meeting. The request is to allow an existing single-family structure to be used as an office use for an appraisal company. The company presently has four employees. The hours of operation are from 7:30 am to 5:00 pm Monday through Friday. No signage is proposed to serve the business and no customer traffic is proposed. The site contains an existing hard surface driveway extending from Pine Mountain Drive to a parking pad. The applicant has indicated the only modification to the site would be the addition of approximately six (6) to eight (8) feet of additional paving material to expand the drive to a maximum of 20-feet in width to accommodate two (2) vehicles and meet the typical minimum parking demand for the use. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7791-A 5 The City’s adopted land use plan shows this area to be Transition, which is appropriate for office uses. In this case, the proposal is to maintain the residential character of the property while allowing the office use. It is likely, in fact, that this use may serve as a holding use for the property. There is a potential that long-term the larger area around this site may redevelop as some thing other than the existing, detached single family. The applicant has stated this may not be a permanent use; that the office could relocate in the future as the business grows. The bill of assurance for Pine Mountain Subdivision was created in 1958 and appears to still be valid. Section 1 of the bill of assurance contains the following statement: No lot other than Lot “P” shall be used except for residential purposes. The subject property is Lot “O”. The applicant is requesting a waiver of the typical screening requirement along the northern and southern perimeters. In light of the specifics of this proposal, staff supports a waiver of the screening requirements. The driveway is located on the south side of the lot where there is no abutting residential property and there is no outside activity other than parking. Since the development does not anticipate customer traffic to the site the number of trips per day should be minimal and not significantly impact the area. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s proposal. Staff feels the utilization of the existing structure as an office use for an appraisal company should have minimal impact on the area. The proposed use is consistent with uses as allowed per the City’s Future Land Use plan. To staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding 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, F and H of the above agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. 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, F and H of the above agenda staff report. Mr. Chris Maris addressed the Commission stating he had nothing to add to the staff presentation. Mr. Tom Anderson addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated his property was located to the north of the site. He stated the Bill of Assurance for the subdivision prohibited commercial activity on the site. He stated the applicant had March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7791-A 6 indicated difficulty in renting the site for a residential use. He stated he had not experienced this problem when his unit was vacant within a limited time he was able to rent the structure. He requested the Commission use the common sense approach to the request and deny the rezoning. Ms. Becky Cantrell addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated her home was located at 6 Pine Mountain Drive. She stated she had lived in her home since 1970. She stated the applicant contacted her to see if the neighborhood would support the office use. She stated she contacted the homeowners in the area and the neighborhood association and it was a consensus the office use should not be supported. She stated the neighborhood had a history with the owner and he did not keep his word or maintain the properties he owned in the neighborhood. She stated staff stated the development would not impact the area but in public works comments the developer would be required to increase the street to a commercial design standard. She stated the subdivision had a Bill of Assurance which prohibited commercial activity but had been told by staff the Bill of Assurance and zoning were two different issues. She stated the neighborhood had a number of elderly residents who did not want commercial development on their street. She requested the Commission maintain the residential integrity of the street and deny the request. Ms. Sandra Burkhart Stevens chose not to address the Commission. Mr. Nick Alsop addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated he was president of the Pinnacle Valley Property Owners Association which represented the residents of Pine Mountain Drive. He stated the association represented approximately 30 households. He presented the Commission with a slide show depicting the street as a quiet residential street with homes well maintained and yards manicured. He stated the house was not isolated from the neighborhood but was the entrance to the neighborhood. He read a letter from Ted and Wendy Hoss to the Commission. The letter stated her family was opposed to the change of the structure to a commercial use. Mr. Alsop stated Pine Mountain was a quiet residential street with 13 homes. He requested the Commission not change the character of the street by allowing the rezoning of the structure. Ms. Mary Dornhoffer addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated she represented the West Little Rock Collation of Neighborhoods. She stated the proposed change was precisely what the collation had been fighting for a number of years. She stated the change in zoning would change the fabric of the neighborhood. She stated with the change in zoning this could create a domino effect. She requested the commission protect the neighborhood and oppose the rezoning request. Mr. James Rengers stated he had noting additional to add. Mr. Maris stated he presently owned four of the houses on the street and had a fifth house under contact. He stated the change in classification would not change the March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7791-A 7 character of the neighborhood. He stated the drive would be located on the south property line and there would be a limited number of trips per day by the employees. He stated the traffic generated would not be any greater than a family of four. The Commission questioned Mr. Maris as to if he lived on the street. Mr. Maris stated he did not live on the street. The Commissioners indicated a concern with the Bill of Assurance and the Commission allowing a non-residential activity within the subdivision which was prohibited by the Bill of Assurance. Staff stated the Commission was to consider the Bill of Assurance when making a decision but was not bound by the Bill of Assurance. The Commission questioned staff as to their thoughts on recommending approval and if they felt the neighborhood was no longer a viable neighborhood. Staff stated this was not the case they felt the neighborhood was viable as a neighborhood but since the site was shown as Transitional on the Land Use Plan the proposed use was an allowable use under the Transitional classification. Staff suggested the Commission consider recommending an amendment to the Land Use Plan to create an all or noting classification which would not piecemeal the subdivision but require all the area to change at one time or remain residential. The Commission questioned the neighborhood about why they did not oppose MEMS or the mini-warehouse located to the east. Ms. Cantrell stated the neighborhood felt MEMS, the vet clinic, the mini-warehouse were all good neighbors and the neighborhood knew the area would change. The neighborhood wanted to be maintained as a single unit until such time the entire neighborhood was transitioned or change to a non-residential use. The Chair entertained a motion for approval of the item. The motion failed by a vote of 0 ayes, 9 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 13 FILE NO.: LU07-09-03 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - I-630 Planning District Location: southeast corner of 7th and Woodrow Streets Request: Service Trades District to Mixed Office Commercial Source: Stephen Giles, Attorney at Law PROPOSAL / REQUEST: The applicant has requested that this item be deferred to April 12, 2007. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant on February 9, 2007 requested this item be deferred to the April 12, 2007 Planning Commission Hearing. The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral. The consent agenda was approved by a vote of 9 for, 0 against with 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 13.1 FILE NO.: Z-7895-A NAME: 7th and Woodrow Short-form PCD LOCATION: Located on the Southeast corner of 7th and Woodrow Streets DEVELOPER: Stephen R. Giles, PA 425 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 3200 Little Rock, AR 72201 ENGINEER: White Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 1.29 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 zoning lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-3, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: Restaurant VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. The applicant submitted a request dated February 9, 2007, requesting a deferral of this item to the April 12, 2007, public hearing. Staff is supportive of the deferral request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated on February 9, 2007, the applicant submitted a requested for deferral of the item to the April 12, 2007, public hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 14 FILE NO.: Z-8140-A NAME: ME Seckt LTD Company Short-form PD-O LOCATION: Located at 4720 West Markham Street DEVELOPER: M. E. Seckt, LTD Co. 608 Nan Circle Little Rock, AR 72211 ENGINEER: James Farris, PLS 1485 South Hills Drive Conway, AR 72034 AREA: 0.16 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-3, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residence PROPOSED ZONING: PD-O PROPOSED USE: Office General and Professional – Real Estate Company VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: M.E. Seckt Ltd Company, owner of the 0.16 acre lot at 4720 West Markham Street, is requesting a rezoning of the property from R-3, Single-family District to PD-O Planned Development, Office. The property is located at the northeast corner of West Markham Street and N. Spruce Street. The rezoning is proposed to allow use of the existing building as a real estate office. Parking is proposed in the rear yard area accessed by the existing alley. A small addition is proposed to the rear of the structure to add additional office space. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8140-A 2 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: There is currently a one-story frame single-family structure on the property. There is a paved alley along the rear (east) property line. The alley does not extend the entire length of the block. The alley ties into a paved parking lot for the office use immediately to the east. The general area contains a mixture of uses and zoning. The State Health Department facilities are located across West Markham Street to the south. There are single-family residences to the north and across N. Spruce Street to the west. There is also a mixture of office and commercial uses to the east, along the north side of West Markham Street. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area resident. The Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood Association, all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the proposed development were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Markham Street is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial with reduced standards. A dedication of right-of-way 35 feet from centerline will be required. Due to site constraints, right-of-way should be dedicated to the existing wood fence or the existing residential structure. 2. The proposed land use would classify Spruce Street on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 3. A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of Markham Street and N. Spruce Street. 4. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan to be placed along Markham Street. 5. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8140-A 3 6. Obtain a franchise agreement from Public Works (John Barr, 371-4646) for the trees located along N. Spruce Street and any other improvements located in the right-of-way. 7. Remove old fence and fence post located along West Markham Street. 8. Since the existing wooden fence creates access and sight distance problems, the fence should be removed as noted on plan. 9. Dedication of right-of-way is required to 10 feet from centerline of alley. 10. Existing radiuses of the curb on the alley is substandard and should be increased to a 10-foot radius. The alley should be constructed to Public Work Alley Turnout detail (PW-35). 11. The proposed entrance from the alley into the property should be located on the northern portion of the property and the proposed parking spaces should be moved to the south side of the property. The proposed parking layout should provide area for vehicles to backup. The proposed parking layout does not provide that backing area. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer service line location is unknown. No sewer is available to this property. Sewer main extension is required with easements. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. Fire Department: Fire hydrants may be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located near CATA Bus Route #8 - the Rodney Parham Route. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8140-A 4 F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights Hillcrest Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Office for this property. The applicant has applied for a rezoning to allow the existing structure to be utilized as an office use for a real estate company. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: West Markham Street is shown as a Minor Arterial on the Master Street 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 West Markham Street since it is a Minor Arterial. The street may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. Bicycle Plan: Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III Bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Action Plan. The Zoning and Land Use goal states a need to “stop the degradation” and “this includes no net loss of residential units by demolition or conversion to other uses.” Landscape: 1. Site plan must comply with the City’s minimal landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 2. The zoning buffer ordinance requires a six foot nine inch (6’-9”) wide land use buffer to separate this proposed development from the residential property on the northern perimeter of the site. Seventy percent (70%) of these buffers are to remain undisturbed. 3. A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the northern perimeter of the site. Credit towards fulfilling this requirement can be given for existing trees and undergrowth that satisfies this year-around requirement. 4. The zoning ordinance requires a six foot nine inch (6’-9”) wide street buffer. Current, proposal does not meet this minimal requirement along W. Markham Street. Approval from the Planning Commission will be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8140-A 5 5. The landscape ordinance requires a six foot nine inch (6’-9”) wide landscape strip. Current, proposal does not meet this minimal requirement along W. Markham Street. Approval from the City Beautiful Commission will be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. 6. A water source must be located within seventy-five foot (75) of all landscaped areas. 7. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on tree covered sites. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. 8. These calculations take into account the proposed development is located within a designated mature area of the city. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 8, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff requested the developer provide the days and hours of operation, the number of employees, the total square footage of the existing structure and the square footage of the proposed addition. Staff stated they had concerns with the parking as proposed. Staff suggested the applicant redesign the site plan to not pave the entire rear yard area and maintain the residential character of the structure. Staff suggested the parking be limited to three spaces, possibly four with the double stacking of one space, accessed from the alley, which would allow landscaping around the parking area. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated additional right of way dedication would be required per the Master Street Plan. Staff also stated the alley would require improvements to a minimum paving width of 18-feet. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed site plan did not allow adequate landscaping to meet the typical minimum ordinance requirements for the landscape and buffer ordinances. Staff stated any reduction in the minimum landscape ordinance requirements would require approval from the City Beautiful Commission. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them directly for additional information and clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8140-A 6 H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing some of the issues raised at the February 8, 2007, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has provided the days and hours of operation, the number of employees, the total square footage of the existing structure and the proposed addition. The revised plan indicates dedication of right of way along the two abutting streets and the alley. A note indicates the alley will be improved to a minimum paving width of 18-feet. The site plan indicates a seven foot landscape strip adjacent to the proposed parking pad in the rear on the north and south perimeters. Adjacent to the structure landscaping is proposed within the right of way of West Markham Street. The right of way dedication proposed is 34.0 feet which abuts the southern wall of the structure. With the dedication a zero setback along West Markham is proposed. The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation are from 8:00 am to 6:00 pm Monday through Saturday. There are five (5) employees of the business. The use is proposed as a real estate office. Signage is to be limited to signage allowed in office zones or a maximum of six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area. Building signage will be limited to ten percent of the façade area. The site plan indicates the placement of a drive extending from the alley into the rear yard area flaring to allow the parking of three automobiles. Staff is not supportive of this design. Staff feels the parking should be constructed nearer the alley with the allowance of one stall to double stack and the cars exit the parking stall by backing into the alleyway. With this design the paving material will be greatly reduced which in turn will maintain the residential character of the structure. This site as well as the frontage in this area along West Markham Street is indicated on the City’s Future Land Use Plan as Office. Staff is supportive of allowing the structure to convert to a quiet office use but staff is not supportive of allowing the rear yard area to be substantially paved. The office use as proposed with limited days and hours of operation and the limited number of employees should act as a transition between the State Health Department located to the south and the single-family homes located to the north. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of the request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of deferral to the April 12, 2007, public March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8140-A 7 hearing to allow staff and the applicant time to resolve issues raised concerning the proposed parking layout. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 15 FILE NO.: Z-8167 NAME: Meyer Short-form PCD LOCATION: Located at West Markham and Kavanaugh DEVELOPER: Jerry Meyer 3001 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72205 SURVEYOR Donald Brooks Surveying 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.5+ acres LOTS: 1 zoning lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: C-3 and R-5 ALLOWED USES: General Commercial Uses and Multi-family 36-units per acre PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: C-3, General Commercial District uses VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. The applicant requested on February 12, 2007, this item be deferred to the April 12, 2007, public hearing. Staff is supportive of the deferral request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated on February 12, 2007, the applicant submitted a requested for deferral of the item to the April 12, 2007, public hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 recusal (Jerry Meyer). March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 16 FILE NO.: Z-8168 NAME: Waters Edge Tract B Long-form PD-R LOCATION: Located North of David O Dodd Road, East of I-430 DEVELOPER: H & L Properties 505 West Dixon Road Little Rock, AR 72209 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 10 Otter Creek Court, Suite A Little Rock, AR 72210 AREA: 6.506 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 350 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R PROPOSED USE: 36-unit condominium housing VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The project consists of 6.05 acres located at the northeast corner of I-430 and David O Dodd Road. The site is currently zoned R-2, single-family. The owner is requesting a rezoning to PD-R to allow the development of a 36-unit condominium project. A six foot wood and brick fence is proposed to enclose the project. Signage is proposed in accordance with the City of Little Rock specifications for multi-family development. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is located to the west of the Waters Edge Subdivision, a newly developing single-family subdivision. The preliminary plat for this subdivision March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8168 2 indicated this area for development with single-family lots. The developers are utilizing the site as access to the subdivision to limit the construction traffic on Wasters Edge Drive. The area is predominately single-family residential with a few duplex structures located at the southeast corner of David O Dodd and I-430. A number of the homes are located on large lots with acreage but in recent past three subdivisions have been developed with new homes; Kenwood Estates, Woodridge Estates and Shady Brook. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area resident. The Stagecoach Dodd Neighborhood Association, Southwest Little Rock United for Progress, all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the proposed development were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. David O. Dodd Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be required. 2. With site development, provide the design of the street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvements to David O. Dodd Road including 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development. 3. The proposed land use would classify the future street on the Master Street Plan as a residential collector street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 4. With site development, provide the design of the future street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct street improvements to this future street including 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development. Due to the use, the future street should be constructed to a residential collector street standard (60-foot R/W - 31 feet pavement) to the future street to the north. 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. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 6. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan if not provided by the lake. 7. If disturbed area is 1 or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8168 3 8. Turn around must be provided for a WB-30 vehicle attempting to enter development. A stacking distance of at least 30 feet from pavement must also be provided. It is suggested that the gates be relocated to the interior of the site to the north and south sides of the entrance driveway. 9. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. 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 Improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction. 12. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Contact Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information regarding streetlight requirements. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension is required with easements. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A water main extension, on-site fire line and additional fire hydrant(s) will be required in order to provide service to this property. The facilities on-site will be private. When meters are planned off private lines, private facilities shall be installed to Central Arkansas Water's material and construction specifications and installation will be inspected by an engineer, licensed to practice in the State of Arkansas. Execution of Customer Owned Line Agreement is required. 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. Maintain a 20-foot minimum gate opening. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8168 4 F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the 65th Street West Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Low Density Residential for this property. The applicant has applied for a rezoning of 6.5 acres to Planned Residential Development to allow the construction of 11 buildings containing 36 units of multi family housing resulting in a density of 5.5 units per acre. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: David O. Dodd Road is shown as a Minor Arterial on the Master Street Plan. This street may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. 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 David O. Dodd Road since it is a Minor Arterial. Bicycle Plan: A Class III bike route is shown on David O. Dodd Road. A Class III bikeway is a signed route on a street shared with traffic. No additional paving or right-of-way is required. Class III bicycle route signage may be required. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Pecan Lake Neighborhood Action Plan. The Zoning and Land Use Goal states: “Maintain and encourage single-family and low-density residential developments in the residential area of the neighborhood, while encouraging responsible non-residential development in the area currently reserved for such uses on the Future Land Use Plan.” Landscape: 1. Site plan must comply with the City’s minimal 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 tree covered site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8168 5 G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 8, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff requested the applicant provide details of the proposed gate entrance, details of any proposed signage and the location of all proposed fencing. Staff questioned if the units would be owner or renter occupied. Mr. McGetrick stated the development was proposed as owner occupied units. Staff stated a note should be added to the site plan indicating the required dumpster screening. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a second entrance to the development was required. Staff stated in one and two family residential developments where the number of dwelling units exceeded 30 units a second access point or road was required to meet the State Fire Code. Staff also stated sidewalks would be required with the development of the site. Staff requested the applicant develop the street as a commercial street standard, adjacent to the multi-family development, to ensure traffic flows within the area. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the site plan did not appear to meet the typical minimum ordinance requirement along the northern perimeter. Staff stated a 23-foot average landscape strip would be required to meet the typical minimum standard. Staff also stated the City Beautiful Commission recommended preserving as many existing trees as feasible on the site. Staff also stated a landscape plan would be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them directly for additional information and clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the February 8, 2007, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the proposed fencing, provided details of the proposed signage and indicated a note concerning the required dumpster screening. The revised site plan has removed the proposed gate from the development. The site plan also indicates the placement of a second entrance from David O Dodd Road for emergency access as required by State Fire Code. The proposal is to allow the development of this 6.5 acre site with 36 units in eleven (11) buildings of condominium housing. The units are proposed as one and two story units with a maximum building height of 25-feet. Each of the units is proposed with a two (2) car garage and ten (10) additional guest parking spaces are proposed. Two (2) signs are proposed with the development. One located at the intersection of David O Dodd Road and the new street accessing the site and the second located at the entrance to the development. The signage March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8168 6 is proposed consistent with signage allowed in multi-family zones or a maximum of six (6) feet in height and thirty-two (32) square feet in area. Fencing is proposed around the perimeter of the development. The fencing along the eastern and southern portions of the development is a six (6) foot wood fence and fencing along the western and northern perimeters is a six (6) foot brick and decorative metal fence. The site plan indicates the placement of the proposed buildings at a minimum of 25-feet from the property lines. With the proposed building placement, the typical minimum required landscaping for a multi-family development can be achieved. The site plan indicates a total of .25 acres of private open space per unit and 1.58 acres of public open space within the development. The ordinance typically requires the placement of a minimum of ten (10) to (15) percent of the gross planned residential district area as common usable open space and a minimum of five (500) hundred square feet of usable private open space per unit. As indicated each of the units within a patio area will have approximately one hundred forty-four (144) square feet of private open space and twenty-four (24) percent of the development will be public open space. Staff is supportive of the open space as proposed. Although each of the units will not have the typical minimum ordinance standard requirement of five hundred (500) square feet the public open space more than exceeds the typical minimum ordinance standard. The development is proposed with the placement of eight-two (82) parking spaces. Based on the typical minimum ordinance standard for a multi-family development fifty-four (54) parking spaces would be required. The development is proposed with a two (2) car garage for each unit and an additional ten (10) spaces for guest parking. The indicated parking is more than adequate to meet the typical minimum ordinance standard. The site plan indicates the placement of a single dumpster to serve the site. The dumpster has been located near Building I. No hours for the dumpster service have been indicated. Staff recommends the dumpster service hours be limited to daylight hours only to limit the noise impact on the residents of the development and the nearby residents. Two building types are proposed. One building type allows four (4) units and the second allows two (2) units. Buildings A, B, C, D, E, F, G and H are proposed with four units. The two (2) center units are proposed as two story units while the end units are proposed as single story units. Buildings I and J are proposed as two unit buildings. These buildings are single story buildings. The units are proposed with square footages ranging from 1,300 square feet to 2,100 square feet of heated and cooled space. Each unit is proposed with a patio area. Fencing is proposed to separate the patio areas which will allow limited privacy to the occupants. The second floor of the two (2) story units is not proposed to be “finished-out” by the developer. The area will be used as storage or if the owner desires to “finish-out” this area, the area could be utilized as a game/bonus room or an office. The site plan indicates the new street constructed to commercial street standard or a sixty (60) foot right of way with thirty-six (36) feet of pavement. A temporary March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8168 7 turn-around is proposed just past the western drive and the road will signed to provide residents information that the road will be extended in the future. Staff is supportive of the request. The site is indicated as Low Density Residential on the City’s Future Land Use Plan. This category provides for a broad range of housing types including single-family attached, single-family detached, duplex, townhomes, multi-family and patio or garden homes. Any combination of these and possibly other housing types may fall in the Low Density Residential category provided that the density is between six (6) and ten (10) dwelling units per acre. The development is proposed with a density of five and one half (5.5) units per acre which is consistent with single-family development as opposed to the Low Density Residential category of the Future Land Use Plan. This developer is proposing the addition of approximately two hundred (200) residential lots for detached single-family homes and a nearby subdivision has added approximately seventy-five (75) new homes to the area. In addition, nearby Kenwood Subdivision is proposed at build-out to have approximately two hundred and twenty (220) homes. Staff feels the development of the site as proposed with condominium housing allows a diversity of housing types in the area. Staff feels it is important for healthy growth to allow various housing types to develop in an area. Although the units are attached which is not the norm for the current development pattern in the area, staff does not feel this development will adversely impact the area. The units are proposed as owner occupied units which typically lends to buy-in of the residents into the neighborhood and provides the residents with a stake in the future of 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, F and H of the above agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E, F and H of the above agenda staff report. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 17 FILE NO.: LU07-09-02 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - I-630 Planning District Location: 5801 Asher Avenue Request: Industrial, Commercial and Park/Open Space to Multi Family Source: Tim Daters, White-Daters PROPOSAL / REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the I-630 Planning District from Industrial, Commercial and Park/Open Space to Multi Family. Multi Family accommodates residential development of ten to thirty-six dwelling units per acre. The application is for a large apartment complex marketed toward UALR students. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is the site of the old Coleman Dairy plant and the old Asher Drive-In. It is currently zoned I-2 Light Industrial and C-3 General Commercial. The amendment area is approximately 20 acres. The property on the north side of Asher across from this site is currently zoned C-3 General Commercial for a large strip mall. There are still a few commercial uses in the strip mall, but UALR has purchased the northeast corner of Asher and University. This area is shown as campus on the UALR master plan, and eventually it will all be used for Public/Institutional uses. The C-3 to the west of the amendment area is another large strip center which includes many stores and several restaurants. East of the application area along Asher is zoned C-4 with many varieties of auto shops. The area to the south of the amendment area is zoned R-2 Single Family and is currently undeveloped. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: The site is currently shown on the Future Land Use Plan as Industrial to recognize the old Coleman Dairy use. The amendment area also includes a strip Park/Open Space and Commercial. It is surrounded on the south and east sides by Park/Open Space. A large strip of Commercial is shown on the north side of Asher Avenue across from this site. West and adjacent to the site is planned for Commercial. Ordinance 18,373 was passed on October 17, 2000. This was the result of the Asher Corridor Study as requested by the Planning Commission. In the immediate vicinity, this amendment changed part of the Commercial to the west of the application area to Park/Open Space. Many other areas were changed further northeast along Asher March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU07-09-02 2 Avenue with the goal of keeping Industrial uses south of Asher Avenue and Commercial uses north of Asher. MASTER STREET PLAN: Asher Avenue is shown as a Principal Arterial on the 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 Asher 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 is no bike route in the immediate vicinity according to the Master Street Plan bicycle section. PARKS: According to the Master Parks Plan, the application area is within eight blocks of existing parks or open spaces. To the north is Curran Conway Park and to the west is the Jack Stephens Youth Park. HISTORIC DISTRICTS: There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this amendment. CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN: The Oak Forest Neighborhood Action Plan covers the application area. Their community image goal states a need to “eliminate vacant or blighted structures.” The housing goal also calls for the construction of new residential units. This application would help achieve both of these goals with the removal of the vacant Coleman Dairy site and the addition of new multi family residences. ANALYSIS: The application area is in a part of Little Rock that has been fully developed for many years. Just west of this application area is the Asher Avenue and University Avenue intersection. Both of these roads are Principal Arterials and have been used for Commercial and Industrial uses in the past. The Coleman Dairy and the Asher Drive-In had been in place for many years but have since closed. The amendment area has been shown on the Future Land Use Plan as Industrial, Commercial and Park/Open March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU07-09-02 3 Space for many years to recognize existing uses. The amendment area is approximately 20 acres. Most of this 20 acres is either Industrial or Park/Open Space and only one acre of this area is currently shown as Commercial on the Future Land Use Plan. This one acre is relatively insignificant considering the large amount of Commercial shown along both Asher and University Avenues. The area just north of this amendment area is shown as Commercial and Public Institutional on the Future Land Use Plan. The Public Institutional is shown to recognize the UALR campus. Currently there are still several commercial uses in this shopping center including Big Lots, two banks and a Mexican restaurant. This Commercial area shown at the northeast corner of Asher Avenue and University Avenue is actually owned by the University and will eventually be used for only campus purposes. The redevelopment of this shopping center and this old industrial site will help improve the appearance of this part of Asher Avenue and the overall vitality of the area. The redevelopment of the old Coleman Dairy to a multi family complex would help reduce the amount of vacant structures in the area, which is one of this area’s Neighborhood Action Plan’s goals. This area and the intersection of Asher and University are in need of redevelopment to bring investment and people back to this part of the city. The proposed Multi Family would be south and adjacent to the future UALR campus. The applicant plans to market these apartments to UALR students and staff. There is a demand for more residential density near campus since the campus has only limited on- campus housing. The only other Multi Family shown in this vicinity is west of campus on Colonel Glenn Road for the Bradford Place Townhomes and Chateau De Ville Apartments and east at Fair Park for the Fair Oaks Apartments. All of these apartment complexes appear occupied and in varying states of repair. There is no vacant Multi Family shown in this vicinity. The amount of Industrial that this amendment would change is fairly insignificant because of the large amount of land planned for Industrial in this region. The Industrial shown on the plan at the amendment location is only eleven acres. There are more than 300 acres planned for Industrial or Light Industrial east of this location along the south side of Asher. This part of Asher was one of the main routes into Little Rock for many years, but with changes such as the interstate the use pattern has changed for Asher Avenue. With the expansion of the University to the south and alternative traffic routes, this area is less desirable as a manufacturing and distribution area than in the past. There is less demand for Industrial in this area. Even though this section of Little Rock has been developed for many decades, the Plan shows areas yet to develop for industrial use. A portion of the amendment area and south of the application area is shown on the Future Land Use Plan as Park/Open Space. The Future Land Use Plan currently shows more than 200 acres of Park/Open Space in this area. UALR owns the property March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU07-09-02 4 immediately to the south of the amendment area and plans to use it as intramural fields in the future. This would extend the UALR campus to the south side of Asher Avenue. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Curran Conway and South of Asher. Staff has not received any comments from area residents. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is appropriate. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant on February 27, 2007 requested this item be deferred to the March 15, 2007 Planning Commission Hearing. The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral. The consent agenda was approved by a vote of 9 for, 0 against with 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 17.1 FILE NO.: Z-8169 NAME: UALR Student Housing Long-form PD-R LOCATION: Located South of Asher Avenue, East of University Avenue DEVELOPER: Place Properties 5215 N. O’Conner Boulevard Suite 200 Irving, TX 75039 ENGINEER: White Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 12.606 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: I-2 and C-3 ALLOWED USES: Light Industrial Uses and General Commercial Uses PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R PROPOSED USE: Student Housing VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Place Properties an Atlanta based Student Housing Developer is proposing to develop 192 units on this 12.54 acre site which is know as the Coleman Dairy property. The project consists of eleven three story garden style apartment buildings and a one story community building. Exterior finish for the apartment buildings is painted horizontal fiber cement siding with painted fiber cement accent trim. The roofs are composition shingles and a 6:12 pitch. The community building is stone with some stucco, cast stone and wood accents. The majority of its roof is composition shingles at a 6:12 pitch with some standing seam metal accents. The property will be a secured site with controlled access gates allowing only residents to enter the property. Security cameras will be placed around the clubhouse and at a few strategic locations around the March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8169 2 property. The clubhouse will consist of offices and leasing space for the management staff as well as a shop for the full time maintenance staff. Resident amenities will include such things as a fitness center featuring various cardiovascular equipment, weight machines and free weights, a club area with pool table, foosball and other gaming activities as well as casual gathering space for resident use. The site amenities will include a resort style swimming pool, basketball court and sand volley ball court. The property will be professionally managed by Place Management Group who will staff the property with approximately eight full time employees including a business manager, leasing manager, leasing staff and maintenance staff. Place Management Group will also employ several part-time Community Assistance persons who are residents/students that live on the property. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is the “old” Coleman Dairy site and the “old” Asher Drive-in. The buildings are remaining on the Coleman property and there is a building located on the drive-in property. The site is located near the Asher/Colonel Glenn/South University Avenue intersection and area has developed with predominately commercial uses along these roadways. To the south is property owned by UALR and is proposed for athletic fields. To the east is a vacant R-2 zoned property with a creek bisecting the property mid-point. Further north of the site is the UALR Campus. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area resident. The South of Asher and the Curran Conway Neighborhood Associations, all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the proposed development were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. The existing median east of the proposed driveway should be removed and striping provided for a left turn lane on Asher Avenue into the site. The left turn lane should provide 200 feet of stacking capacity. The existing median located west of the new driveway should be partially removed to provide a left turn lane into Campus Drive and left turns from the site. The left turn lane should provide 200 feet of stacking capacity. 2. All existing curb cuts should be closed with curb and gutter per AHTD standards. 3. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8169 3 4. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 5. Private access is proposed through this property. In accordance with Section 31-207, private streets must be designed to the same standards as public streets. A minimum access easement width of 60 feet is required and street width of 36 feet from back of curb to back of curb with sidewalks on both sides. 6. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. 7. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 8. A portion of this property is located in the 100-year floodplain. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per Section 8-283 prior to construction. 9. Turn around must be provided for a WB-30 vehicle attempting to enter development. A stacking distance of 30 feet from the call box to the street proposed curb must also be provided. The entrance gate area should be redesigned. It will be difficult for vehicles to maneuver through the gate from the call box location. Contact Bill Henry, Traffic Engineering, at 379- 1816 if you have any questions or desire additional 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. If disturbed area is 1 or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 12. Provide a Traffic Impact Study for the intersection Asher Avenue, Campus Drive, and proposed access easement taking into account the proposed project, future UALR plans, pedestrian crossings, and future uses of the property to the south. Contact Bill Henry, Traffic Engineering, at 379-1916 for additional information. 13. Provide design of the intersection including left turn lanes, pedestrian crossings on both sides of the intersection and pedestrian refuge islands. Contact Bill Henry, Traffic Engineering, at 379-1816 for additional information. 14. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Contact Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information regarding streetlight requirements. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8169 4 15. The off-street parking located between Asher Avenue and the entrance gate into the development should be removed. 16. Streetlights are required on Asher and on the street along the east property line. 17. Provide traffic impact study for all traffic and pedestrian activity. Study shall include signal warrants analysis for the intersection of Asher and Campus Drive. 18. Construct eastbound right turn lane into site with 250’ of storage. 19. Reconfigure median islands on Asher to increase left turn storage into Campus Drive and remove left turn storage currently for westbound left turns into Village Shopping Center. 20. Reconfigure existing entrance into Village Shopping Center as right turn in and out only. 21. Remove the parking shown on the access drive from Asher to just south of proposed entry drive. No Parking on access drive within 50’ of entrance drive. 22. Provide right turn lane into access drive for stacking due to gate access. 23. Construct sidewalks and rebuild curbs on Asher along north property line. 24. Construct “T” turn around at the end of the access drive. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Relocation of existing sewer main is required prior to the start of construction. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. 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. The facilities on-site will be private. When meters are planned off private lines, private facilities shall be installed to Central Arkansas Water's material and construction specifications and installation will be inspected by an engineer, licensed to practice in the State of Arkansas. Execution of Customer Owned Line Agreement is required. This March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8169 5 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. The development is required to maintain a minimum gate opening of 20-feet. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located near CATA Bus Routes #14 – the Rosedale Route and #17A the Mabelvale UALR Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the I-630 Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Industrial for this property. The applicant has applied for a rezoning to allow 192 units of student housing to be constructed on the site. A land use plan amendment for a change to Multi Family is a separate item on this agenda (LU07-09-02). Master Street Plan: Asher Avenue is shown as a Principal Arterial on the 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 Asher Avenue since it is a Principal Arterial. Bicycle Plan: Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III Bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The Oak Forest Neighborhood Action Plan covers the application area. Their community image goal states a need to “eliminate vacant or blighted structures.” The housing goal also calls for the construction of new residential units. The application would remove the old Coleman Dairy site and the old drive in and replace it with new multi family housing. Landscape: 1. Site plan must comply with the City’s minimal landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 2. The landscape ordinance requires a nine foot (9’) wide landscape strip along all perimeters of the property. Site plan appears short in some areas. A variance March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8169 6 must be obtained from the City Beautiful Commission for approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. 3. The zoning buffer ordinance requires a fifty foot wide (50) land use buffer between the proposed new road and the residential property to the east. Seventy percent (70%) of these buffers are to remain undisturbed. 4. Interior islands must be a minimum of three hundred (300) feet in area to receive credit toward fulfilling landscape ordinance requirements. Some of the proposed areas do not meet this minimum standard. 5. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. 6. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. 7. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on tree covered sites. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 8, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff stated a CATA Bus pull-off may be required and requested the applicant contact CATA to determine if a pull-off would be required. Staff also stated the access easement should be indicated as a 60-foot access and utility easement to meet commercial street design standards. Staff also requested the developer provide the proposed construction materials, the building height and the proposed fencing material. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a traffic impact study would be required to determine the impact on Asher Avenue, Campus Drive and the proposed access easement. Staff also stated a turn around should provide for a WB-30 vehicle attempting to enter the gated development. Staff stated a secondary access for emergency vehicles would be required to allow access to the site if for some reason the main entrance was blocked. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated a nine foot landscape strip would be required along all perimeters. Staff also stated a 50-foot land use buffer would be required along the eastern perimeter of the site adjacent to the service drive. Staff stated interior landscape islands would be required at a minimum of 300 square feet in area. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them directly for additional information March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8169 7 and clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the February 8, 2007, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated a bus pull-off for CATA, indicated the access easement as a 60- foot access and utility easement and indicated sidewalks on both sides of the easement. The applicant has also provided a secondary entrance to the development. The site plan indicates the placement of a seven foot landscape strip along the perimeters of the site. The site is located east of University Avenue, the designated mature area of the City which allows the minimum landscape strip to be reduced to six feet nine inches. The site plan indicates interior landscaping will be added per minimum ordinance standards. The site plan indicates the development will be constructed in a single phase. There are a total of eleven residential buildings and a community building. The development is proposed as a gated community and fencing is proposed around the perimeter of the site. Fencing is proposed six feet in height and constructed of brick, wrought iron and wood. The units are proposed as three story buildings with a maximum height of 35-feet. The construction materials are brick, brick and stone, stucco, siding and wood. Three building footprints are proposed. Building footprint I contains twenty-four one bed, one bath units with a total of twenty-four beds per building. Building 9 is proposed as this prototype. Building footprint II is proposed with twelve four bed, four bath units and twelve two bed, two bath units. There are seventy-two beds per building. Buildings 2, 4, 5 and 8 are proposed as this prototype. Building footprint III is proposed containing twelve four bedroom four bath units. There are forty-eight beds per building. Buildings 6, 7, 10 – 12 are proposed as this prototype. A total of 192 units are proposed with a total of 600 beds. The site plan indicates the placement of 600 parking spaces. The parking is indicated with 589 resident spaces and 11 visitor spaces. The resident parking is proposed with 190 covered parking spaces and 399 uncovered parking spaces. A single ground mounted sign is proposed near the entrance to the development from Asher Avenue. The sign is proposed with a maximum height of six feet and a total sign area not to exceed thirty-two square feet. The signage is consistent with signage allowed in multi-family zones. The development is proposed as a gated community. Concerns were raised at the February 8, 2007, Subdivision Committee meeting related to the gated entrance. The revised site plan has not provided a turn around as requested by staff sufficient to accommodate a WB-30 vehicle attempting to enter the gated development. Staff also has concerns with the placement of the call box. The entrance as indicated does not allow sufficient stacking outside the access and utility easement. The access and utility easement is to function as a City street. Staff is concerned with the lack of on-site stacking. The stacking will occur on the easement. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8169 8 The revised site plan does not include the land use buffer along the eastern perimeter of the site. The zoning ordinance would typically require the placement of a 50-foot landscape strip along the eastern perimeter where abutting residentially zoned or used property. Portions of this area are located in the floodplain and floodway of a drainage structure which bisects the adjoining property. The property is indicated as Light Industrial on the City’s Future Land Use plan and is not likely to develop with a residential use. Staff is supportive of the buffer as indicated on the site plan. The applicant has not provided staff with the requested traffic study. Staff requested the applicant provide a traffic impact study to determine the impact on Asher Avenue, Campus Drive and the proposed access easement. The developers have committed to funding the cost of a traffic signal at the intersection of Campus Drive, Asher Avenue and the access easement should a signal be warranted. Staff is supportive of this agreement. Staff is supportive of the development concept and many aspects of the development. The development is proposed to fill a housing need for the campus in dormitory style housing but funded by a private developer. The units will be arranged around centralized kitchen and den area with private bedroom and baths. A community building is proposed within the development to serve as common public space. In addition, the site will contain a swimming pool, basketball court and volleyball pit. Staff does have concerns with the indicated gated entrance and the lacking of stacking outside the service easement. Staff feels the applicant should address this concern by eliminating the gate or by reworking the entrance to allow adequate stacking, a minimum of 40-feet from the curb line, outside the service easement. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of the request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated on February 28, 2007, the applicant submitted a request for a deferral of the item to the March 15, 2007, public hearing. Staff stated the deferral would require a waiver of the Commission’s By-laws with regard to the late deferral request. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. 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. A motion was made to place the item on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 18 FILE NO.: LU07-29-01 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Barrett Planning District Location: The northwest corner of Highway 10 and Pleasant Grove Road Request: Single Family and Suburban Office to Commercial and Office Source: Joe White, White-Daters PROPOSAL / REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the Barrett Planning District from Single Family and Suburban Office to Commercial and Office. Commercial includes a broad range of retail activities. Office represents services provided directly to consumers. The application is for a mixture of commercial and office uses using the Planned Zoning District process. Prompted by this Land Use Amendment request, the Planning Staff expanded the area of review to include the area immediately west of the application. With these changes, the entirety of the Suburban Office would be eliminated. It is thought that the additional area would make the boundaries more logical. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is outside of the city limits and is currently zoned R-2 Single Family. It is 22 acres ± in size and is currently used for a driving range and three single family houses in varying stages of repair. This area is outside of the Little Rock city limits, so most of the surrounding area is either zoned R-2 Single Family or AF Agricultural Forestry District. Most of this area is either undeveloped or developed with single family houses. West and adjacent to this area is zoned C-1 and PCD Planned Commercial Development for a small commercial center. Another PCD Planned Commercial Development is just east of this area for a small store called Twigs. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: The area is currently planned for Single Family and Suburban Office. To the west is a small area of Commercial. On the south side of the intersection of Highway 10 and Goodson Road is an area of Neighborhood Commercial. There is a large strip of Park/Open Space north of this area to represent Nowlin Creek’s floodplain. The remaining surrounding areas are planned for Single Family. Ordinance 19,257 was passed on January 4, 2005 to amend the western portion of Neighborhood Commercial on the north side of Highway 10 near Goodson Road and the Single Family immediately north to Commercial with a required Planned Zoning March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU07-29-01 2 District for any development in the Commercial area. This ordinance also amended the eastern portion of Neighborhood Commercial on the north side of Highway 10 near Goodson Road and the Single Family immediately north to Suburban Office. These areas are just west of the current application. Ordinance 18,994 was passed on December 2, 2003 to amend the eastern portion of Low Density Residential at the southwest corner of Highway 10 and Ferndale Cutoff to Commercial for future development. MASTER STREET PLAN: Highway 10 is shown as a Principal Arterial on the 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 Highway 10 since it is a Principal Arterial. Pleasant Grove Road is shown as a Local Street on the plan. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Local Streets which are abutted by non-residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes are considered as “Commercial Streets” and have a design standard the same as a Collector. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. BICYCLE PLAN: There are no bike routes in the immediate vicinity. PARKS: The property under review is not located in a recognized Park Planning District and there are no existing or proposed parks in the immediate vicinity. 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. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU07-29-01 3 ANALYSIS: The amendment area is outside of the city limits and near the edge of Little Rock’s extraterritorial jurisdiction boundary. The area has remained rural and undeveloped despite a few small commercial developments along Highway 10. This area is surrounded to the north and west by the Nowlin Creek watershed, which limits the possibility of expanded development in these directions. This area has been a commercial node at least since 2002 when this area was added to the Future Land Use Plan. In 2004, the Future Land Use Plan was amended at the intersection of Goodson Road and Highway 10 from Neighborhood Commercial and Single Family to Commercial and Suburban Office. The current expanded application would change that Suburban Office and some Single Family to the east to Commercial and Office. Changing this area from Suburban Office and Single Family to Commercial and Office would increase the use intensity of this intersection. The Suburban Office that is currently shown on the plan was intended to buffer the single family houses from the Commercial. This amendment would not only remove that buffer but also increase the amount of Commercial shown on the Plan for this area. There is currently 5.5 acres of Commercial, 6.4 acres of Suburban Office and 3.1 acres of Neighborhood Commercial at the intersection of Highway 10 and Goodson Road. This amendment would add approximately 15 acres of Commercial to the area. The Suburban Office would be replaced with approximately 7 acres of Office to the north of the Commercial. This amendment would be building on the existing Commercial at this location. This location is the first commercial area upon entering the City of Little Rock’s extraterritorial jurisdiction along Highway 10 from the west. The combination of Lake Maumelle and its sailing clubs, the Alotian Golf Course and new residences to the west of this area have created a demand for more commercial in this area. The existing Commercial on the Future Land Use plan is all developed at this location. A new commercial development designed to respect the large lot single family to the east could be a positive to this commercial node. The proposed Office in this amendment will also need to be designed with respect to the existing Nowlin Creek floodplain. These concerns regarding Nowlin Creek cause staff to believe Suburban Office would be more suitable than Office at this location. This would mean no net change in office classification with this amendment. Along Highway 10, Commercial areas exist one to one and a half miles from each other. Having Commercial at this location would be consistent with the existing Commercial node spacing along Highway 10, since the closest Commercial center is the Kings One Stop which is a mile east of this location. Besides these two Commercial nodes, most of the surrounding areas are either planned for Single Family or Park/Open Space. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU07-29-01 4 There is an abundance of undeveloped Single Family land in this region but little to no vacant Commercial land available. On January 20, 2004, Ordinance 19,041 was passed. This ordinance extended the Highway 10 Scenic Corridor Design Overlay district west from Highway 300 to the western line of the Planning Boundary. The extension of the overlay includes the amendment area and will be subject to the overlay requirements including strict landscaping requirements, building setbacks, and a limit on curb cuts on Highway 10. Ordinance 19,257 amended the western portion of Neighborhood Commercial on the north side of Highway 10 near Goodson Road and the Single Family immediately north to Commercial with a required Planned Zoning District for any development in the Commercial area. Like that amendment, a Planned Zoning Development requirement would be appropriate with a change to Commercial at this amendment site. Staff believes that the Planned Zoning District is desirable for this location due to the location near a significant floodplain and single family homes on large lots. Using the PZD process, needed commercial services can be reviewed to assure compatibility with the surrounding area protecting both the natural environment and rural nature of the vicinity. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received one comment opposed to the change from area residents. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes Commercial is appropriate with a required Planned Zoning Development and Suburban Office rather than Office. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant amended the application to Commercial with a Planned Zoning District and Suburban Office. The amended application was placed on the consent agenda for approval. The consent agenda was approved by a vote of 9 for, 0 against with 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 18.1 FILE NO.: Z-8170 NAME: Pinnacle at Maumelle Long-form Conceptual PCD LOCATION: Located North of Highway 10 and North and West of Pleasant Grove DEVELOPER: LRG Investment, LLC 404 East Kiehl Sherwood, AR ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 37.56 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 6 FT. NEW STREET: 915 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: C-2 and O-2 uses and the allowance of a convenience store. VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The developer is proposing to construct a cul-de-sac northwest through the middle of the property to develop six (6) lots. Lots 1 and 6 would develop using C-2 uses and the allowance of a convenience store on either lot. Lots 2 through 5 would develop using O-2 uses with the allowance of 10 percent of the total building square footage to be an accessory uses as allowed per the O-2 zoning district. The request also includes utilizing the existing office and parking for an office use until the property is redeveloped. The lots are indicated in excess of three (3) acres; ranging from 3.01 to 11.49 acres. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8170 2 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site was formerly used as a golf driving range and there is a single building located near the southwestern portion of the site. The area has a mixture of uses and zoning. A number of the properties in the area are zoned AF. There are two commercially zoned properties located to the west, a site zoned C-1 which is vacant and a site zoned PCD which is developed with a number of buildings which allows C-1 uses, limited outdoor storage and auto sales, as allowable uses for the site. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area resident. All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the proposed development were notified of the public hearing. There is not an active neighborhood association located in the area. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Highway 10 is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial. Dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline will be required. 2. The proposed land use would classify Pleasant Grove Road on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 3. With site development, provide the design of the street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to Highway 10 including 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development. 4. With site development, provide the design of the street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvements to Pleasant Grove Road including 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development. Pleasant Grove Road should be constructed to a collector street standard. 5. The property shows to be in the 100-year floodplain. Contact Sherman Smith with Pulaski County Road and Bridge at 340-6800 for additional floodplain information. 6. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 7. Pinnacle Place should be designed to commercial street standard with sidewalks on both sides per the Master Street Plan. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8170 3 8. The minimum Finish Floor elevation is required to be shown on plat. 9. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. 10. If disturbed area is 1 or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 11. Due to the commercial use of the properties, the cul de sac should be extended to Lot 7. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Outside the service boundary. Sewer service will not be provided by Little Rock Wastewater Utility. Provide details of how wastewater collection and treatment will be handled. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. A water main extension and additional fire hydrant(s) will be required in order to provide service to this property. Adequate easements or rights-of-way will be required for installation of water facilities. 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. Outside the City of Little Rock Fire Service Boundary. Provide a letter from the area volunteer fire department indicating their knowledge of the project and their ability to serve the development. County Planning: No comment received. 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 Barrett Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8170 4 for a Conceptual Planned Commercial Development for office and commercial uses. A land use plan amendment for a change to Office and Commercial is a separate item on this agenda (LU07-29-01). Master Street Plan: Highway 10 is shown as a Principal Arterial on the 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 Highway 10 since it is a Principal Arterial. Pleasant Grove Road is shown as a Local Street on the plan. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Bicycle Plan: Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III Bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the development. 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. Landscape: 1. Site plan must comply with the City’s minimal landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 2. Site plan must comply with the Highway 10 Overlay District Requirements. 3. This site plan will be used for all parcel permitting; buffers and landscaping requirements to be administered as a whole project. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 8, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff stated platted building lines for commercial and office subdivision lots located outside the city limits but within the planning jurisdiction were to be at least 45-feet from the street right of way. Staff also stated the depth and width for commercial lots located outside the City limits but within the planning jurisdiction were to be one hundred feet of frontage by one hundred fifty feet in depth. Staff stated no commercial or office lot was allowed a depth exceeding three times the width. Staff stated Lots 2, 3, 9 and 10 were indicated with an increased lot depth to width ratio. Staff stated pipe stem lots were prohibited in office or commercial subdivision. Staff stated Lot 7 was indicated as a pipe stem lot. Staff stated the ordinance also stated in the interest of efficient traffic circulation, and to ensure a suitable relationship between the street system and the proposed commercial use, blocks in commercial and office subdivisions were generally to be not less than six hundred feet or more than one March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8170 5 thousand feet in length. Staff stated Cul-de-sacs were not permitted as termination devices for commercial streets. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated dedication per the Master Street Plan would be required. Staff also stated dedication of right of way would be required on Pleasant Grove Road. Staff stated Pinnacle Place should be constructed to Master Street Plan standard for a commercial street. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the developments would be required with minimum ordinance standards at the time of development including the Highway 10 Design Overlay and the zoning and landscape Ordinances. Staff stated the site was being reviewed as a unified development and each lot development would be required to fully comply with minimum ordinance standards. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them directly for additional information and clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the February 8, 2007, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has amended the plat to eliminate the variance request for a pipe stem lot, the lot depth to width ratio and the increased length of a commercial cul-de-sac. The proposed platted building lines have been indicated at 45-feet as required by the Subdivision Ordinance. The site plan also includes the location of the floodway and the lots located within the flood plain have been indicated with a minimum floor elevation as required by ordinance. The plan has been reduced from ten lots to six lots. The applicant is proposing a conceptual PCD to establish uses and create lots for future development. In the interim, the applicant is seeking approval of utilization of the existing office building as an office use as allowed the O-2 zoning district. The future development plan includes the construction of a 915 foot commercial cul-de-sac street to serve the six lots. No driveway access is proposed from Highway 10 and all the proposed lots will be served by the new street. Lots 1 and 6 are proposed for future commercial development utilizing C-2 uses with the addition of a convenience store. The remaining lots (Lots 2 – 5) are proposed to develop utilizing O-2 uses with the allowance of 10 percent accessory uses as allowable uses. As each development plan is secured, the applicant will amend the PCD to establish building footprints, parking areas and proposed landscape areas. According to the applicant, Lots 1 and 6 will fully comply with the Highway 10 Design Overlay District requirements. Lots 2 – 5 will comply with typical development standards of the O-2 zoning district with regard to setback and the City’s minimum landscape and buffer ordinances will be adhered to. Staff is supportive of the request. Adjacent and to the west of the site are commercial uses in an existing Business Node. To the east of the site is a PCD March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8170 6 zoned property zoned to allow a gift shop. The nearest commercial in the area is located approximately one mile from this site. Staff feels with the new homes in the area and the lake located nearby, there could be a demand for additional commercial in the area. To staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff feels the rezoning of this site to PCD to allow a conceptual plan to establish uses and create a plat will not negatively impact any adjoining property 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 above agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above agenda staff report. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 19 FILE NO.: Z-7585 NAME: River Tower Short-form PD-R Time Extension LOCATION: Located on the Northwest corner of River Bend and River Front Drive DEVELOPER: The Hathaway Group 1001 North University Avenue Little Rock, AR 72207 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 3.2 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PD-R ALLOWED USES: Residential Tower – 50 units PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R PROPOSED USE: Residential Tower – 50 units Time Extension VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 19,127 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on June 15, 2004, established the River Tower Short-form PD-R. The approval allowed the construction of a 12 story building on this 3.2 acre site located at the northeast corner of Riverfront Drive and Riverbend Road. The approved plan allowed living areas consisting of 180,000 square feet while the parking deck had 54,000 square feet of area. A maximum building height of 175 feet was approved. The floors consisted of the following: Floors 1 –2 would be used as a parking deck with 50 spaces per level, Floor 3 would be the amenities floor for exercise, storage, meeting, guest suites, Floors 4 –11 would be used as living units at six units per floor and a total of 48 units and Floor 12 would contain two penthouse units. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7585 2 The layout provided 43 spaces for visitors, staff and event parking adjacent to Riverfront Drive. Landscape areas were significant with approximately 30 percent of the development reserved for green space. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now requesting approval by the Planning Commission of a time extension for implementation of the previously approved PRD. Per Section 36-454(e) the applicant shall have three years from the date of passage of the ordinance approving the preliminary approval to submit the final development plan. Requests for extensions of time shall be submitted in writing to the Planning Commission which may grant one (1) extension of not more than two years. Time extensions shall be applied for by formal written request not less than ninety days prior to the first expiration date. Failure of the applicant to file a timely extension shall be cause for revocation of the PUD as provided in the ordinance. The applicant has indicated they have been actively working on the project in an effort to refine and further improve the design. As a part of these efforts the developers have engaged a firm to provide additional design and consulting services. All the design changes are well within the perimeters of the previously approved PRD. The intention is to begin actively marketing the River Tower residences within 6 – 8 weeks. The developers have indicated permitting cannot be achieved within the three year as required by the minimum ordinance standards. As a result, the applicant requests the Commission allow a two-year time extension of the previously approved PCD. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is located in the Riverdale area which has developed with a mixture of uses. The site is a grass covered vacant site. There is a single-family neighborhood located to the east of the site and another located to the north and northeast. To the south of the site is the Alltel complex and to the west of the site is a private school and a office building. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area resident. The River Bend Property Owners Association, all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the proposed development were notified of the public hearing. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7585 3 D. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the request for a two-year time extension for the proposed development subject to compliance with all previously approved comments and conditions. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request for a two-year time extension for the proposed development subject to compliance with all previously approved comments and conditions. Mr. Jim Hathaway addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. Mr. Hathaway stated the Commission was not here to discuss whether the development should occur only if the time extension should be granted. He stated the development was debated at great length a few years ago and the development was determined appropriate for the site. He stated with a project of this magnitude it took time to address all the dynamics of the development. He stated the developers were working with a design firm to create a development that would be an asset to the community and the neighbors. Mr. Sterling Cockrill addressed the Commission in opposition of the time extension. He stated the River Bend Property Owners Association was opposed to the development of a thirteen story building on the site. He stated he was opposed to the time extension because the neighbors were sitting on edge waiting for the project to occur. He stated the neighbors want the project to move forward or to be abandoned. Mr. Jim Hathaway stated the developers were committed to building the project. He stated the land had been purchased and design fees paid. He stated the developers had already spent a great deal of money and in the next few months would spend additional funds to move the project forward. The Commission questioned what activities had taken place to date. Mr. Hathaway stated the land was purchased, design had taken place, he stated his firm was not happy with the design so a second firm had been retained to give new insight to the development. He stated the number of units had been reduced and the building pulled away from the rear property line. He stated all the revisions were within the approved PD-R perimeters. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for approval of the item. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 20 FILE NO.: Z-6062 NAME: McAlmont POD Revocation LOCATION: 1814 – 1824 McAlmont Street OWNER: Renee Stehle 27 Crystal Mountain Lane Maumelle, AR 72113 OWNER: Ms. Wanda G. Mitchell 1020 G Street North Little Rock, AR 72114 AREA: 0.389 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: POD ALLOWED USES: Charitable or philanthropic organization PROPOSED ZONING: R-4, Two-family PROPOSED USE: Duplex Housing VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 17,094 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on January 16, 1996, established Global Learning Community Services Center, Inc. Short-form Planned Office Development. The approval allow the utilization of three existing 1,200 square foot residential duplex structures as the support offices for, and facilities for services to the public for, the Global Learning Community Services Center. The northern-most duplex building was to be utilized for the office of the Center’s crisis intervention hotline, for counseling, and for the food pantry operation. The center duplex structure was proposed to be the general offices of the center. The southern most duplex structure was proposed to house the youth center and the GED classroom. No changes to the structures was proposed, except for superficial remodeling and repair work, and no additional parking beyond the six residential style head-in parking March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6062 2 spaces off McAlmont Street were proposed. The residential character of the site was to be maintained. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Per Section 36-458(a) Cause for revocation as enforcement action. The Planning Commission may recommend to the Board of Directors that any PUD or PD approval be revoked and all building permits or certificates of occupancy be voided under the following circumstances: (1) The applicant has not submitted a final development plan to staff. Where a staged development plan is approved the Board of Directors may revoke the entire preliminary plan or may revoke only that stage on which a final plan has not been submitted and approved. (2) Construction has not commenced within the time allowed. (3) The applicant has not adhered to the development schedule as stated in the approved preliminary plan. In addition, to the revocation for cause, Section 36-454(e) final development plan states the applicant shall have three years from the date of passage of the ordinance approving the preliminary approval to submit the final development plan. Request for extensions of time shall be submitted in writing to the Planning Commission which may grant one extension of not more than two years. Failure of the applicant to file a timely extension shall be cause for revocation of the PUD as provided in the ordinance. Per the ordinance requirement of the procedure for revocation, staff has contacted the applicant indicating the default of approval and setting a time to appear before the Planning Commission to show cause why steps should not be made to totally or partially revoke the POD zoning classification. According to the ordinance, the Planning Commission shall provide a recommendation which shall be forwarded to the Board of Directors for disposition as in the original approval. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is developed; there are three duplex residential units on the site. The site is in a developed area, and the topography is nearly level. The zoning of the area to the north, south and west is primarily R-4, Two-family and has developed with a mix of one and two family residences. The units are currently occupied as residential. I-30 abuts the site to the east. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area resident. The East of Broadway Neighborhood Association, all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6062 3 identified, located within 300 feet of the proposed development were notified of the public hearing. D. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff feels the approval should be voided since the applicant has failed to satisfy the requirements of the approval process. Staff recommends the current POD zoning classification be revoked and the previously held R-4, Two-family zoning District be restored. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated they felt the approval of the POD should be voided since the applicant has failed to satisfy the requirements of the approval process. Staff presented a recommendation that the current POD zoning classification be revoked and the previously held R-4, Two-family zoning district be restored. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 21 FILE NO.: Z-3491 NAME: Albert PiKe Phase II PD Revocation LOCATION: 221 East 7th Street DEVELOPER: Philip Jones Moser Tucker Real Estate 200 S. Commerce Street, Suite 300 Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 0.63 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: PD ALLOWED USES: Elderly Housing PROPOSED ZONING: UU PROPOSED USE: Uses as allowed in the UU Zoning District VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 13,842 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on July 15, 1980, established a Planned Development for the property located at the southwest corner of Cumberland and 7th Streets. The rezoning encompassed an area described as Lots 1, 2, 3, 10, 11, 12 and the W 125 feet of Lot 4, and the W 125 feet of the N 182 of Lot 5, Block 27, Original City of Little Rock, Arkansas for a ten-story multi-family housing project for the elderly. The project was approved to allow a ten story 200 unit apartment development for the elderly and was sponsored by the Second Baptist Church. The project included the Albert Pike project located to the west and would be know as Albert Pike II would allow the construction of a second building. Parking for the project would include approximately 20 parking spaces under the building and 110 spaces located immediately north of the project site. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Per Section 36-458(a) Cause for revocation as enforcement action. The Planning Commission may recommend to the Board of Directors that any PUD or March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 21 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3491 2 PD approval be revoked and all building permits or certificates of occupancy be voided under the following circumstances: (1) The applicant has not submitted a final development plan to staff. Where a staged development plan is approved the Board of Directors may revoke the entire preliminary plan or may revoke only that stage on which a final plan has not been submitted and approved. (2) Construction has not commenced within the time allowed. (3) The applicant has not adhered to the development schedule as stated in the approved preliminary plan. In addition, to the revocation for cause, Section 36-454(e) final development plan states the applicant shall have three years from the date of passage of the ordinance approving the preliminary approval to submit the final development plan. Request for extensions of time shall be submitted in writing to the Planning Commission which may grant one extension of not more than two years. Failure of the applicant to file a timely extension shall be cause for revocation of the PUD as provided in the ordinance. Per the ordinance requirement of the procedure for revocation, staff has contacted the applicant indicating the default of approval and setting a time to appear before the Planning Commission to show cause why steps should not be made to totally or partially revoke the PD zoning classification. According to the ordinance, the Planning Commission shall provide a recommendation which shall be forwarded to the Board of Directors for disposition as in the original approval. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: To the north of the site is a parking lot and south of the site is a church. East of the site are residential uses, the Albert Pike Phase I is located to the west. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. The Downtown Neighborhood Association, the McArthur Park Property Owners Association, all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the proposed development were notified of the public hearing. D. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends the approval be voided since the applicant has failed to satisfy the requirements of the approval process. Staff recommends the current PD zoning classification be revoked and the property be zoned UU. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 21 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3491 3 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented a recommendation that the approved PD zoning be voided since the applicant has failed to satisfy the requirements of the approval process. Staff presented a recommendation the current PD zoning classification be revoked and the property be zoned UU. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. March 1, 2007 ITEM NO.: 22 FILE NO.: Z-6554-E NAME: Bowman Kanis Retail Center Long-form PCD Revocation LOCATION: Located on the Northwest corner of Kanis and Bowman Roads DEVELOPER: USA Drug c/o Collier Dickson Flake Partners 400 West Capitol, Suite 1200 Little Rock, AR 72202 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 11.85 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PCD ALLOWED USES: Single-family, Office and Commercial PROPOSED ZONING: C-3, O-3 and R-2 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On January 5, 2006, the Commission recommended approved a preliminary plat for a larger area which included this site. Proposed Lot 1 would remain zoned C-3, with conditions allowing a reduction in the previously imposed no build area. The approval allowed future development to be construct nearer the “hard corner” of Kanis and Bowman Roads. The Board of Directors approved this request by the adoption of Ordinance No. 19,477 on February 7, 2006. Lot 2 was rezoned from R-2, O-3 and C-3 to PCD. Lot 2 was proposed for the development with a retail shopping center containing 123,860 square feet and a total of 617 parking spaces. The Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 19,479 on February 7, 2006, establishing Bowman Kanis Retail Center Long-form PCD. March 1, 2007 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 22 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6554-E 2 A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant’s request is now to revoke the PCD zoning classification for this site. The site has not developed and the applicant is requesting the current PCD zoning be revoked and the original C-3, O-3 and R-2 zoning classifications be restored. Per Section 36-454(d) the Owner may for cause request repeal of the ordinance establishing the development. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The property is located in an area of mixed zoning and extremely varied uses. The intensely commercial Chenal Parkway/Bowman Road intersection is directly north of the site. Uses in this area include a wide variety of retail commercial businesses such as Sam’s, Wal-Mart, Garden Ridge and Best Buy. Across Bowman, at the northeast corner of Kanis and Bowman Road is a PCD, which has developed as an office/warehouse/retail center. The C-3 and PCD zoned properties to the south; contain a variety of uses including offices, office/warehouse and mini-warehouses. The area to the west of the site is vacant and currently zoned POD. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. All owners of property located within 200-feet of the site, the John Barrow Neighborhood Association and the Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the revocation request of the PCD zoning classification and the restoration of the previously held R-2, O-3 and C-3 zoning classifications. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 1, 2007) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the revocation request of the PCD zoning classification and the restoration of the previously held R-2, O-3 and C-3 zoning classifications. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.