pc_12 06 2007
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING – REZONING – CONDITIONAL USE HEARING
MINUTE RECORD
DECEMBER 6, 2007
4:00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being eleven (11) in number.
II. Members Present: Pam Adcock
Troy Laha
Jerry Meyer
Lucas Hargraves
Jeff Yates
Chauncey Taylor
Darrin Williams
J. T. Ferstl
Obray Nunnley, Jr.
Valerie Pruitt
Bill Rector
Members Absent: None
City Attorney: Cindy Dawson
III. Approval of the Minutes of the October 11, 2007 Meeting of the Little Rock
Planning Commission. The Minutes were approved as presented.
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING – REZONING – CONDITIONAL USE HEARING
DECEMBER 6, 2007
4:00 P.M.
I. OLD BUSINESS:
Item Number:
File Number:
Title
A. Z-8214 Jefferson Day Care Center – Conditional Use Permit
3200 and 3208 Gilman Street
B. A-310 Shoemaker Annexation, 218± Acres South of Lawson
Road between Crystal Valley Road and Duvall in
Sections 20, 29, 30, T-1-N, R-13-W.
C. Z-6933-B Crackerbox – Conditional Use Permit
14100 Kanis Road
D. 2007 Ordinance Amendment Package
II. NEW BUSINESS:
Item Number:
File Number:
Title
1. LU07-13-01 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the 65th Street East
Planning District in the 7000 Block of Geyer Springs
from Industrial to Commercial
1.1 Z-8282 Rezoning from R-2 to C-3
7000 Geyer Springs Road
2. Z-8283 Rezoning from R-2 to C-4
4800 Baseline Road
3. Z-8284 Rezoning from R-2 to C-3
8707 Mabelvale Pike
Agenda, Page Two
II. NEW BUSINESS: (CONTINUED)
Item Number:
File Number:
Title
4. Z-8285 Rezoning from I-2 to C-3
6423 Geyer Springs Road
5. LU07-16-02 Land Use Plan Amendment in the Otter Creek Planning
District on east side of Vimy Ridge Road north of
County Line Road from Single Family to Neighborhood
Commercial.
5.1 Z-8286 Rezoning from R-2 to C-1
East side of Vimy Ridge Road, approximately 250 feet
north of County Line Road
6. Z-7511-A Felton Accessory Dwelling – Conditional Use Permit
5324 Sherwood Road
7. Z-8278 Avis Car Rental – Conditional Use Permit
600 S. University Avenue
8. Z-8280 Ewing-Butler Day Care Center – Conditional Use Permit
3523 West 12th Street
9. Z-8281 Martin Multisectional Manufactured Home – Conditional
Use Permit
8900 “A” Johnson Lane
10. G-25-197 Pinnacle Drive Street Name Change to Pinnacle Point
11. LA-0019 Appeal of the Land Alteration Ordinance
12 Pinto Point
12. LA-0020 Rees Land Alteration Variance
1815 Rahling Road
13. MSP07-04 Alternate Design Standard for University Avenue from
Markham north to Cantrell Road
14. A-311 Rocket Annexation, 240 Acres between Rushmore
Avenue and Woodlands Trail in Section 7, T-1-N,
R-13-W.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: Z-8214
NAME: Jefferson Day Care Center – Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 3200 and 3208 Gilman Street
OWNER/APPLICANT: Gail Lambert/Lanell Jefferson
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow
conversion of these two residential structures into
a day care center. The properties are zoned R-3.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The properties are located at the southwest corner of West 32nd and
Gilman Streets, in the John Barrow neighborhood.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The site is located within the heart of a single family residential
neighborhood. All surrounding properties are occupied by single family
homes. The applicants proposal is to convert two single family residences
into a day care center campus. Staff does not believe this is the
appropriate location for this business. The day care center should be
located outside of the neighborhood, on a collector or arterial street.
All owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet of the site who could be identified and the John Barrow
Neighborhood Association were notified of this proposal.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The proposed day care is to have an enrollment of 32 children, with 6
employees; requiring 9 on-site parking spaces. The applicant proposed to
utilize a single car wide driveway off of Gilman Street to access a new,
12-space parking lot. If the C.U.P. is approved, the parking will need to be
paved and the existing driveway widened to accommodate two-way traffic
or a connection made to West 32nd Street to accommodate one-way traffic
onto and off of the site.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Site plan must comply with the City’s minimal landscape and buffer
ordinance requirements.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8214
2
The circulation and design of the parking lot is questionable.
The zoning buffer ordinance requires a minimum eight (8) foot wide land
use buffer along the southern and western perimeters of the site, next to
the residentially zoned property. Seventy percent (70%) of this buffer is to
remain undisturbed.
A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side
directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along
the southern and western perimeters of the site next to the residentially
zoned property. Credit toward fulfilling this requirement can be given for
existing trees and undergrowth that satisfies this year-around requirement.
Landscaping will be required in conjunction with the newly proposed
parking lot and in conjunction with the proposed building addition. A
landscaping plan will required per city ordinance prior to the issuance of a
building permit.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. West 32nd Street is classified on the Master Street Plan as a residential
street. A dedication of right-of-way 25 feet from centerline will be
required.
2. Gilman Street is classified on the Master Street Plan as a residential
street. A dedication of right-of-way 25 feet from centerline will be
required.
3. A twenty (20) foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the
intersection of West 32nd Street and Gilman Street.
4. Additional concrete or asphalt should be installed to provide a one (1)
way drive into and out of the property. This may also require the
existing concrete drive to be widened.
5. Boundary street ordinance will require half-street improvements to
West 32nd and Gilman Streets; including street widening, curb, gutter
and sidewalks.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this property.
Entergy: No comment received.
Centerpoint Energy: No comment received.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8214
3
AT&T (SBC): No comment received.
Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water
meter(s) are required. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required.
Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding
the required placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas
Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s).
Fire Department: Fire sprinklers may be required along with a fire
hydrant.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: The site is not located on a CATA bus route. The nearest route
is located along West 36th Street, 4 blocks to the south.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MAY 17, 2007)
The applicants were present. Staff presented the item and noted additional
information was needed regarding signage, fencing and site lighting. Staff asked
that the playground area be located on the site plan. In response to questions
from staff, the applicants stated the day care would operate Monday through
Saturday, 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. The applicants stated neither house would be
occupied as a residence.
Staff noted the site plan did not provide adequate parking or proper driveways.
The applicants were advised to enlist the services of a design professional to
prepare a proper site plan.
Public Works, Utility and Landscape Comments were discussed. The applicants
were advised to contact the Fire Marshall regarding the installation of a fire
hydrant.
The applicants were advised to respond to staff issues by May 23, 2007 or seek
a deferral.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The properties at 3200 and 3208 Gilman Street are each occupied by a one-
story, frame, single family residence. Approval has been given for the occupant
of 3200 Gilman to keep no more than 5 children, which does not require either a
special use permit or conditional use permit. The property has been converted
into a day care center and is currently under enforcement by the City as a zoning
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8214
4
violation. The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to
allow the conversion of 3200 and 3208 Gilman into a day care center with an
enrollment of 32 children with 6 employees. The house at 3200 will be used for
keeping children ages birth to three years. The house at 3208 is proposed to be
used for developmental, speech, physical and occupational services and for
tutoring for older children. Hours of operation are proposed as 6:00 a.m. to 11:00
p.m. The applicant previously specified days of operation as Monday through
Saturday. Neither house will be occupied as a residence.
The applicant has submitted a site plan showing 12 on-site parking spaces. The
driveway modifications necessary to accommodate this parking have not been
shown. Access is via a single-car-wide driveway off of Gilman Street. The plan
proposes doubling the size of the structure at 3208 Gilman to accommodate the
proposed use. A playground area is proposed behind 3200 Gilman. Fencing
around the site is a combination of wood screening fence and chain link fencing.
The screening requirements of the Code require a solid opaque screen on the
south and west perimeters, where the site is adjacent to residential properties.
The applicant has stated no signage is proposed, unless required. Site lighting is
to consist of parking lot lighting.
Staff is not supportive of the proposed C.U.P. The site is located within the
heart of a single family residential neighborhood. All surrounding properties are
occupied by single family residences. Staff has supported S.U.P.’s for day care
family homes in residential neighbors to allow the occupant of a residence to
keep up to 10 children. Day care centers are more appropriately located on
collector or arterial streets on the edge of or out of neighborhoods. Since the
application was initially filed as a day care center, the applicant has expanded
the proposed uses for the site to include therapy services and tutoring for older
children. This further increase in activity proposed for the site only serves to
intensify staff’s concerns. Additionally, the streets immediately adjacent to and
around the site are narrow, open ditch, chip-seal roadways with no sidewalks or
gutters. The streets will not support the proposed institutional use at this
location.
The 1908 Bill of Assurance for the John Barrow Addition does not address use
issues.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the application.
STAFF REPORT:
On May 24, 2007, the applicant contacted staff and requested deferral of the item
to allow more time to address issues raised at the May 17, 2007 Subdivision
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8214
5
Committee meeting. Staff recommends deferral to the July 19, 2007
Commission meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 7, 2007)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item and a recommendation of deferral. There was no additional discussion.
The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved for deferral to the
July 19, 2007 meeting. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 open
position.
STAFF REPORT:
The applicant has not submitted the required site plan, as instructed by the
Subdivision Committee. Staff recommends the item be deferred to the
August 30, 2007 Commission Agenda.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 19, 2007)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed
the Commission that the applicant had failed to submit the required site plan. The
item was placed on the consent agenda and deferred to the August 30, 2007
meeting. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 open position.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 30, 2007)
The applicants were present. There were no objectors present. A letter of
opposition had been received from the John Barrow Neighborhood Association.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of denial.
The applicant, Gail Lambert, addressed the Commission. She stated she had
previously operated a day care family home at 3200 Gilman until the number of
children pushed her out of the home. She stated it was her desire to provide child
care to younger children. She stated she was a licensed therapist as well; going
to children’s homes and providing services.
In response to a question from the Commission, Director of Planning and
Development Tony Bozynski described the differences between a day care
family home and a day care center under Little Rock zoning regulations.
Co-applicant Lanell Jefferson stated the day care currently had 12-13 children
counting those who arrived after school.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8214
6
Commissioner Taylor told Mr. Jefferson the number of children and type of
operation was beyond what is permitted as a residential use.
Ms. Lambert asked if they could keep just 10 babies. Another discussion of the
provisions for a day care family home and a day care center followed. The
applicants were told that a day care family home required the applicant to live in
the residence.
It was suggested that a deferral might be in order to allow the applicants an
opportunity to discuss the issue with staff. Staff stated the item had been ongoing
for six (6) months and the applicants were operating the day care center in
violation of City Code. Staff recommended the Commission take action on the
application to bring closure.
Ms. Lambert stated she had kept children since 1995 and had only recently
moved out of the house at 3200 Gilman. She stated she did not currently use
3208 Gilman, but hoped to use it in the future to provide therapy services for the
children.
Commissioner Williams suggested deferring the item since there was no support
for a day care center at this location.
Mr. Jefferson asked for more time. He stated he did not fully understand the
issue.
In response to a question from Commissioner Adcock, Ms. Lambert stated she
provided therapy services to 20 – 30 children.
Mr. Bozynski stated staff was agreeable to a deferral
A motion was made to defer the item to the October 11, 2007 meeting. The
motion was approved by a vote of 8 ayes, 1 noe, 1 absent and 1 open position.
STAFF UPDATE:
On September 17, 2007, staff met with the applicants Gail Lambert and Lanell
Jefferson. At that meeting, Ms. Lambert amended her application to a Special
Use Permit for a day care family home. The following conditions were submitted
by Ms. Lambert and Mr. Jefferson in support of the revised application:
1. The applicant, Gail Lambert, will reside at 3200 Gilman as her principle
residence.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8214
7
2. There will be no use of 3208 Gilman for any purpose other than as a single-
family residence.
3. The day care family home to be operated at 3200 Gilman will have an
enrollment of no more than ten (10) children.
4. In addition to the applicant, Gail Lambert, employees will include her son,
Lanell Jefferson and one (1) other person.
5. The days and hours of operation for the day care family home are proposed
as 6:00 a.m. – 6:30 p.m., Monday – Friday.
6. All vehicles will be parked on the paved driveway and parking surface.
The property has a one-car driveway from Gilman Street. The driveway widens
in the back yard area with space to park 5-6 vehicles. This will allow sufficient
space for drop-off and pick-up of children. On inspection of the site, staff
observed no vehicles parked on unpaved areas. Staff also observed no non-
operating vehicles on the site. There is a fenced playground area located behind
the residence. As a day care family home, the principal use of the property will
remain single family residential. No signage beyond that allowed in single family
zones will be permitted.
Section 36-54(e)(3) of the City of Little Rock Zoning Ordinance establishes the
site and location criteria for day care family homes as follows:
Day care family home:
a. This use may be located only in a single family home, occupied by the care
giver and which is the full time residence of the care giver.
b. Must be operated within licensing procedures established by the State of
Arkansas. State regulations shall control the number of employees residing
off premises.
c. The use is limited to ten (10) children including the care givers.
d. The minimum to qualify for special use permit is six (6) children from
households other than the care givers.
e. This use must obtain a special use permit in all districts where day care
centers are not allowed by right.
f. After the effective date of this subsection, no Special Use Permit will be
approved for a day care family proposed to be located within 300 feet of a
licensed day care center or an operating day care family home for which a
Special Use Permit has previously been approved. For the purposes of this
subsection, the distance between properties shall be measured in a straight
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8214
8
line without regard to intervening structures or objects, from property line to
property line.
g. All day care family homes located in the City of Little Rock are required to
obtain a City of Little Rock business license and to pay an annual business
tax as specified in Chapter 17. of the Code.
h. A copy of the day care family home’s current State of Arkansas license must
be submitted to the City Collector’s Office each year at the time of payment of
the annual business tax.
i. All vehicles must be parked on an on-site paved surface.
j. All vehicles located on the site must be operational.
k. All pick-up and drop-off of children shall be on the property’s driveway and not
on the public right-of-way unless otherwise approved by the Planning
Commission.
l. Special Use Permits for day care family homes shall be reviewed by staff
every three (3) years for compliance with the development criteria and
Planning Commission approval.
m. The Fire Marshall must approve use of the residence for the proposed day
care family home.
Special Use Permits are not transferable in any manner. Permits cannot be
transferred from owner to owner, location to location or use to use.
To staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with this
application. Staff feels that the proposed day care family home at this location
could have no adverse impact on the general area. Based on information
provided by the State, there are no permitted/licensed day care family homes or
day care centers within 300 feet of the site.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION, REVISED:
Staff recommends approval of the Special Use Permit to allow a day care family
home at 3200 Gilman Street, subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the site and location criteria in Section 36-54(e)(3).
2. There is to be no signage beyond that permitted in single family zones.
3. Outdoor activities, including playground use, are to be limited to day-light
hours.
4. Days and hours of operation are to be Monday-Friday, 6:00 a.m. – 6:30 p.m.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8214
9
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 11, 2007)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. As there were only
seven (7) Commissioners present, the applicant was offered the opportunity to
defer the application to a later date. The applicant stated he wished to defer. A
motion was made to defer the item to the December 6, 2007 meeting. The
motion was approved by a vote of 5 ayes, 2 noes, 3 absent and 1 open position.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 6, 2007)
The applicants were present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the application, as amended to a special use permit for a day care
family home, and a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with
conditions noted in the “revised staff recommendation” above.
The applicants, Gail Lambert and Lanell Jefferson, stated they had nothing to
add and would reserve their time to respond.
Ruth Bell, of the League of Women Voters, spoke in support. She stated the
League generally supported in-home day care and would support this application
as long as the applicant complied with Ordinance requirements.
In response to questions from Commissioner Adcock, it was noted that the
playground was within a fenced area behind the residence and the broken
boards in the fence would be replaced.
In response to questions from Commissioner Nunnley, the applicants stated the
debris on the site would be cleaned up and Ms. Lambert does live in the
residence.
Commissioner Laha voiced his opposition to day care family homes in general.
He stated the applicants should have made a better effort to gain approval by
cleaning up the yard and fixing the fence.
A motion was made to approve the application, including all staff comments and
conditions. The motion failed by a vote of 4 ayes, 7 noes and 0 absent.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: B FILE NO.: 310
NAME: Shoemaker Annexation
REQUEST: Accept 216 acres plus or minus to the City
LOCATION: South of Lawson Road, between Crystal Valley and Duvall, within
Sections 20, 29 and 30, Township 1 North, Range 13 West
SOURCE: Andrew Francis, PA, representative for Emprise LLC,
Property Owner
GENERAL INFORMATION:
• The County Judge held a hearing and signed the Annexation Order on
July 24, 2007.
• The area requested for consideration is currently undeveloped.
• There is one owner, the Emprise LLC.
• The site is contiguous to the City of Little Rock on a portion of two sides.
• The annexation request is to obtain sewer service and other City Services.
• The area in question is along the south side of Lawson Road between
Crystal Valley Road and Duvall. It is continuous to the City along its
southwestern boundaries, connecting to an area currently developing as
Sienna Lake Subdivision.
• Currently the property is zoned Single Family (R-2).
• The property owner has indicated they intend to develop this land into
some 160 lots for single-family homes.
Staff Recommendation:
In order to more fully review the issues related to this annexation Staff has
requested the item be deferred for six weeks to the October 11, 2007 hearing.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 30, 2007)
This item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the October 11, 2007
agenda. The consent agenda was passed with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent
and 1 open position.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: 310
2
STAFF UPDATE:
AGENCY COMMENTS:
Public Safety:
Fire: The Fire Department has concerns about service to the area. The closest
station is almost 4 miles from the area. While this should not affect the ISO
rating at this time, unless additional station(s) are constructed in the next decade
or so problems could arise. Due to the distance, the Department suggests that
all structures be sprinkled should be implemented. Alternatively, the requester
could purchase the site for the future station and provide it to the city (site
location as designated by the Little Rock Fire Department).
Additionally there is only one access. Arkansas state law says that for a
development of this size, there should be at least two access points. Therefore
the proposed second access point along the southern parameter of this area
should be opened prior to the thirtieth residential unit being constructed. (Prior to
the final plat approval of the creation of more than 29 lots there should be a
second access point made available).
The Crystal Fire Protection District has expressed concerns that this annexation
could cause with response to fires for both the Little Rock and Crystal Valley
Departments. With an area that protrudes in to the county and is surrounded on
three sides by un-incorporated areas confusion is possible. In addition, though
contiguous, this connection is not by way of street. A person would have to drive
great distance outside the city limits to access this site. (NOTE: This is the Fire
Department that currently services the area requesting annexation and will
continue to service areas both to the east and west of the site.)
The closest Fire Station is on Colonel Glenn Road a little over three and three-
quarters of a mile to the east of the annexation area.
Police: The Little Rock Police Department has indicated there are some
concerns. While there should not be immediate impacts beside longer than
desirable response times to this area, there are longer-term concerns. The
potential link to the Sienna Lake development could be problematic to the police.
In addition, the future call loading for this area is an unknown.
The closest police patrol would have to drive almost one-mile to get to this area
adding additional time to an already large patrol district.
Infrastructure and Community Facilities:
Central Arkansas Transit: No Comment Received.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: 310
3
The closest regular bus service is at Colonel Glenn Road and Shackleford Road,
approximately two and a third miles away to the east.
Parks and Recreation: The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Department
indicates there are essentially no services available in this vicinity and that they
continue to fall behind with acquisition of property and provision of facilities.
The proposed ‘Take it to the Extreme’ Trail (shown in the Little Rock Parks and
Recreation Master Plan) would go through or near this annexation area. Some
sort of open space recreational area should be included within or near the
annexation area.
Public Works: The Public Works Department has indicated while there could be
issues in the future with waste collections and maintenance of Lawson Road. At
this time they do not recommend against the annexation of this land.
Lawson Road is shown as an Arterial but is currently a two-lane road with open
ditches. Right of way for this widening was included in the approved preliminary
plat ‘Ventana Ridge’ for this area. In addition as part of the subdivision process a
collector was required through the development. At the time of development the
property owner – developer, will make these street improvements. Currently the
City would have the additional maintenance of approximately 400 linear feet of
Lawson Road.
Utilities:
Central Arkansas Water: Central Arkansas Water indicates additional water
facilities and fire protection shall be required at the developer expense. A Capital
Investment Charge based on meter size will also apply to this area.
There is an existing 12-inch line in Lawson Road.
Entergy: No Comment Received.
Reliant-Energy: No Comment Received.
Wastewater Utility: The Little Rock Wastewater Utility has indicated there is no
sewer service in this area. Sewer Mains will have to be extended at the cost of
the developer and sized as required by the Wastewater Utility. Additionally in
order to service this area a trunk-line may have to be constructed outside the
current city limits to service this area requesting annexation.
Southwestern Bell: No Comment Received.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: 310
4
Schools:
Little Rock: No Comment Received.
The annexation is not within the Little Rock School District.
Pulaski County Special: No Comment Received.
The annexation area is with in the Pulaski Special School District and the
Lawson Elementary attendance zone.
ANALYSIS:
This site is within the City of Little Rock Planning Jurisdiction. The site is
primarily wooded and undeveloped. A single house has been located on this
site. There are two ridgelines that cross the area in a northwest to southeast
direction. The result is topographic change of 180 feet from around 360 feet to
500 feet. McHenry Creek flows by the property at Lawson Road. This is the low
point of the property.
The property is within the City Planning Jurisdiction and was zoned in October
1991 to ‘R-2’ Single Family. This zoning allows for a minimum lot size of 7000
square feet. In October 2006 the Little Rock Planning Commission approved a
preliminary plat, Ventana Ridge Subdivision, for over 160 single-family lots
ranging in size from a third of an acre to 1.3 acres. Ventana Ridge Subdivision
was approved by the Little Rock Planning Commission conditioned on
annexation. (Note: Staff noted that the recommendation and approval did not
indicate that the City would be supportive of annexation.)
The petition for annexation was made and properly filed before the County. The
County Judge found that the annexation was proper, however at the hearing
concern was raised about confusion this could cause for public safety providers.
In addition the single access was noted. While the Judge did find that the
concerns might be valid, they were beyond the scope of his review. He
encouraged the City to carefully review and address these concerns in its review.
The area to the southeast of the annexation request has recently started
development. The Sienna Lake Subdivision is the 360 acres annexed in early
2004 as the ‘Dyke Annexation’. Only the initial phase, some 78 lots and 40 acres
have been final platted. These lots are approximately a mile to the southeast of
the annexation area. To the southwest of the annexation area are the Plantation
Acres and Chicopee Subdivisions with lots generally two to five acres in size.
These subdivisions along with other tracks fill the area to the southwest to
Crystal Valley Road. Generally this area is developed with homes and a few
businesses. The area along Lawson to the west remains in larger tracts and is
wooded. To the east, between the City limits and proposed annexation, the area
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: 310
5
is developed along Lawson Road with homes and a few businesses, including
the Rolling Meadows Subdivision adjacent to the City Limits at Lawson and
David O Dodd Roads. Several large undeveloped wooded tracts remain
(approximately a quarter of a mile south of Lawson) in this area as well.
The only current access to this land is on Lawson Road, approximately nine
tenths of a mile from the current City Limits. The land along Lawson Road is
within the McHenry Creek floodplain. The creek itself is along the north side of
Lawson Road in this location and crosses back to the south just west of the
western boundary of the annexation. Flood control may well have an impact on
the design of access to any major development of the site as well as the design
of the widening of Lawson Road to Arterial standard.
The two ridgelines that cross the annexation area have steep slopes. The first
ridge rises over the McHenry floodplain some one hundred and fifty feet.
Between the two ridges the land falls over one hundred and twenty feet before
rising one hundred and thirty feet to the second ridge.
The City’s Land Use Plan shows this area for single-family development and the
current zoning is ‘R-2’ Single-family. Based on the current zoning and
development pattern for non-annexed developed area, without annexation it
would be likely to see 50 to 100 home sites on this land. If the annexation is
approved the density is likely to be higher with 160 to 200 homes on the same
land.
With the issues expressed by the Parks Department some provisions for
recreational activities should be included on this land. Even with the rugged
topography, there should be some opportunities for the provision of recreational
space within this acreage. This can be achieved with a Property Owners,
private, park or by working with the City Parks and Recreation Department to
provide land, which they might develop. In addition the Master Parks Plan shows
the proposed ‘Take it to the Extreme’ Trail on or near this site. The owners could
work with the Parks Department to develop a segment of the trail along with large
‘active recreational area(s).
The public safety concerns raised by both the police and fire departments
(including the volunteer department which currently services this area) should be
addressed. From a fire protection standpoint, due to the concern about the great
distance to the closest fire station, the Little Rock Fire Department has
recommended any structures be sprinkled. Second, there must be more than
one access point in place and useable by the fire department that is servicing this
development. Both of these issues are life safety issues and the second access
point is a requirement of state law. At a later date in the future, the City’s ISO
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: 310
6
rating could suffer when the proposed area is 50% developed an no additional
fire stations are built within the immediate area to serve the subdivision.
Due to the distance from the existing patrol areas, the police feel that as long as
the development functions as an isolated area with a single access crime will be
low. The concern arises when a second access is provided. The concern here
is that the criminals will become more aware of the development at this point and
begin to target it. With the police so far it would be hard to respond and control
this. The response times are projected to be higher than those for the Otter
Creek area.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of this annexation request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 11, 2007)
The applicant requested the item be differed. The item was placed on consent
agenda for deferral to the December 6, 2007 hearing. By a vote of 7 for,
0 against, 3 absent and one open position the item was deferred to December 6,
2007.
STAFF UPDATE:
At the request of the applicant, Staff met with the applicants to discuss the issues
related to parks (recreation area) and fire protection. The applicants indicated
that there would be one or more private parks as part of the development.
These would be Property Owner Association (POA) parks and would include
some recreation facilities but not athletic fields. They also indicated a willingness
to work with the City on trails in and through the development including the
possibility that a section to the ‘Take it to the Extreme’ trail could go through their
property (with compensation for the owners). The City indicated this would help
but there would still be a need for active recreation areas, which included athletic
fields. It was agreed that within the ownership of this application, the need could
not be met.
At the meeting on Fire Department concerns, there was discussion about the
maximum number of lots and the second access point. Also pros and cons of
sprinklering the structure and possible future requirement for this was shared
by the Fire Department. The lack of fire stations to serve the western and
southwestern areas of the City was discussed and how the ISO reviews this.
It was agreed that solely within the ownership of this application the solution to
the issue of additional fire facilities was not likely to be addressable.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: 310
7
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 6, 2007)
The applicant requested the item be deferred to January 3, 2008. The item was
placed on consent agenda for deferral. By a vote of 11 for, 0 against the consent
agenda was approved.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: C FILE NO.: Z-6933-B
NAME: Crackerbox – Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 14100 Kanis Road
OWNER/APPLICANT: Crackerbox, LLC/Terry Burruss, Architect
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
construction of a convenience store with gas pumps
on this C-1 zoned site.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located at the northwest corner of Kanis Road and Kirby
Road; just outside the city limits but within the City’s extraterritorial
jurisdiction.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The property is located at the edge of the city limits, in an area that
contains existing, older development and planned new development. An
undeveloped PDR zoned tract is directly north of the site. Single family
neighborhoods are located to the north. With these neighborhoods are
other uses such as churches and a fire station. The C-1 zoned properties
to the east and west appear to contain no active use. The northern
extension of the Woodlands Edge Subdivision is proposed to intersect
Kanis Road, southeast of this site. That overall development does have
an area set aside for commercial and office development. A new
development east of the site is currently under review. That development
does contain a limited list of commercial uses. Under a recent review of
this site for a convenience store, staff expressed concern about allowing
an intensive commercial, C-3 or C-4 type use at this entry point into the
extended residential neighborhoods to the north. Staff’s current concerns
remain the same. Staff does not believe the proposed use is appropriate
for this site. The property should be developed for a “neighborhood
commercial” C-1 use.
All owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Parkway Place and
Woodlands Edge Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6933-B
2
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The plan proposes two driveways; one off of Kirby Road and one off of
Kanis. Twenty-one (21) parking spaces are proposed. Additional parking
will be located at the fuel pump islands. The building is proposed to
contain a 4,000 square foot convenience store and a 1,000 square office
use; requiring a total of 15 on-site parking spaces.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Property to the north is zoned residential, therefore, the zoning ordinance
requires average sixteen (16) foot wide land use buffer along this northern
perimeter. Easements cannot count toward fulfilling this requirement.
Property to the west is zoned residential, therefore, the zoning ordinance
requires average seventeen (17) foot wide land use buffer along this
perimeter. Easements cannot count toward fulfilling this requirement.
The zoning street buffer ordinance requires an average sixteen (16) foot
wide street buffer along Kanis Road.
The zoning buffer ordinance requires an average seventeen (17) foot wide
street buffer along Kirby Road.
The landscape ordinance requires a minimum of eight (8) percent of the
paved areas be landscaped with interior islands of at least 7 ½ feet in
width and 150 square feet in area. Show areas required to reflect this
minimum.
A small amount of building landscaping is required to be located between
the parking lot and the building.
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 western perimeters of the site. Credit towards fulfilling
this requirement can be given for existing trees and undergrowth that
satisfies this year-around requirement.
An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
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.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6933-B
3
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Kirby Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a collector
street. A dedication of right-of-way 30 feet from centerline will be
required.
2. A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way or of sufficient width for
intersection improvements is required at the intersection of Kirby
Road and Kanis Road.
3. Kanis Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial.
A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be required.
4. With site development, provide design of street conforming to the
Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvements to Kanis
Road consisting of 33 feet of street measured from the centerline to
the back of curb and 5-foot sidewalks with planned development.
Construct one-half street improvements to Kirby Road consisting of
18 feet of street measured from the centerline to the back of curb and
5-foot sidewalks with planned development. Dual left turn lanes on
Kanis for westbound left turns are required per MSP with 250 feet
stack distance and taper lengths per AASHTO standards. Provide
overall intersection design. Include calculations showing design will
meet design traffic capacities. Determine whether signalization is
required for acceptable operation. A westbound right turn lane is
required per MSP with 250 feet stack distance and a 150 ft taper.
Contact Bill Henry, Traffic Engineering at 379-1816 for additional
information.
5. In accordance with Section 32-8, no obstruction to visibility shall be
located within a triangular area 50 feet back from the intersecting
right-of-way line (or intersecting tangent lines for radial dedications)
at the intersection of Kanis Road with Kirby Road.
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) 379-1805 (Travis
Herbner).
7. If disturbed area is one or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water
permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior
to the start of construction.
8. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the
proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan.
9. Street improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic
Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6933-B
4
10. Street lights are required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock Code.
Provide plans for approval to Traffic Engineering. Street lights must
be installed prior to platting/certificate of occupancy. Contact Traffic
Engineering 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information.
11. The applicant should work with adjacent property owners including
those across Kanis Road to construct his portion of improvements to
the intersection of Kirby, Kanis, proposed Woodlands Trail, and
Cooper Orbit to meet AASHTO design standards. The new
intersection design may require the realignment of Kirby Road and
Cooper Orbit Road, dedication of addition right-of-way, and
intersection improvements.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Property is outside of current service boundary. No
comment.
Entergy: No comment received.
Centerpoint Energy: No comment received.
AT&T (SBC): No comment received.
Water: 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).
Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional meters are
required. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter
connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges for
additional and/or larger meter(s).
Due to the nature of this facility, installation of an approved reduced
pressure zone backflow preventer assembly (RPZA) is required on the
domestic water service. This assembly must be installed prior to the
first point of use. Central Arkansas Water (CAW) requires that upon
installation of the RPZA, successful tests of the assembly must be
completed by a Certified Assembly Tester licensed by the State of
Arkansas and approved by CAW. The test results must be sent to
CAW’s Cross Connection Section within ten days of installation and
annually thereafter. Contact Carroll Keatts at 377-1226 if you would
like to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this project.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6933-B
5
County Planning: Approved as submitted.
CATA: The site is not located on a CATA bus route.
Planning Division: No Comments.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (SEPTEMBER 20, 2007)
The applicant was present. Staff presented the item and noted additional
information was needed regarding signage, fencing, building design and height
and hours of dumpster service. Staff asked if there would be any outside
speakers or music. The applicant was asked to indicate on the site plan where
fuel trucks would be parking.
Public Works, Utility and Landscaping Comments were noted and discussed. It
was noted that the applicant had proposed landscaping/screening along the
north and west perimeters at 1.5 times the ordinance standard.
Staff noted the site was not inside the city limits and sewer service was not
available. The applicant responded that the property would be annexed prior to
construction.
The applicant was advised to respond to staff issues by September 26, 2007.
The Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
A conditional use permit is requested to allow for construction of a convenience
store with gas pumps on this vacant, 1.7± acre tract. The development is
proposed to contain a one-story, 5,355 square foot building, a detached gas
island canopy and associated parking. The building will be divided between two
uses; a 4,080 square foot convenience store and a 1,275 square foot office use.
The building is proposed to have an exterior finish of split face block, brick and
stucco. The structure will have a flat roof, hidden by parapet walls. The
operating hours for the convenience store are proposed as 5:00 a.m. to 11:00
p.m., Sunday through Thursday and 5:00 a.m. to midnight, Friday and Saturday.
The office use hours are proposed as 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday. Site and building lighting is proposed to follow “dark sky” requirements.
Signage is proposed to consist of wall signage on the building façade, signage
on three sides of the gas canopy and a 12-foot tall, 168 square foot, monument
style ground-mounted sign. No pricing signage will be placed on the canopy.
The ground sign will have an automatic reader display.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6933-B
6
The building height is proposed as 17’4” with the front façade parapet wall
extending to a height totaling 20’6”. The gas canopy is proposed as 18’ with 15’
of clearance. No fencing is proposed on the site. There will be no outside
speakers or music. The dumpster is located on the south side of the building
with pick-up hours to occur after 6:00 a.m.
The plan complies with buffer ordinance requirements. Landscaping and dense
evergreen plantings will be placed along the north and west perimeters at 1.5
times the Ordinance requirement. The plan has been revised to show required
interior landscaping. There is no bill of assurance for this acreage tract. The site
is located outside of the city limits and does not currently have sewer service.
The applicant has stated the property will be annexed to the city prior to
construction.
While the applicant has done a good job of addressing site plan issues, staff still
has concerns about the use. A similar plan for a convenience store with gas
pumps and a carwash was denied by the Commission at its April 26, 2007
meeting. That denial was upheld by the Board of Directors on August 6, 2007.
Although this proposal has dropped the car wash and added an office use, staff’s
concerns about the convenience store remain. This property is located at the
entrance to what is primarily a single family residential neighborhood. It is zoned
C-1 which allows for commercial uses typically designed to accommodate limited
retail development within or adjacent to neighborhood areas for the purpose of
supplying daily household needs of the residents for food, drugs and personal
services. Commercial uses in the C-1 district should not depend on market
areas larger than the neighborhood served. Staff does not believe a
convenience store meets this criteria and does not believe this is an appropriate
location for such a use.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the application.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 11, 2007)
The applicant was present. There were three (3) registered objectors present.
Staff had received numerous telephone calls in opposition. As there were only
seven (7) Commissioners present, the applicant was offered the opportunity to
defer to a later date. The applicant stated he wished to defer. A motion was
made to defer the application to the December 6, 2007 meeting. The motion was
approved by a vote of 5 ayes, 2 noes, 3 absent and 1 open position.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6933-B
7
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 6, 2007)
The applicants were present. There were several objectors present. Staff
presented the item and a recommendation of denial.
Applicant Terry Burruss addressed the Commission. He stated they had
prepared a good site plan and 35% of the site was going to green
area/landscaping. Mr. Burruss stated it came down to a use issue. He listed
several C-1 uses that he felt would generate more traffic and be more intense
than a convenience store. He stated the store would provide services to the
neighborhood residents.
Attorney Skip Davidson, representing the applicant, spoke in support. He noted
the change from the prior applications for a convenience store at this site. He
commented that the proposed site plan did comply with all development codes.
Mr. Davidson presented the results of a survey conducted by the applicant,
showing the majority of respondents within a one mile radius of the site were in
support of having a convenience store at this site. He made note of other
properties in the area that could be developed as a convenience store.
Mr. Davidson stated the site was not at the entrance to a neighborhood.
Ross Phillips of 34 Vista Drive, spoke in support of the application. He stated the
Spring Valley Manor POA took a neutral stance on the issue but most members
were in support of the store. He stated the proposed improvements to the street
intersection would benefit the residents of his neighborhood.
Tim Kenny , President of the Parkway Place Neighborhood Association, spoke in
opposition. He read letters of opposition from Laurie Payne and Eddie
Schmekenbecker, President of the Parkway Place Swim and Racquetball Club (staff
did not receive the letters). Mr. Kenny voiced concern about the substandard
condition of Kirby Road and the traffic that would be generated by the store.
Cliff McKinney, of 709 Kirby Road, spoke in opposition. He took issue with
Mr. Davidson’s description of the area and the survey conducted by the
applicant. He stated the store was not a good fit for the neighborhood and did not
fit the Kanis Road Plan. Mr. McKinney voiced concern about dangerous traffic
conditions and said it would be arbitrary to approve the application in light of the
Board of Directors’ denial of a similar application.
Lenice Garrison, of 28 Willow Oak Court, spoke in opposition. She presented a
power point of photographs of the area. She also spoke of the substandard
condition of the abutting streets and of concerns about traffic. Ms. Garrison
stated the site was the only rear entrance to the neighborhood.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6933-B
8
Mr. McKinney interjected that the Neighborhood Association voted to oppose the
application.
Ruth Bell, of the League of Women Voters, spoke in opposition. She stated there
were more appropriate properties in the general area for development as a
convenience store. She stated this site should be developed as an allowable C-1
use.
Mr. Davidson responded that the proposed development would improve the
street and help to address traffic concerns. He stated the store would provide
services to the area residents. He urged the Commission to look at the objective
criteria outlined in the Ordinance for reviewing conditional use permits.
Mr. Davidson reiterated his statement that there were more persons in the area
in support of the store than opposed.
There was then a general discussion of the zoning pattern in the area.
In response to a question from Commissioner Adcock, Mike Hood of Public
Works stated the traffic volume at the intersection did not currently warrant a
traffic signal. He surmised that one would be needed at some point in the future.
In response to additional questions, Mr. Hood discussed the planned
improvements to the Kanis/Kirby/Cooper Orbit intersection. He stated the
proposed development would help the traffic problem by improving the
Kanis/Kirby intersection.
In response to a question from Commissioner Laha, Mr. McKinney stated the
neighborhood would not have the same objections to a convenience store if it
were on the south side of Kanis.
Commissioner Nunnley stated traffic to the store coming down Kirby would be
neighborhood residents and those same persons would drive down Kirby if the
store were located on the south side of Kanis.
A motion was made to approve the application, subject to all staff comments and
conditions except the recommendation of denial. The motion was approved by a
vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: D 2007 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT PACKAGE
SUBJECT: Planning Commission receipt and acceptance of a Proposed
Ordinance Amendment package for 2007; directing the Plans
Committee to proceed with review and forwarding the results of
that review for public hearing.
STAFF REPORT:
The subjects in this proposal have been accumulated by staff during the past
year. If the Commission accepts this material as the 2007 work program for
ordinance amendments, staff will distribute the material to contact persons.
Comments received will be forwarded to the Plans Committee for inclusion in the
discussion.
Once the Plans Committee completes its review, the completed package will be
returned to the Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 11, 2007)
Staff presented the proposed ordinance package and asked the Commission to
set a public hearing date.
Ruth Bell, of the League of Women Voters of Pulaski County, noted that there
was no proposed amendment to the Subdivision Ordinance that would give the
Commission greater discretion in reviewing proposed subdivision preliminary
plats. She stated she hoped the Commission would take the issue up in a
subsequent amendment package.
A motion was made to set December 6, 2007 as the public hearing on the
ordinance amendments. The motion was approved with a vote of 7 ayes, 0 noes,
3 absent and 1 open position.
STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION:
On October 17, 2007, Staff sent a summary of the Proposed Ordinance
Amendment package to 170+ neighborhood associations and coalitions and to
an additional contact list of 50± other interested parties. The attached letter gave
the date, time and location of the Commission hearing and asked for comments
and suggestions to be submitted to staff. As of this writing, staff received one (1)
response from a neighborhood association stating they were in support of the
proposed amendments.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) 2007 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT PACKAGE
2
The amendments were discussed at the October 31, 2007 Plans Committee
meeting. There were questions raised about only one item that being the
amendment language associated with airports or landing fields. It was
suggested that some language should be added to the ordinance to address the
possibility that a landing strip or airport could be proposed to be located on land
other than Industrial. Staff stated they would look into the issue.
On November 14, 2007, a second draft was discussed at Plans Committee. Staff
had added to the airport/landing field amendment a proposed amendment to the
conditional use section of the Code. The amendment places airport or landing
fields in the category of uses that require a conditional use permit in any zone
other than industrial. The Committee felt this addressed the concern that had
been raised at the prior meeting.
The amendment package is forwarded to the full Commission with support from
the Plans Committee and a recommendation of approval by staff.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 6, 2007)
Staff presented the Ordinance amendment package and a recommendation of
approval. There was no additional discussion. The item was placed on the
consent agenda and approved by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: LU07-13-01
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - 65th Street East Planning District
Location: The west side of the 7000 block of Geyer Springs Road
Request: Industrial to Commercial
Source: Rollin Caristianos
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
A Land Use Plan amendment in the 65th Street East Planning District from
Industrial to Commercial. Commercial represents a broad range of retail and
wholesale sales of products and general business activities. Commercial
activities vary in type and scale, depending on the trade that they serve. The
applicant is proposing to develop C-3 zoning uses.
Prompted by this Land Use Amendment request, the Planning Staff expanded
the area of review to include area the area immediately north and south of this
application. It is thought that the additional area would make the boundaries
more logical by taking in all of the C-3 Commercial zoned property to the north.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
This amendment area is currently zoned C3 General Commercial, R2 Single
Family and I-2 Industrial. The I-2 and R-2 portions are currently vacant. The C-3
has a doctor’s office, a church, a Mexican restaurant, and five hair salons. The
surrounding area is zoned as follows. West of this amendment site is vacant and
zoned I-2. To the west is also zoned C-3 along Arbor Cove and has multi family
residences. North is zoned I-2 and is occupied by Sears Home Central and
Veriplas. The whole east side of Geyer Springs Road between Big Oak and
Forbing is zoned C-3. This portion has several offices, a daycare, a vacant
office, and a park area. South of the amendment site is zoned O-1 and R-2 for
single family residences along Meyerson Drive.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
This area is currently shown as Industrial on the Future Land Use Plan. The
surrounding area to the west and north is also shown as Industrial. To the east
along Geyer Springs is shown as Commercial. South of this amendment area is
shown as Suburban Office and Mixed Use.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU07-13-01
2
There have not been any land use plan amendments in this area in the recent
past.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Geyer Springs Road is shown as a Minor Arterial. A Minor Arterial provides
connections to and through an urban area and their primary function is to provide
short distance travel within the urbanized area. Entrances and exits should be
limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Geyer Springs
since it is a Minor Arterial. This street may require dedication of right-of-way and
may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site.
BICYCLE PLAN:
There are no bike routes in the immediate vicinity.
PARKS:
According to the Master Parks Plan, this location is within eight blocks of a city
park. Wakefield Park is located east of this area.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this
amendment.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The Geyer Springs/Wakefield Neighborhood Action Plan covers this area. The
Zoning and Future Land Use Goal states: “Encourage down-zoning where
appropriate and encourage new businesses that are neighborhood friendly.
Utilize existing buildings before developing new commercial areas.”
ANALYSIS:
The amendment area is currently zoned three different ways: C-3 General
Commercial, R-2 Single Family, and I-2 Light Industrial. This area is all shown
as Industrial on the future land use plan and has been shown as such since at
least 1992. The Industrial on the Future Land Use Plan continues west over to
the railroad easement, south to Interstate 30, and north to 65th Street. This
Industrial area covers approximately 150 acres of land and has been an
industrial district with steady occupancy rates. This amendment proposes to
change approximately 4.5 acres of land shown as Industrial on the Plan to
Commercial for future development and to recognize the existing C-3 zoning.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU07-13-01
3
This amendment would still leave ample amounts of Industrial shown on the Plan
for this area and would only add 4.5 acres of Commercial, which is a relatively
insignificant change. This area is still a viable location for Industrial uses due to
its close proximity to University Avenue and Interstate 30, but it is also logical to
have commercial uses fronting on Geyer Springs Road. A commercial corridor
along Geyer Springs helps to separate the industrial uses on the west with the
residential uses on the east.
The amendment would make the west side of Geyer Springs Road more
consistent with the existing land use pattern of Commercial frontage. This area
is already zoned for non-residential uses (C-3 and I-2) and the southern portion
of the amendment area has been undeveloped for many years. The northern
portion of this amendment is currently occupied by several office uses and multi
family apartment buildings along Arbor Cove, which is all zoned C-3 General
Commercial. Most of the surrounding area is developed as commercial, office or
industrial to the west of Geyer Springs Road. Commercial zoning and uses line
the east side of Geyer Springs Road from 65th Street south to Interstate 30. The
massing and use of this application is very similar to that of the surrounding
commercial and office uses along Geyer Springs Road. For this planning district,
there has only been one commercial building permit issued in the year 2007 for
the P.A.R.K. parking lot. There have been no industrial building permits issued in
the year 2007.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Southwest Little
Rock United for Progress, Geyer Springs and Wakefield. Staff has received one
neutral comment from an area resident.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is appropriate.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 6, 2007)
The item was placed on consent agenda for approval. By a vote of 11 for,
0 against the consent agenda was approved.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 1.1 FILE NO.: Z-8282
Owner: George B. Hays
Applicant: Rollin Caristianos
Location: 7000 Geyer Springs Road
Area: 1.2 Acres
Request: Rezone from R-2 to C-3
Purpose: Future charter school or commercial
development
Existing Use: Undeveloped
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Mixed commercial, office, single family and multifamily uses
(along Arbor Cove); zoned C-3
South – Undeveloped property; zoned I-2
East – Mixed office and commercial uses (along east side of Geyer
Springs Road); zoned C-3
West – Undeveloped property; zoned I-2
A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Geyer Springs Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor
arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be
required.
B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The site is located on a CATA Bus Route #17A (Mabelvale-UALR Route).
C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified, and the Geyer Springs, Wakefield
and SWLR United for Progress Neighborhood Associations were notified
of the public hearing.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO: 1.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8282
2
D. LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the 65th Street East Planning District. The Land
Use Plan shows Industrial. The applicant has applied for a rezoning from
R-2 Single Family to C-3 General Commercial District.
A Land Use Plan amendment from Industrial to Commercial is a separate
item on this agenda.
Master Street Plan:
Geyer Springs Road is shown as a Minor Arterial. A Minor Arterial provides
connections to and through an urban area and their primary function is to
provide short distance travel within the urbanized area. Entrances and
exists should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and
pedestrians on Geyer Springs since it is a Minor Arterial. This street may
require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for
entrances and exits to the site.
Bicycle Plan:
There are no bike routes in the immediate vicinity.
Neighborhood Action Plan:
This area is covered by the Geyer Springs/Wakefield Neighborhood Action
Plan. The Zoning and Future Land Use Goal states: “Encourage down-
zoning where appropriate and encourage new businesses that are
neighborhood friendly. Utilize existing buildings before developing new
commercial areas.”
E. STAFF ANALYSIS:
George B. Hays, owner of the 1.2 acre property located at 7000 Geyer
Springs Road, is requesting to rezone the property from “R-2” Single
Family District to “C-3” General Commercial District. The property is
located on the west side of Geyer Springs Road at Browning Road. The
rezoning is proposed for future development of a charter school or
commercial use.
The property is currently undeveloped and grass covered. There is a
mixture of uses and zoning in this general area. There is a mixture of
office, commercial, multifamily and single family uses to the north along
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO: 1.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8282
3
Arbor Cove and Sears Drive. Undeveloped I-2 zoned property wraps
around the property to the south and west. There is a mixture of single
family and commercial uses further south, and industrial uses further west.
There is also a mixture of commercial and office uses to the east, along
the east side of Geyer Springs Road.
The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Industrial. A
Land Use Plan Amendment from Industrial to Commercial is a separate
application (Item 1.) on this agenda.
Staff is supportive of the requested rezoning to C-3 and the Land Use
Plan Amendment to Commercial. Staff views the request as reasonable.
Staff feels that C-3 zoning for this 1.2 acres is a good option given the
adjacent properties to the north and across Geyer Springs Road to the
east are currently zoned C-3. Staff believes that the continuance of C-3
zoning along this side of Geyer Springs Road will have no adverse impact
on the adjacent properties or the general area.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested C-3 rezoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 6, 2007)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of approval.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for approval, as recommended by staff. A motion to that effect
was made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: Z-8283
Owner: Jon P. Luer
Applicant: Rollin Caristianos
Location: 4800 Baseline Road
Area: 2.04 Acres
Request: Rezone from R-2 to C-4
Purpose: Future commercial development
Existing Use: Vacant commercial building
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Undeveloped property and single family residences (northeast);
zoned R-2
South – Single family residences and commercial use (across Baseline
Road); zoned R-2 and C-3
East – Mini-warehouse development; zoned C-3
West – Mixed commercial uses; zoned C-1 and C-3
A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Baseline Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal
arterial. Dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline will be
required.
B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The site is located on CATA Bus Route #15 (65th Street Route).
C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified, and the Upper Baseline,
Windamere and SWLR United for Progress Neighborhood Associations
were notified of the public hearing.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8283
2
D. LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the Geyer Springs East Planning District. The
Land Use Plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant has
applied for a rezoning from R-2 Single Family to C-4 Open Display District.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
Master Street Plan:
Baseline Road is shown as a Principal Arterial with reduced standards. 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 exists should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic
and pedestrians on Baseline since it is a Principal Arterial. This street may
require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for
entrances and exits to the site.
Bicycle Plan:
There are no bike routes in the immediate vicinity.
Neighborhood Action Plan:
This area is covered under the Upper Baseline Neighborhood Action Plan.
The economic development goal states: “Encourage and establish
neighborhood-oriented businesses.”
E. STAFF ANALYSIS:
Jon P. Luer, owner of the 2.04 acre property located at 4800 Baseline
Road, is requesting to rezone the property from “R-2” Single Family
District to “C-4” Open Display District. The property is located on the north
side of Baseline Road, between Stanton and Doyle Springs Roads. The
rezoning is proposed for future commercial development of the property.
The site is occupied by a one-story commercial building which is currently
vacant. The building is located within the south half of the property.
There is an access drive from Baseline Road with a paved parking area
on the south side of the building. A truck access/loading dock is located
on the building’s west side. The rear yard area is partially gravel, with the
remainder being grass covered. An accessory, shed-type building is
located along the rear (north) property line.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8283
3
There is a mixture of uses and zoning in this general area along Baseline
Road. The property immediately north is undeveloped and zoned R-2.
There are single family residences to the northeast. Single family
residences and commercial uses are located across Baseline Road to the
south. A mini-warehouse development is located on the C-3 zoned
property immediately east, with a church development further east. A
beauty salon and concessions trailer business is located to the west, with
mixed commercial uses further west.
The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Commercial.
The requested rezoning to C-4 does not require a change to the Land Use
Plan.
Staff is supportive of the requested rezoning to C-4. Staff views the
request as reasonable. The site has a past history of C-4/I-1 type use.
Most recently Capitol Fence Company occupied the property, with the use
being office/warehouse and contractor yard with outdoor storage. Staff
feels the requested C-4 zoning is appropriate along Baseline Road, which
the City’s Master Street Plan classifies as a principal arterial. According to
Section 36-302(a) of the City’s Zoning Ordinance, appropriate locations for
the C-4 zoning district are “along heavily traveled major traffic arterials”.
Staff believes the requested C-4 zoning will have no adverse impact on
the adjacent properties or the general area.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested C-4 rezoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 6, 2007)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of approval.
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had revised the application to
eliminate the following as permitted uses, as found in Section 36-302(c)(1) of the
Code, under the proposed C-4 zoning.
e. Auto paint or body rebuilding shop.
f. Auto parts and accessories.
g. Automobile or motorcycle display, sales or service.
h. Auto or truck rental or leasing.
i. Auto repair garage.
k. Building material sales (open).
cc. Lumber yard.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8283
4
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for approval, as revised and recommended by staff. A motion
to that effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 3 FILE NO.: Z-8284
Owner: Mildred C. Eubanks
Applicant: Rollin Caristianos
Location: 8707 Mabelvale Pike
Area: 2.67 Acres
Request: Rezone from R-2 to C-3
Purpose: Future commercial development
Existing Use: Single family residence
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Industrial uses, including a trucking company (across Mabelvale
Pike); zoned I-2
South – Undeveloped property and mixed commercial uses (along I-30);
zoned R-2 and C-4
East – Manufactured home, commercial building and single family
residences on large lots; zoned R-2
West – Industrial use (Arkansas Highway Department facilities); zoned R-2
A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Mabelvale Pike is classified on the Master Street Plan as a collector
street. A dedication of right-of-way 30 feet from centerline will be
required.
2. With site development and issuance of building permit, provide design
of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half
street improvement to Mabelvale Pike including 5-foot sidewalks with
planned development.
B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route. Routes #17 (Mabelvale-
Downtown) and #17A (Mabelvale-UALR) run along the I-30 access road
and Baseline Road to the south.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8284
2
C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified, and the Town and Country and
SWLR United for Progress Neighborhood Associations were notified of the
public hearing.
D. LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the Geyer Springs West Planning District. The
Land Use Plan shows Commercial. The applicant has applied for a
rezoning from R-2 Single Family to C-3 General Commercial District.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
Master Street Plan:
Mabelvale Pike is shown as a Collector. The primary function of a Collector
Street is to provide a connection from Local Streets to Arterials. These
streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street
improvements for entrances and exits to the site.
Bicycle Plan:
A Class III bikeway is shown along Mabelvale Pike. A Class III bikeway is
a signed route on a street shared with traffic. No additional paving or
right-of-way is required. Class III bicycle route signage may be required.
Neighborhood Action Plan:
This area is covered by the 65th Street West Neighborhood Action Plan.
The Land Use and Zoning goal states: “Limit expansion of non residential
developments to areas shown as non residential on the FLU (Future Land
Use) Plan.”
E. STAFF ANALYSIS:
Mildred C. Eubanks, owner of the 2.67 acre property located at 8707
Mabelvale Pike, is requesting to rezone the property from “R-2” Single
Family District to “C-3” General Commercial District. The property is
located on the south side of Mabelvale Pike, at Mabelvale Drive (just east
of the State Highway Department campus). The rezoning is proposed for
future commercial development of the property.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8284
3
The site is occupied by a one-story brick single family residence located
within the northwest portion of the property. There is a one-story frame
accessory structure at the southeast corner of the house. A gravel
driveway from Mabelvale Pike serves as access. The east and south
portions of the property are undeveloped and partially wooded.
The general area contains a mixture of zoning and uses. The properties
across Mabelvale Pike to the north are zoned I-2 and contain industrial
uses. There is a manufactured home and large commercial-type building
on the property immediately east, with single family residences on large
lots further east. Arkansas Highway Department facilities are located to
the west. There is undeveloped R-2 zoned property immediately to the
south, with mixed commercial uses further south along Interstate 30.
The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Commercial.
The requested rezoning to C-3 does not require a change to the Land Use
Plan.
Staff is supportive of the requested rezoning to C-3. Staff views the request
as reasonable, given the current surrounding uses and future plan
designation. The Future Land Use Plan shows Commercial for the area
between Mabelvale Pike and I-30, from the Mabelvale Pike/Baseline
intersection eastward several hundred feet past this property. Staff believes
future commercial development of this property is appropriate, and will have
no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or general area.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested C-3 rezoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 6, 2007)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of approval.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for approval, as recommended by staff. A motion to that effect
was made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: Z-8285
Owner: Bruce A. Hankins
Applicant: Kenneth Roberts
Location: 6423 Geyer Springs Road
Area: 0.54 Acre
Request: Rezone from I-2 to C-3
Purpose: New building for existing liquor store
Existing Use: Undeveloped
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Commercial and industrial uses; zoned I-2 and PID
South – Mixed commercial uses (across West 65th Street); zoned C-3
East – Mobile home park; zoned C-3
West – Mixed commercial and industrial uses; zoned I-2
A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Geyer Springs Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor
arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be
required.
2. Due to the proposed overpass construction over the railroad tracks,
access to Geyer Springs Road from this property maybe restricted to a
designated location on the property.
B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The site is located on CATA Bus Route #17A (Mabelvale-UALR Route).
C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified, and the Geyer Springs, Wakefield
and SWLR United for Progress Neighborhood Associations were notified
of the public hearing.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8285
2
D. LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the 65th Street East Planning District. The Land
Use Plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant has applied
for a rezoning from I-2 Light Industrial to C-3 General Commercial.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
Master Street Plan:
Geyer Springs Road is shown as a Minor Arterial. A Minor Arterial provides
connections to and through an urban area and their primary function is to
provide short distance travel within the urbanized area. Entrances and exits
should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on
Geyer Springs since it is a Minor Arterial. This street may require dedication
of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits
to the site.
Bicycle Plan:
There are no bike routes in the immediate vicinity.
Neighborhood Action Plan:
This area is covered by the Geyer Springs/Wakefield Neighborhood Action
Plan. The Zoning and Future Land Use Goal states: “Encourage down-
zoning where appropriate and encourage new businesses that are
neighborhood friendly. Utilize existing buildings before developing new
commercial areas.”
E. STAFF ANALYSIS:
Bruce A. Hankins, owner of the 0.54 acre property located at 6423 Geyer
Springs Road, is requesting to rezone the property from “I-2” Light
Industrial District to “C-3” General Commercial District. The property is
located on the east side of Geyer Springs Road, just north of West 65th
Street. The 0.54 acre is part of a 1.194 acre property at the northeast
corner of Geyer Springs Road and West 65th Street. The south 0.654 acre
of the overall tract is currently zoned C-3. The owner is requesting
rezoning of the north 0.54 acre to C-3 so that the property can be
redeveloped under a single zoning district designation.
The 0.54 acre portion of the property is currently undeveloped. The area
is partially paved and partially grass covered. The property is relatively
level. There is an access drive from Geyer Springs Road, which serves
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8285
3
the property. A liquor store and a second commercial building are located
on the south 0.654 acre.
The property is located in an area primarily comprised of mixed
commercial and light industrial uses. There is a commercial/industrial
building located on the I-2 zoned property immediately to the north. A
mixed use commercial building is located to the south across West 65th
Street. A mobile home park is located on the C-3 zoned property to the
east, with mixed light industrial uses further east. There is also a mixture
of commercial and light industrial uses, including automotive-type uses, to
the west across Geyer Springs Road.
The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Commercial.
The requested rezoning to C-3 does not require a change to the Land Use
Plan.
Staff is supportive of the requested rezoning to C-3. Staff views the
request as reasonable. The 0.54 acre is part of a 1.194 acre tract with a
single ownership. With the south portion of the tract being zoned C-3,
zoning the balance to C-3 for one (1) overall redevelopment plan
represents the best option for the property. As noted earlier, the entire
tract is designated for future commercial development by the City’s Land
Use Plan. Staff believes the requested C-3 zoning will have no adverse
impact on the adjacent properties or the general area.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested C-3 rezoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 6, 2007)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented
the item with a recommendation of approval.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for approval, as recommended by staff. A motion to that effect
was made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: LU07-16-02
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Otter Creek Planning District
Location: North of County Line Road on the east side of Vimy Ridge Road
Request: Single Family to Neighborhood Commercial
Source: Robert A. Roberts, Kittler-Roberts Group
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the Otter Creek Planning District from Single
Family to Neighborhood Commercial. Neighborhood Commercial represents
services in close proximity to a neighborhood, providing goods and services to
that neighborhood market area. The applicant is proposing a zoning change to
C-1 Neighborhood Commercial.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is zoned R-2 Single Family and is currently vacant. The property is
surrounded to the north, west and east by R-2 Single Family zoning. Most of this
R-2 land is developed with single family residences, but some of the R-2 zoned
land remains undeveloped. To the southwest at the corner of Vimy Ridge Road
and County Line Road is zoned C-1 Neighborhood Commercial for a Dollar
General store. Immediately south and adjacent to the amendment area is zoned
C-3 for a gas station with convenience store. Southeast of this site on County
Line Road is zoned MF-6 Multifamily District and is vacant and undeveloped.
South of County Line Road is Saline County, which the City does not zone. This
area is within Shannon Hills and is largely rural in nature with single family
residences and an elementary school on County Line Road.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
Ordinance 18865 amended the property immediately west of this application from
Low Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial in 2002.
The amendment site is currently shown as Single Family on the Future Land Use
Plan. Single Family extends to the north and east of this site. West of this site is
shown as Neighborhood Commercial. Northwest is shown as Suburban Office
and south is shown as Commercial.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU07-16-02
2
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Vimy Ridge Road is shown as a Minor Arterial. A Minor Arterial provides
connections to and through an urban area and their primary function is to provide
short distance travel within the urbanized area. Entrances and exits should be
limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Vimy Ridge
since it is a Minor Arterial. This street may require dedication of right-of-way and
may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site.
BICYCLE PLAN:
There are no bike routes in the immediate vicinity.
PARKS:
According to the Master Parks Plan, this area is located within eight blocks of a
park or open space. Northeast of this amendment site is Alexander Road park.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this
amendment.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
This area is covered by the Chicot West/I-30 South Neighborhood Action Plan.
The Economic Development goal states: “Provide a mixed
commercial/residential environment that will promote the safety, attractiveness,
and value of the area while creating a competitive and adaptable economic
climate that encourages investment and diversity of employment opportunities.”
It also states: “Expand Neighborhood Commercial uses at the intersections of
Arterials.”
ANALYSIS:
The application property is currently vacant. The proposed amendment would
change approximately 1.5 acres on the eastern side of Vimy Ridge Road from
Single Family to Neighborhood Commercial. This amendment would make the
land use plan symmetrical at this intersection with a buffer of Neighborhood
Commercial surrounding the Commercial shown at the intersection of Vimy
Ridge Road and County Line Road.
The site is located at the intersection of Vimy Ridge Road and County Line Road.
These are both classified as Minor Arterials on the Master Street Plan, and this is
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU07-16-02
3
a highly used intersection. While this part of the city is fairly rural in nature, the
high number of single family residences from Saline County travel north along
Vimy Ridge Road to access Interstate 30 creates quite a bit of traffic. A
convenience store and gas station is currently located at the northeast corner of
this intersection. That corner is already zoned C-3 to permit this usage. On the
northwest corner is a Dollar General store, which is zoned C-1 Neighborhood
Commercial. Approximately a mile north of this site is the Vimy Ridge Road and
Alexander Road intersection. That intersection was changed to Commercial on
the Land Use Plan on the northwest and southeast corners. If the proposed site
is approved for Neighborhood Commercial, the neighborhood might be able to
acquire new or different types of businesses to the area. The area has a real
need for more commercial sites. Residents have to drive either to Otter Creek,
Baseline, or Saline County for most of their local commercial needs.
This area has been mostly dormant for the past twenty years, but new residential
developments are currently moving to this area. One large subdivision north of
this site on the west side of Vimy Ridge Road is in the final plat stage. In the
past five years, many new houses have developed south of County Line Road in
the Shannon Hills area. While there are some commercial opportunities in Saline
County, new residents in this area will increase the community’s need for more
commercial development both in Saline and Pulaski County. There appears to
be an increased interest in single family residences at a more suburban/urban
density rather than the more traditional rural density. There are several new
subdivisions being built along County Line Road and another is in progress along
Alexander Road, which is north of this amendment site. These new subdivisions
could mean a need for more local retail and employment sites. The only other
area for commercial development is north of this site at the intersection of Vimy
Ridge Road and Alexander Road. Most of the other existing areas shown as
non-residential on the Future Land Use Plan are occupies, so there are no longer
options besides expanding the existing non-residential areas to meet the growing
need.
The Chicot West I-30 Neighborhood Action Plan addresses many issues
concerning Vimy Ridge Road. The Plan is in favor of Neighborhood Commercial
development at the intersection of arterials and also states the need for more
restaurants in the area. The Economic Development goal states: “Provide a
mixed commercial/residential environment that will promote the safety,
attractiveness, and value of the area while creating a competitive and adaptable
economic climate that encourages investment and diversity of employment
opportunities.”
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU07-16-02
4
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Quail Run,
Alexander Road and Southwest Little Rock United for Progress. Staff has
received no comments from area residents.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is appropriate.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 6, 2007)
The applicant requested the item be deferred to January 17, 2008. The item was
placed on consent agenda for deferral. By a vote of 11 for, 0 against the consent
agenda was approved.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 5.1 FILE NO.: Z-8286
Owner: Richard A. Williams
Applicant: Bob Roberts
Location: East side of Vimy Ridge Road, approximately
250 feet north of County Line Road
Area: 2.519 Acres
Request: Rezone from R-2 to C-1
Purpose: Future neighborhood commercial development
Existing Use: Undeveloped
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North – Single family residence and undeveloped property;
zoned R-2
South – Convenience store; zoned C-3
East – Single family residences; zoned R-2
West – Undeveloped property (across Vimy Ridge Road); zoned R-2
A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Vimy Ridge Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor
arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be
required.
2. With site development and issuance of the building permit, provide
design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-
half street improvement to Vimy Ridge including 5-foot sidewalks with
planned development.
B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT:
The site is not located on a CATA Bus Route.
C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified, and the Alexander Road, Quail
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO: 5.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8286
2
Run and SWLR United for Progress Neighborhood Associations were
notified of the public hearing.
D. LAND USE ELEMENT:
This request is located in the Otter Creek Planning District. The Land Use
Plan shows Single Family. The applicant has applied for a rezoning from
R-2 Single Family to C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District.
A Land Use Plan amendment from Single Family to Neighborhood
Commercial is a separate item on this agenda.
Master Street Plan:
Vimy Ridge Road is shown as a Minor Arterial. A Minor Arterial provides
connections to and through an urban area and their primary function is to
provide short distance travel within the urbanized area. Entrances and exits
should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on
Vimy Ridge since it is a Minor Arterial. This street may require dedication of
right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to
the site.
Bicycle Plan:
There are no bike routes in the immediate vicinity.
Neighborhood Action Plan:
This area is covered by the Chicot West/I-30 South Neighborhood Action
Plan. The Economic Development goal states: “Provide a mixed
commercial/residential environment that will promote the safety,
attractiveness, and value of the area while creating a competitive and
adaptable economic climate that encourages investment and diversity of
employment opportunities.”
E. STAFF ANALYSIS:
Richard A. Williams, owner of the 2.519 acre tract located along the east
side of Vimy Ridge Road, approximately 250 feet north of County Line
Road, is requesting to rezone the property from “R-2” Single Family
District to “C-1” Neighborhood Commercial District. The rezoning is
proposed for future neighborhood commercial development of the
property.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO: 5.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8286
3
The property is undeveloped pasture-type land. There is a single family
residence on a large tract located immediately north of the property, with
undeveloped R-2 zoned property further north. There is also undeveloped
R-2 zoned property across Vimy Ridge Road to the west, with a Dollar
General Store to the southwest. A convenience store is located
immediately to the south at the northeast corner of Vimy Ridge Road and
County Line Road. A single family subdivision is located to the east, with
undeveloped MF-6 zoned property to the southeast.
The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Single
Family. A Land Use Plan Amendment from Single Family to
Neighborhood Commercial is a separate application (Item 5.) on this
agenda.
Staff is supportive of the requested rezoning to C-1 and the Land Use
Plan Amendment to Neighborhood Commercial. Staff views the C-1
zoning request as reasonable, given the fact that the property immediately
west across Vimy Ridge Road is designated as Neighborhood
Commercial on the Future Land Use Plan, wrapping around the
commercial designation at the northwest corner of Vimy Ridge Road and
County Line Road. Staff feels that with more single family subdivisions
being developed in this general area, including into Saline County,
additional C-1 Neighborhood Commercial zoning in this area is
appropriate. Staff believes the proposed rezoning to C-1 will have no
adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the neighborhood.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested C-1 rezoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 6, 2007)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter to staff on
November 27, 2007 requesting the application be deferred to the January 17,
2008 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the
Consent Agenda for deferral to the January 17, 2008 Agenda. A motion to that
effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: Z-7511-A
NAME: Felton Accessory Dwelling – Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 5324 Sherwood Road
OWNER/APPLICANT: Daniel and Josephine Felton
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
construction of an accessory dwelling/guest quarters
on this R-2 zoned lot.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the north side of Sherwood Road, west of
Harrison Street, in Prospect Terrace.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The property is located in a residential neighborhood comprised solely of
large single-family residences on R-2 zoned lots. Many of the properties
have similar accessory buildings and several have accessory dwellings or
guest homes. The proposed use is compatible with uses in the area.
All owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Prospect Terrace and
Forest Park Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The principal dwelling and accessory dwelling each require one on-site
parking space. The property has an existing paved driveway with enough
room to accommodate the required parking. No additional parking is
proposed.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No Comments.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No Comments.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7511-A
2
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this property.
Entergy: No comment received.
CenterPoint Energy: No comment received.
AT&T (SBC): No comment received.
Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding possible meter
relocation.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: No Comments.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (NOVEMBER 1, 2007)
Chris Smith was present representing the applicants. Staff presented the item
and noted there were no outstanding issues.
After reviewing the proposal, the Committee forwarded t he item to the full
Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
On October 30, 2003, the Planning Commission approved a conditional use
permit allowing the applicants to replace an existing, dilapidated accessory
structure with a new accessory structure containing an accessory dwelling.
They began working with an architect to finalize plans for the structure but failed
to obtain permits prior to the three-year authorization period expiring. The
applicants are requesting approval of a C.U.P. to allow construction of a new
accessory building, containing an accessory dwelling or guest quarters.
The home is a two-story, Tudor-style, stucco and brick and frame house built in
1926 of approximately 3,300 square feet. The existing accessory building is a
wooden, one-story building of approximately 431.3 square feet with a front porch
of approximately 51 square feet. The accessory building was built to be used
partly as a “servant’s quarters” and partly as a garage or for storage. At one
time, electricity, water, and sewage were connected to this building as evidenced
by a drain, sink, and shower in the “servant’s quarters” bathroom and the
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7511-A
3
exposed electrical wiring in the storage area. Currently, the building is falling
down: the roof is deeply sagging in the middle; a neighbor’s tree is uprooting the
building’s foundation and causing the building to lean forward; and the wooden
exterior is severely damaged from termite infestation and has holes and gaps.
The existing porch is also sagging and is dangerous to walk on.
The applicants propose to tear down the existing structure and replace it with a
one-story brick and siding structure in keeping with the house and neighborhood
style. This new accessory building will serve as a gardening room, guest’s
quarters for occasional out-of-town guests and family members, and a tool
storage facility. It will include a half-bath in the gardening room and a full bath in
the guest room. The building will be approximately 616 square feet with roughly
fifty percent allotted to the guest’s quarters. The building also will have a front
porch or patio area. The roof will slope to the north and south with gutters
installed. There are no separate utilities required for this building. The proposed
use and size is not out of character with other accessory buildings in Prospect
Terrace.
A variance is requested to allow use of the existing footings, maintaining the side
yard setback of 1.3 feet on the east side. The code requires a setback of 3 feet.
A variance is also requested to allow a rear yard area coverage of 47%. The
code allows rear yard coverage of 30% for accessory structures. Staff is
supportive of both variances. As previously noted, the size of the structure is not
out of character with others in the general area. The setback is the same as the
existing building. The new building’s roof will slope north and south, with gutters
installed so that there will be no water runoff onto the neighbor’s property to the
east.
1. The 1926 Bill of Assurance appears to still be in effect and includes the
following statements:
a) All plots in said addition shall be limited to single family residences.
b) No more than one residence shall be erected on any plot in said addition.
The Commission approved this same request on October 30, 2003. That prior
approval expired three (3) years later, on October 30, 2006, since the applicants
had not obtained the required permits.
Staff is supportive of the requested C.U.P. What the applicants are constructing
is truly a guest quarters. There is no intent to create a separate dwelling that
could be rented as another home on the property. To staff’s knowledge, there
are no outstanding issues.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7511-A
4
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested C.U.P., as filed.
Staff recommends approval of the requested side yard setback and rear yard
area coverage variances.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 6, 2007)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
item and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the “staff recommendation”
above. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes
and 0 absent.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: Z-8278
NAME: Avis Car Rental – Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 600 S. University Avenue
OWNER/APPLICANT: Sears Roebuck Co./Avis
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow Avis
Car Rental to operate a satellite car rental business
from the existing Sears Auto Center Building on this
C-3 zoned property.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the west side of S. University Avenue, just
north of I-630.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The property is located within the Markham-University Commercial node
known as Midtown. Numerous commercial uses are located to the north
of the site. War Memorial Golf Course is located across University to the
east. I-630 is adjacent to the south and additional commercial uses
extend beyond. Other uses in the area include hospitals and medical
office buildings. Allowing use of 10 parking spaces on the site and
counter space within the existing building will not affect the site’s
compatibility with the neighborhood.
All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Briarwood Neighborhood
Association were notified of this request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
Access to the Sears property is via several driveways off of West 6th
Street. The Sears store and the accompanying auto center where Avis is
proposed to locate are surrounded by a large parking field. No changes
are proposed to parking or driveways. Avis will park up to ten vehicles in
existing parking spaces located southwest of the auto center building.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No Comments.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8278
2
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No Comments.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this property.
Entergy: No comment received.
CenterPoint Energy: No comment received.
AT&T (SBC): No comment received.
Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional
meter(s) are needed.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: No Comments.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (NOVEMBER 1, 2007)
The applicant was not present. Staff noted there was little additional information
needed. Staff stated the applicant would be asked to provide days and hours of
operation and a signage plan.
The Committee determined there were no other issues and forwarded the item
to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Avis Rent-A-Car is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow
operation of a satellite car rental business at the Sears Auto Center facility
located at 600 S. University Avenue.
Avis will place a rental counter inside the customer lobby of the Sears Auto
Center. Up to 10 rental vehicles will be parked in existing parking spaces located
southwest of the building. Any vehicle prep will be conducted wholly within the
Sears Auto Center service bays.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8278
3
Hours of operation are proposed as Monday-Friday, 8:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m.;
Saturday, 8:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m. and Sunday, 9:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. The hours
fall within the current operating hours of the Sears Store. Signage will consist of
wall signs on the south and east facades of the building, facing I-630 and
University.
The property is located within the area of the Midtown Overlay District. Nothing
under this proposal violates the overlay standards or triggers implementation of
those standards. The bill of assurance does not prohibit the proposed use.
To staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues. Staff is supportive of the
proposed conditional use.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested C.U.P., as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 6, 2007)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
item and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the “staff ecommendation”
above. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes
and 0 absent.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: Z-8280
NAME: Ewing-Butler Day Care Center –
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 3523 West 12th Street
OWNER/APPLICANT: Jack Bennett/Nicole Ewing and Therman Butler
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow
conversion of this R-3 zoned residence into a day
care center for 35 children with 4 employees.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located on the south east corner of West 12th and
Valentine Streets.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The property fronts onto an arterial street in an area of mixed uses and
zoning. An R-5 zoned transitional living facility is located to the west. R-3
zoned properties containing a variety of housing types are located in the
larger area around the site. C-3 zoned properties are located to the east
and contain a variety of uses, including a plumbing contractor’s facility.
With attention given to proper screening, landscaping and parking design,
the proposed use should be compatible with uses in the area.
All owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the Pine to Woodrow and
Stephens Area Faith Neighborhood Associations were notified of the
proposal.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
A day care center with a capacity of 35 children and 4 employees requires
7 on-site parking spaces. The applicant proposes to place 4 parking
spaces at the rear of site, taking access off of the alley. Two additional
spaces are available, utilizing the existing driveway off of West 12th Street.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required.
A 6.9’ landscaped buffer is required on both the east and west perimeters
of the new parking area. A 6.9’ landscaped buffer is required on the east
side of the playground. A 6’ tall, opaque screen is required along the
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8280
2
property’s east perimeter. The screen may be either a solid wood fence
built with the finished side facing out or dense evergreen plantings.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. West 12th Street is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor
arterial with special design standards. A dedication of right-of-way 35
feet from centerline will be required.
2. Dedicate right-of-way to 25 feet from centerline on Valentine Street.
3. Dedication of right-of-way is required to a total width of 20 feet for the
alley.
4. With site development or prior to issuance of city permits, provide
design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct
one-half street improvement to Valentine Street including 5-foot
sidewalks with planned development.
5. A 10-foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection
of Valentine Street and the alley.
6. Pave alley to a width of twenty (20) feet along the entire frontage for
vehicle access to the property.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this property.
Entergy: No comment received.
CenterPoint Energy: No comment received.
AT&T (SBC): No comment received.
Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional
meter(s) are required.
Fire Department: Place and install fire hydrants per Code. Sprinklers may
be required. Contact Captain Dennis Free at Little Rock Fire
Department; Phone #918-3757.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: The site is located on a CATA bus route.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8280
3
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (NOVEMBER 1, 2007)
The applicants were not present. Staff presented the item and stated they would
meet with the applicants to discuss any issues. Staff noted there was additional
information needed including days and hours of operation, signage, fencing, site
lighting and dumpster location. Staff noted the site plan needed to be modified to
provide required landscaping and screening and to show proper parking stall
depth and maneuvering.
Public Works and Landscape Comments were noted as were comments from the
other reviewing agencies. It was noted that improvements would need to be
made to Valentine Street and the alley.
The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The R-3 zoned lot located at 3523 West 12th Street is currently occupied by a
one-story, frame residential structure. A single-wide driveway off of West 12th
Street leads to the footing of a garage structure that has been removed from the
property. An alley is located to the rear of the lot and S. Valentine Street is
adjacent to the west.
The applicants are requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow use of
the structure for a day care center with an enrollment of 35 children, with 4
employees. Days and hours of operation are proposed as Monday through
Friday, 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Signage will consist only of wall signs on the north
and west facades. A playground area will be located behind the building. A six-
foot tall privacy fence will be installed along the east perimeter of the site.
Additional fencing will surround the playground. The playground will only be
used during daylight hours. Site lighting will consist of security lighting mounted
on each corner of the building. No dumpster is proposed. The existing driveway
off of West 12th Street will be used as a handicap parking space. One employee
space can be located in front of the handicap space.
The alley will be widened to 20 feet in width to provide access off of Valentine
Street to four paved parking spaces to be built at the rear of the lot. Landscaping
will be installed on each perimeter of the new parking as required by the
Landscape Ordinance.
Valentine Street is extremely substandard and must be improved and widened in
conjunction with this proposal. Once the street is widened, there will be room for
several vehicles to park adjacent to the property. A day care for 35 children with
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8280
4
4 employees requires 7 on-site parking spaces. The applicants will be able to
provide 6 spaces on-site; 4 at the rear of the property and 2 stacked spaces at
the front. Since there will be space to park along the widened Valentine Street,
staff can support a variance to allow a reduction in on-site parking of 1 space.
The applicant responded to issues raised at Subdivision Committee as reflected
on the analysis above. The 1890 Bill of Assurance does not address use issues.
The proposed use is appropriately located and staff is supportive of the
application. To staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested C.U.P. subject to compliance with
the comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the agenda staff
report and subject to all drop-off/pick-up of children taking place utilizing the on-
site parking spaces.
Staff recommends approval of a parking variance to allow two stacked spaces on
the driveway off of West 12th Street and to allow 1 less on-site parking space
than required by the Code subject to Valentine Street being improved to Master
Street Plan Standards.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 6, 2007)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
item and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the “staff recommendation”
above. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes
and 0 absent.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 9 FILE NO.: Z-8281
NAME: Martin Multisectional Manufactured Home –
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 8900 “A” Johnson Lane
OWNER/APPLICANT: Carolyn Martin
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for
placement of a multisectional manufactured home on
this R-2 zoned tract.
1. SITE LOCATION:
The property is located at the end of Johnson Lane, off of Johnson Road,
east of Heinke Road.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The property is located in an area of the southwest corner of the City that
is still relatively rural in character. The site is approximately ¼ mile north
of the city limits line. Uses in the area are principally residential. Housing
types range from single-wide mobile homes and manufactured homes to
multisectional manufactured homes and site built homes of varying size
and quality. An OS zoned golf course property is adjacent to the east.
The proposed use is, in staff’s opinion, compatible with uses in the area.
All owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site, all residents
within 300 feet who could be identified and the SWLR United for Progress
were notified of this proposal.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The site is served with an existing driveway off of Johnson Lane. There is
sufficient space for parking on the site.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No Comments.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
The applicant needs to be aware that the proposed South Loop appears
to cross the northeast corner of this site. It appears that the proposed
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8281
2
location of the manufactured home is not within the route of the South
Loop. No right-of-way dedication is required under this single family
residential proposal.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Wastewater: Sewer available to 8900 Johnson Road.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
CenterPoint Energy: No comment received.
AT&T (SBC): No comment received.
Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional
meter(s) are required.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: No Comments.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (NOVEMBER 1, 2007)
The applicant was present. Staff presented the item and noted there were no
outstanding issues.
Public Works staff discussed the requirement of right-of-way dedication for the
South Loop. It was noted that the path of the road crossed the northeast corner
of the site. The applicant was advised to contact Public Works staff to further
discuss the issue.
The Committee determined there were no other issues and forwarded the item to
the full Commission.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow
placement of a multisectional manufactured home on an R-2 zoned, 2.5± acre
tract located at the end of Johnson Lane. The property currently contains an
older single family residence and an accessory building. The applicant proposes
to remove the existing residence since it is in a state of disrepair.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8281
3
The proposed multisectional manufactured home is a new (2007) model, with
vinyl siding and a pitched, shingled roof. Porches will be added to the front and
rear of the structure. The proposed home measures 32’ X 80’ (2,560 square
feet) in area. The existing driveway will provide access to the site.
Staff is supportive of the requested C.U.P. The proposed home will not be out of
character with existing homes and development in the general area. Placement
of the home must comply with the siting criteria established by the Code. There
is no bill of assurance for this acreage tract. The applicant has been made
aware that the proposed route of the future South Loop appears to cross the
northeast corner of the 2.5± acre tract. No right-of-way dedication is required
through this single family C.U.P. application. Placement of the home as
proposed will not be affected by the apparent route of the road.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested C.U.P. subject to compliance with
the following conditions:
1. Placement of the home must comply with the following siting criteria from
Section 36-254(d)(5) of the Code:
a. A pitched roof of three (3) in twelve (12) or fourteen (14) degrees or
greater.
b. Removal of all transport elements.
c. Permanent foundation.
d. Exterior wall finished so as to be compatible with the neighborhood.
e. Orientation compatible with placement of adjacent structures.
f. Underpinning with permanent materials.
g. All homes shall be multisectional.
h. Off-street parking per single-family dwelling standard.
2. Appropriate tie-downs and anchors must be installed as recommended by the
manufacturer.
3. The existing residential structure is to be removed from the property within
6 months of placement of multisectional manufactured home.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 6, 2007)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
item and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the “staff recommendation”
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8281
4
above. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes
and 0 absent.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 10 FILE NO.: G-25-197
Name: Pinnacle Drive – Street Name Change to
Pinnacle Point
Location: South ends of Mellon and Bryan Streets
Petitioner: Celeste Barker and Abutting Residents
Request: To change the name of Pinnacle Drive to
Pinnacle Point.
Abutting Uses and Ownerships:
Eighteen (18) single-family residences abut the street in question. Fifteen (15) have
a Pinnacle address and three (3) take addresses from a cross street.
Neighborhood Effect:
Making the change will result in less confusion for residents, some of whom use
Pinnacle Point as their street name, although they front onto Pinnacle Drive.
Neighborhood Position:
All abutting residents have signed the petition requesting the street name change.
Effect on Public Services:
All public services will be notified of the name change once it takes effect. None
have objected to the proposal.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Pinnacle Drive is a short street forming a “U” at the south ends of Bryan Street
and Mellon Street. A “tail” of the street extends to the west, intersecting with
McAdoo Street. The “tail” is named Pinnacle Point. Over the years, there has
been much confusion about the street name and many residents of Pinnacle
Drive actually use Pinnacle Point as their address. The problem can be resolved
by naming the entire street to Pinnacle Point.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-25-197
2
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request to rename Pinnacle Drive to Pinnacle
Point. Staff also recommends that clarifying signage (i.e., “Pinnacle Point
begins”) be placed at the Bryan-Pinnacle and Mellon-Pinnacle intersections.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 6, 2007)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
item and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the “staff recommendation”
above. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and approved as recommended by staff. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes
and 0 absent.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: LA-0019
NAME: 12 Pinto Point, Appeal of Issuance of Notice of Violation
LOCATION: 12 Pinto Point
APPLICANT: Luke Ortiz
ENGINEER: None
AREA: Approx. one-quarter acre
CURRENT ZONING: R3
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: An appeal of the issuance of Notice of
Violation #203 for obstructing a public drainage easement and causing damage
to off-site property.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is appealing Notice of Violation #203 issued on October 5,
2007 by Public Works staff to Mr. Luke Ortiz, the property owner of
12 Pinto Point, for placing a pipe in a drainage ditch located in a public
drainage easement along the north side of his property causing flooding
damage to off-site properties. The complaint was received from an
adjacent property owner.
The applicant stated in a letter dated October 15, 2007 to staff that it is his
contention than any damage to adjacent properties was caused by the
alteration of the drainage in question (post installation of his drain pipe)
and the lack of maintenance in the drainage area above his drainpipe. He
further states unnatural debris blocks the drainpipe which causes the pipe
to backup and overflow resulting in damage to other properties. He
contends the 12 inch diameter pipe was adequate to handle the water flow
through the drainage easement at the time the pipe was installed. In
closing, the applicant believes the needless alteration of the drainage area
and lack of maintenance of the drainage easement is the reason his
drainpipe is found to be inadequate and in violation of City code.
The applicant believes a violation has not occurred due to his actions and
requests Notice of Violation #203 (“NOV”) be dissolved by the Planning
Commission per Sec. 29-172(a)(1) of the Land Alteration Regulations.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0019
2
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
This approximate one-quarter acre property is zoned R3 and located in a
residential subdivision on Pinto Point just southeast of the Point West
Drive and Kanis Road intersection. The subdivision is fully developed and
a public drainage easement is located along the north lot line of the
subdivision on the north side of Pinto Point. On the east and west sides of
the subject property are other residential properties zone R3. North of the
subject property is an undeveloped property zoned C3; the office of the
Better Business Bureau zoned O3; and another undeveloped property
zoned C3. North of those properties is Kanis Road. On the north side of
Kanis Road is located the developing Kanis Point development zoned O1.
On the south side of the property is Pinto Point with residential properties
located on the south side of Pinto Point.
The storm water in this area drains under Kanis Road from the north, thru
the properties located on the south side of Kanis Road and into the public
drainage easement located on the north property line of the subdivision on
the north side of Pinto Point before flowing under Pinto Point and
continuing to the south. Staff does not know how long the 12 inch pipe
has been in place on the applicant’s property. Adjacent residential
properties have built fences and filled in the drainage ditch also resulting
in additional Notices of Violations being issued. Further enforcement and
corrective action will be required to correct the drainage problem in this
area.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any phone calls about this matter
except the initial phone complaint. Also at time of writing, staff has not
received proof of public notice to adjacent property owners by the
applicant.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
1. The Little Rock Storm Water Drainage Manual requires all pipes
installed in public drainage easements must be 15 inch diameter or
larger. This particular pipe is a 12 inch diameter pipe which clogs in
storm events.
2. As required by City code, prior to installation of the 12 inch stormwater
pipe in a City drainage easement, a stormwater drainage plan is
required to be submitted to Public Works for review and approval. In
this case, no plan was ever submitted for review.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0019
3
3. The existing 12 inch pipe must be removed and the ditch reconstructed
to appropriate size or the appropriate sized pipe installed. The pipe
should be sized by a certified professional engineer.
4. Contact Melvin Hall at 918-5217 or 590-7465 at completion of
corrective action for approval of work.
E. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE: (NOVEMBER 1, 2007)
At the subdivision committee, the application was explained by staff. It
was explained that a 12 inch diameter pipe was installed by the applicant
in the public drainage easement and that other fences and obstructions
are also blocking the easement. To resolve the flooding problem addition
enforcement and corrective action will be required by staff.
F. STAFF ANALYSIS:
Staff received a complaint from an adjacent property owner about flooding
on adjacent properties and causing damage. Staff visited the site and
found several fences installed across the public drainage easement which
runs along the northern property line of lots. This particular applicant had
also placed a 12 inch diameter pipe in the ditch which is located in the
public drainage easement for additional yard space. Staff routinely deals
with these types of violation often throughout the City.
In this case, the applicant is appealing Notice of Violation #203. He
believes no violation has occurred due to his actions. He believes the
violation is the result of a poorly maintained ditch by the City and
additional storm water drainage from the properties located upstream. He
states at the time of the installation, the pipe was properly sized by his
landscaper.
The Little Rock Storm Water Drainage Manual requires all pipes installed
in public drainage easements to be a minimum 15-inch diameter. This
size pipe was chosen due to it being less likely to become blocked by
floating debris and other objects. The applicant’s pipe is a 12-inch
diameter pipe, which is smaller than the drainage manual allows. If you
recall the applicant stated in his letter, that the 12-inch diameter pipe often
becomes blocked during storm events.
The Little Rock City code states that public drainage easements cannot be
obstructed. To assure compliance, the code requires a storm water
drainage plan be submitted to Public Works for review and approval prior
to installation of a pipe or other obstructions or modification to a drainage
ditch in a public drainage easement. The applicant or applicant’s
representative never submitted a drainage plan to staff to review prior to
installation. If a plan had been submitted staff would have determined that
a 12 inch diameter pipe was insufficient in size to comply with code and
would obstruct storm water flows from properties upstream.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0019
4
As staff has stated other property owners adjacent to the applicant have
similar violations due to other drainage obstructions. Additional
enforcement and corrective action is planned by staff in the near future to
relieve the flooding problem in the area.
G. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff believes the Notice of Violation #203 should be upheld by the
Planning Commission. The 12 inch diameter pipe installed on the
applicant’s property in the public drainage easement is smaller than
allowed by code and results in the drainage easement being obstructed
and not functioning properly causing adjacent properties to be damaged
by flooding. Staff believes the existing 12 inch diameter pipe must be
removed along with the obstruction caused by the fence. The applicant
should either reconstruct the ditch as originally built and move the fence in
front of the ditch or install a 24 inch diameter or larger pipe in place of the
12 inch diameter pipe after plans are submitted to staff for review and
approval. If the commission denies the applicant’s appeal, staff requests
the violations be corrected by January 6, 2008.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 6, 2007)
Staff recommended deferral of the item to the January 17, 2008 agenda. There
was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and
deferred to the January 17, 2008 agenda. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes and
0 absent.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 12 FILE NO.: LA-0020
NAME: 1815 Rahling Road Land Alteration Regulation Variance
LOCATION: 1815 Rahling Road
APPLICANT: John Rees
ENGINEER: Crafton, Tull, Sparks & Assoc.
AREA: Approx. 2.1 acres
CURRENT ZONING: O3
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance request to exceed the cut,
fill, and slope requirements of Sec. 29-190 of the Land Alteration Regulations.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting to exceed the total maximum vertical height of
30 ft for terraces with multiple retaining walls. The applicant’s terrace
retaining walls total approximately 36 ft high from the original ground line
elevation. The applicant desires to exceed the maximum height of 15 ft
for a single vertical retaining wall. The tallest vertical retaining wall is
approximately16 ft. The applicant also desires to exceed the 1:1 slope
requirement between terraces meaning the slope will be steeper than the
code allows. Furthermore, the applicant desires to landscape the terraces
differently than required by code. The applicant believes the different
landscaping will help hide the height and extreme slope of the wall and
make it more appealing to the public.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
This approximate 2.1 acre property is zoned O3 and located at 1815
Rahling Road just east of the Champlin and Rahling Road intersection.
This current building with the terraces and retaining walls is the 2nd
building in this complex. Currently, the first building has yet to receive a
full certificate of occupancy due to not complying with the City Landscape
codes. The property on the east of the subject property is undeveloped
and zoned R2. The property on the south is an apartment complex and
currently zoned MF-18. The property to the west is owned by the
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0020
2
applicant where an office was recently built. To the north of Rahling Road
is a church and undeveloped steep property that are both zoned R2.
The applicant began construction on the property at 1815 Rahling Road
without a grading permit issued by Public Works. The terraces and
retaining walls have already been built and are not in compliance with the
Land Alteration Regulations. The applicant has filled on the neighbor’s
property and it is unknown at the time of writing if permission was given.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any phone calls about this matter.
Also at time of writing, staff has not received proof of public notice to
adjacent property owners by the applicant.
D. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
1. Provide letter from adjacent property owner on their letterhead
approving grading on their property.
2. Per Sec 29-190(1), the maximum height of a vertical terrace is 30 ft.
Per Sec. 29-190(a), the depth of fill or excavation shall be measured
from the finish grade elevation to the original ground line elevation.
The original ground line elevation shows to approximately 294 ft and
the finish grade elevation of 330 ft meaning the vertical terrace is 6 ft
above the maximum height allowed.
3. Per Sec 29-190(1)(e), terracing width shall be at a ratio of at least 1 ft
of horizontal terrace for every 1 ft of vertical height up to a maximum
15 ft if architectural stone is used. In other words, the terraces should
be approximately constructed to a 1:1 slope. The existing terraces are
constructed much steeper than a 1:1 slope.
4. Per Sec. 29-190(1)(f), if vertical wall is faced with architectural stone,
the terrace plantings shall be a minimum of 2 rows of trees 4 ft
between the rows, staggered not more than 20 ft on centers. Shrubs
and ground cover shall be required in accordance with the Landscape
Regulations. The applicant is proposing: Terrace #1) no trees planted
at base of wall and instead proposes a vegetation to climb the stone
faced wall; Terrace #2) proposes trees to be planted on 10 inch
centers and vegetation to climb the stone faced wall; Terrace #3) no
trees planted at base of wall and instead proposed holly bushes to be
planted; and Terrace #4) proposes holly bushes to be planted near
parking lot.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0020
3
5. If variance is not approved, the terrace should be reconstructed to
meet the Land Alteration Regulations.
E. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE: (NOVEMBER 1, 2007)
At the subdivision committee, the application was explained by staff. It
was explained that the total maximum height of a vertical terraces and
retaining walls cannot exceed 30 ft, the terrace slope cannot be steeper
than 1:1, and a single retaining wall cannot exceed 15 ft without variances
issued by the Planning Commission. It was further explained that the
applicant desires to hide the terrace walls by landscaping that does not
comply with the Land Alteration Regulations.
F. STAFF ANALYSIS:
Staff was not aware of the construction of the terrace retaining walls on
this property due to a grading permit had yet to be issued for the work to
begin. Upon inspection, it was determined that the construction of the
terrace retaining walls was nearly complete and the structure did not
comply with the City’s Land Alteration Regulations. The project was told
to stop work and submit plans to detail the heights and widths of the
terraces. As staff suspected, the terrace retaining walls did not comply
with the City’s Land Alteration Regulations.
The following violations were found:
1.) The total vertical height of the terrace walls is 36 ft. tall from the
original ground line elevation. The code states the total vertical height
of the terrace walls cannot exceed 30 ft. tall.
2.) The tallest retaining wall exceeds the maximum height of 15 ft. This
retaining wall is 16 ft. tall.
3.) The slope of the terraces is steeper than the maximum 1:1 slope. The
code requires for a 5 ft. vertical retaining wall the width of the terrace
must also be 5 ft. and for a 15 ft. vertical retaining wall the width of the
terrace must also be 15 ft. One of the applicant retaining walls is 16 ft.
vertical and the terrace is 10 ft. wide and another retaining wall is 11 ft.
vertical and the terrace is 9 ft. wide.
4.) No grading permit has been issued for grading and drainage and
construction of the terraces and retaining walls to begin on the
property.
To make the terraces more appealing to the public at their present heights
and slopes, the applicant has proposed a different landscape scheme for
the terraces. The code requires terrace plantings to a minimum 2 rows of
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0020
4
trees 4 ft between the rows, staggered not more than 20 ft. on centers and
shrubs and ground cover shall be required in accordance with the
landscape regulations.
The applicant is proposing the following landscape:
Terrace #1. No trees planted at base of wall and proposes vegetation
planted to climb the modular wall;
Terrace #2. Trees are to planted on 10 foot centers and vegetation
planted to climb the modular wall;
Terrace #3. No trees planted on base of wall and proposes dwarf holly
bushes planted instead;
Terrace #4. Proposes holly bushes to be planted on the terrace near
the parking lot.
In addition all landscaped areas are to be irrigated.
This many variances have never been requested on one application since
the Land Alteration Regulations were adopted in September, 2000.
Usually, only one particular code cannot be met and a variance is then
requested. In this case, the applicant is requesting variances from all of
the codes pertaining to construction of terraces and retaining walls as
found in the Land Alteration Regulations.
Besides the terrace and retaining wall violations on this site, the property
next door to the west which is also owned by the applicant does not
comply with the Landscape Code and has yet to get a full certificate of
occupancy.
G. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff believes if the variances are not approved by the Planning
Commission, the terraces should be reconstructed to meet the Land
Alteration Regulations. If the variances are approved, all disturbed area
should be temporarily vegetated.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 6, 2007)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had requested deferral of the
item. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent
agenda and deferred to the January 17, 2008 agenda. The vote was 11 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO.: 13 FILE NO.: MSP07-04
Name: Master Street Plan Amendment University Avenue Design Standard
Location: University Avenue from Markham to Cantrell Road
Request: Alternate Design Standards
Source: Staff
On November 13, 2007 it was requested to defer this item to the January 17,
2008 Hearing of the Little Rock Planning Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 6, 2007)
The applicant requested the item be deferred to January 17, 2008. The item was
placed on consent agenda for deferral. By a vote of 11 for, 0 against the consent
agenda was approved.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO: 14 FILE NO.: 311
NAME: Rocket Annexation
REQUEST: Accept 240 acres plus or minus to the City
LOCATION: Between Rushmore Avenue and Woodlands Trail, in the east half
of Section 7, T-1-N, R-13-W
SOURCE: Ron Tyne, representative for Rocket Properties LLC, Property
Owner
GENERAL INFORMATION:
• County Judge Villines held a hearing and signed the Annexation Order on
September 18, 2007.
• The area requested for consideration is currently undeveloped.
• There is one owner, the Rocket Properties LLC.
• The site is contiguous to the City of Little Rock on three sides.
• The annexation request is to obtain sewer service and other City services.
• The area in question is rectangular in shape and located between
Rushmore Avenue and Woodlands Trail. It is continuous to the City along
its south, east and west boundaries, between the areas currently
developing as Capitol Lakes Subdivision and Woodland Edge Subdivision,
north of the Spring Valley Manor Subdivision.
• Currently the property is zoned Single Family (R-2).
• The property owner has indicated they intend to develop this land into lots
for single-family homes.
AGENCY COMMENTS:
Public Safety:
Fire: The Little Rock Fire Department indicates they do have concerns with the
annexation. They state that the annexation would be minimally invasive to the
Departments run protocol. Since the annexation area is greater than the ISO
recommended 1.5 miles to an engine station and 2.5 miles from a ladder station.
This could have an impact on the future ISO rating if no additional fire resources
are developed in the vicinity of this annexation.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: 311
2
The Crystal Fire Department (the current provider) has indicated that they do not
have any issues or concerns with the proposed annexation.
The closest Fire Station is on Oak Meadow Lane approximately a mile to the
north (via Kirby Road) of the annexation area. (The current driving distance is a
mile and a half along Kirby and Cooper Orbit Roads).
Police: The Little Rock Police Department has indicated no issues or concerns
with this annexation. They did note that a minor service impact was possible with
the development of the area.
Patrol District 71 surrounds the annexation on three sides. Since the area is
undeveloped and has no structures, initially there should be no patrol demands
from the area. As the area develops roads will most likely be extended in to the
area from the Woodlands Edge Subdivision and will become a natural part of the
patrol area.
Infrastructure and Community Facilities:
Central Arkansas Transit: No Comment Received.
The closest bus route is the West Markham Route (Route 5). At its closest point,
the route is over a mile to the northeast of the annexation request area. No
regular bus service is expected for the annexation area.
Parks and Recreation: No Comment Received.
The 2001 Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan standard is to have open
space or active recreational space within 8-blocks of any location. The Plan
indicates the annexation area to be within a deficit area. It should be noted that
a private park (property owners association park) has been developed as part of
the Woodlands Edge Subdivision, since the Plan was published.
As part of previous reviews for annexation to the western part of Little Rock, the
Parks and Recreation Department has noted the lack of active recreation area
(athletic fields, etc) in the western part of Little Rock.
Public Works: Public Works, Civil Engineering section has indicated this area is
a natural continuation of the Woodlands Edge Subdivision and does include a
Collector connection. They have no real issues or concerns with the annexation
of this land. The Traffic Engineering section has indicated the need for
signalization at Woodlands Edge and Kanis, Bowman Road and Brodie Creek
Trail, and Rushmore and the new Collector will be likely with this development.
The three signals should have a cost (in 2005 dollars) of close to $400,000. In
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: 311
3
addition, there will be a cost of around $1000 monthly for streetlights within the
subdivision once developed. The Sanitation section indicates their only concern
is with the design of the street system, which will be developed for this area.
They do not want ‘dead-end’ or hammerhead streets, and would prefer no alleys.
In all cases the roads must be designed to safely move large garbage vehicles.
Utilities:
Central Arkansas Water: Central Arkansas Water (CAW) has indicated that the
developer will have to provide additional water facilities in this area including
additional fire protection. This would be done as part of the development of the
land. A Capitol Investment Charge will also be required of the developer. All
new facilities developed must be designed to meet CAW standards. All new
facilities will be constructed at the cost of the developer.
There is a 12-inch line along the old Cooper Orbit Road alignment just west of
the annexation area.
Entergy: No Comment Received.
Reliant-Energy: No Comment Received.
Wastewater Utility: The Little Rock Wastewater Utility has indicated they have
no objection to annexation. They do note that sewer service for this property will
be the responsibility of the developer of the property and that service line
extensions will be required to serve the property.
There is a 24-inch line along Brodie Creek through the annexation area. The line
was constructed to serve the Capitol Lakes Subdivision to the northwest and
west of the annexation area.
Southwestern Bell: No Comment Received.
Schools:
Little Rock: No Comment Received.
The annexation is not within the Little Rock School District.
Pulaski County Special: No Comment Received.
The annexation area is within the Pulaski Special School District and the Baker
Elementary attendance zone.
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: 311
4
ANALYSIS:
This site is within the City of Little Rock Planning Jurisdiction. The site is
primarily wooded and undeveloped. The annexation area is surrounded by the
City on three sides. To the east is the Woodlands Edge Subdivision, which is
developing toward this area. To the northwest is the Capitol Lakes Subdivision
that is developing south and west toward the annexation area. Both of these
subdivisions are suburban to urban in development density.
Brodie Creek moves through the land from the northwest to southeast within the
northeastern third of the annexation area. Brodie Creek leaves the area
approximately 1400 to 1500 feet from its southeast corner. The lowest part of
the area is at this point and is approximately 380 feet above sea level. Two
ridges parallel the creek on either side. The ridgeline to the north reaches a
height of 520 feet (a rise of 140 feet). The southern ridgeline reaches a height of
570 feet (a rise of 190 feet).
The petitioner for this annexation is the Woodlands Edge developer. This land is
expected to be a continuing phase of that single-family subdivision. Preliminary
drawings have indicated that road connections will be made through this land to
both Woodlands Edge and Capitol Lakes Subdivisions.
The land is currently within the City’s zoning and subdivision authority. The Land
Use Plan shows all this land for Single Family and currently it is zoned ‘R-2’
Single Family. With a Single Family zoning and a minimal lot size of 7000
square feet, the area could be developed with up to1490 houses. Based on the
past development densities of Woodlands Edge, the actual density of the
development of this land is more likely to result in 600 houses, plus or minus.
Woodlands Edge is currently developing a connection near the Kirby-Kanis
Roads intersection. This would be the most direct path for fire responses and
should be in place prior to any development. It would also be the easiest and
shortest path for most of the area to access retail uses and work opportunities.
(This statement could be altered by the actual street pattern used for developing
the land.)
The City’s Master Street Plan also shows this proposed northern extension of
Woodlands Trail as a Collector. A second Collector is shown moving through the
annexation area from the existing Collector to the east (Woodlands Trail) to the
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: 311
5
existing Collector to the west (Rushmore Avenue). Each of these Collectors
would then connect the annexation area to the Arterial street system.
A 24-inch wastewater line through the annexation area to serve areas further
west should be able to take connection to serve this area. Service lines will have
to be added at the cost of the developer at the time of development. All that is
present is a trunk-line that could be used to connect the service for any
development that may occur on the site. There is a 12-inch water line along the
western line of the annexation area. As with wastewater, water facilities will have
to be added to the area as it develops. The developer must construct these
improvements to the standards required by the utility.
As noted previously this area is not developed. It is wooded and has no roads or
structures. The proposal is to develop the land into single-family homes as a
continuation of Woodlands Edge Subdivision. As the land is developed, roads,
water, wastewater and other infrastructure will be constructed by the developer
and provided to the appropriate agency for future use and maintenance. The
new infrastructure will have to be constructed to the requirements of the agency
and for this reason most of the agencies have not expressed any issues or
concerns with annexation.
The Little Rock Fire Department provides service to areas south, east and west
of the area requesting annexation. The responding station is located on Oak
Meadow Lane just west of where Markham curves into Kirby Road. The ISO
guidelines and NFPA Standard recommends stations be no more than 1.5 miles
for engine companies and 2.5 miles for truck companies. When development
reaches over 51 percent and if the measures are not within 90 percent of the
required standards, then the City will be determined to be in non-conformance.
The Little Rock Police Department provides service to the areas south, east and
west of the area requesting annexation. Initially with no direct access and no
structures on the land, little to no impact is expected. With the road systems to
the east and west of the annexation connecting through this area, the police will
be provided alternate routes to service and respond to this area and the areas
surrounding. The multiple routes may also result in increased demand on the
Police Department’s limited resources.
The comments and notes made on this annexation indicated that with
development additional requirements would be necessary to provide service.
The infrastructure requirements noted will be required with the development of
the land and therefore provided at that time. There will be some impacts on the
December 6, 2007
ITEM NO: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: 311
6
public safety infrastructure of the City when the area is developed. Based on
where the land is located relative to the existing City area (surrounded on three
sides) and the level of the concerns raised the request appears reasonable.
Staff Recommendation: Approval
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 6, 2007)
The item was placed on consent agenda for approval. By a vote of 11 for,
0 against the consent agenda was approved.