Loading...
pc_02 16 2006sub LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION SUBDIVISION HEARING SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD FEBRUARY 16, 2006 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 Gary Langlais Lucas Hargraves Robert Stebbins Troy Laha Mizan Rahman Jeff Yates Jerry Meyer Fred Allen, Jr. Darrin Williams Chauncey Taylor Members Absent: None City Attorney: Debra Weldon III. Approval of the Minutes of the January 5, 2006 Meeting of the Little Rock Planning Commission. The Minutes were approved as presented. LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION SUBDIVISION AGENDA FEBRUARY 16, 2006 OLD BUSINESS: Item Number: File Number: Title A. S-1477-B Two Rivers Harbor Revised Preliminary Plat, located at the East end of Isbell Lane. B. Z-5718-A Magnolia Terrace Revised Short-form POD, located at 15100 and 15104 Cantrell Road. C. LU05-18-02 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Ellis Mountain Planning District on the Southwest corner of West 36th Street and South Bowman Road from Suburban Office to Low Density Residential. C.1. Z-6049-B Thomas Park Estates Short-form PD-R, located on the Southwest corner of West 36th Street and South Bowman Road. D. Z-7963 Kanis and Atkins HPR Short-form PD-R, located on the Northwest corner of Kanis Road and Atkins Road. E. Z-7968 Central Arkansas Missionary Baptist Student Fellowship Center Short-form PD-O, located at 5412 West 32nd Street. F. Z-6481-D Breshears Revised Short-form PCD, located at 600 North Tyler Street G. Z-7969 Juarez Revised Short-form PCD, located at 18321 Highway 10. NEW BUSINESS: I. PRELIMINARY PLATS: Item Number: File Number: Title 1. S-200-L Northwest Territory/The Divide Revised Preliminary Plat, located North of Cantrell Road, East of Chenal Parkway. Agenda, Page Two I. PRELIMINARY PLATS: (CONTINUED) Item Number: File Number: Title 2. S-548-Q Candlewood East Subdivision Replat Lot 4, located North of Cantrell Road, West of Highland Drive. 3. S-1042-OO Villages of Wellington Phase 12 Revised Preliminary Plat, located on the Southeast corner of Blackburn Drive and Longwell Loop. 4. S-1451-B Easthaven Addition Preliminary Plat, located on the Northeast corner of Frazier Pike and Riddick Street. 5. S-1454-A Whispering Hills Phase II Revised Preliminary Plat, located on South of Alexander Road, East of Whispering Drive. II. SITE PLAN REVIEW: Item Number: File Number: Title 6. Z-4336-V Children’s Hospital Zoning Site Plan Review, located at 1900 Maryland Avenue. 7. Z-4555-D Ardoin Zoning Site Plan Review, located on the Northwest corner of Clearwater Drive and Shackleford Road. 8. Z-5097-J Murphy Oil Zoning Site Plan Review, 23800 Chenal Parkway. III. PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS: Item Number: File Number: Title 9. Z-4343-Q The Ranch Tract D Short-form PCD, located on the Northwest corner of Cantrell Road and Ranch Boulevard. 10. Z-4343-R Parkland Heights Long-form PD-R, located at 6800 Chenonceau Boulevard. Agenda, Page Three III. PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS: (CONTINUED) Item Number: File Number: Title 11. Z-5038-I Seven Acres Business Park Revised Long-form POD, located on the Southwest corner of Cantrell Road and Seven Acres Drive. 12. LU06-08-02 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Central City Planning District located at 2410 South Battery Street from Public Institutional to Multi-family. 12.1. Z-5445-B Mitchell Place Short-form PD-R, located at 2410 South Battery Street. 13. Z-6019-C GMAC Revised Long-form POD, located on the Southwest corner of LaGrande Drive and Chenal Parkway. 14. Z-6453-B Value Health Short-form PD-R, located on the Southwest corner of Labette Drive and Barrow Road. 15. Z-7699-A Highway 10 Development Revised Short-form POD, located at 16603 and 16623 Cantrell Road. 16. Z-7922-A Roberts Short-form PD-C, located at 2701 West 7th Street. 17. Z-7987 Pearlstein Short-form PCD, located on the Northeast corner of West 2nd Street and Schiller Street. IV. Other Business: Item Number: File Number: Title 18. Z-5936-D The Village at Chenal PCD Revocation, located on the Northwest corner of Rahling Road and Chenal Parkway. 19. Z-7773 Whispering Hills Short-form PD-R Revocation, located South of Alexander Road, East of Whispering Drive. 20. LA-0002 Westrock Office Addition Lots 10 and 11 Land Alteration Variance Request, located at 11500 Executive Center Drive. 21. LA-0003 Chenal Mini-storage Land Alteration Variance Request, located at 24300 Chenal Parkway. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: S-1477-B NAME: Two Rivers Harbor Revised Preliminary Plat LOCATION: Located at the East end of Isbell Lane DEVELOPER: Charles Hinson 24 Isbell Lane Little Rock, AR 72223 ENGINEER: Civil Design Incorporated 15104 Cantrell Road Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 1.31 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 300 LF (Private) CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT: 1 – River Mountain CENSUS TRACT: 42.05 Variance/Waivers: 1. A variance to allow the development of lots with a private street. 2. A variance to allow a reduced building setback adjacent to the floodway. BACKGROUND: On July 21, 2005, the Little Rock Planning Commission approved a preliminary plat request which included this site. The request included the development of an existing 9.66-acre tract of residentially zoned property into five large estate type lots ranging from 1.26 acres up to 2.29 acres and one tract for future development (the area currently being proposed for subdivision). The developer indicated an average lot size of 1.56 acres. The developer requested a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the development of lots with private streets. The applicant submitted a FTN Certificate (“No Rise/No Impact” statement) as required by Pulaski County for February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1477-B 2 development within the Arkansas River floodway. The lots were to be served by individual septic systems. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to revise the previously approved preliminary plat for Two Rivers Harbor Subdivision to create two lots from this previously held tract containing 1.31 acres. A “No Rise/No Impact” statement for the overall Two Rivers development was issued in July, 2005. The certificate covered the proposed lots in addition to the five previously approved lots located to the west. The applicant has indicated sewer service for the two additional lots will be from a package treatment plat. The applicant has provided a NPDES permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality to allow construction of the package treatment plant. The applicant is requesting two variances from the Subdivision Ordinance. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the development of lots with private streets and a variance to allow a reduced setback adjacent to a floodway. The property is located outside the City Limits of Little Rock but within the planning jurisdiction. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: Isbell Lane is a narrow roadway appearing as a drive serving two to three single-family homes. The Arkansas River is located to the north of the site and Two Rivers Park is located to the south of the site. To the west of the site are single-family homes located on large tracts. The tracts appear narrow at the roadway but extend to the river allowing additional acreage. The homes sit on the riverbank and access County Farm Road through single and shared driveways. County Farm Road is a two lane County road with open ditches for drainage. As indicated there is an existing City Park and the County’s Community Garden located south of the site. River Valley Marina is located along the banks of the Little Maumelle River on River Valley Marina Road to the southeast. The site is located within the floodway of the Arkansas River. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. All abutting property owners, the Candlewood/Walton Height Neighborhood February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1477-B 3 Association and the River Valley Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: 1. The property appears to lie within the 100-year floodplain and the regulatory floodway. Contact Pulaski County for a floodplain development permit and further information. 2. No residential waste collection service will be provided on private streets unless the property owners association provides a waiver of damage claims for operations on private property. 3. Private access is proposed for these lots. In accordance with Section 31-207, private streets must be designed to the same standards as public streets. A minimum access easement width of 45 feet is required and street width of 24 feet from back of curb to back of curb. A standard 80 foot cul-de-sac or tee type turnaround is required. 4. Obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Outside the service boundary. Provide staff with approval from the Arkansas Department of Health and/or Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality concerning the proposed wastewater disposal. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Fire Department: Outside the City jurisdiction. Provide approval from the area volunteer fire department serving the area. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1477-B 4 County Planning: Please provide the following information on the proposed plat: 1. Provide a legal description that is tied to two land corners and provide state plane coordinates. 2. Provide an original print – copy received is vague. 3. Provide existing cul-de-sac on Isbell Lane. 4. Provide the names of abutting subdivisions or owners. 5. Provide existing or proposed covenants or restrictions. 6. Provide drainage and flood control plans. 7. Provide a copy of the bill of assurance. 8. Indicate if the sewer treatment facility will serve both lots or one will be constructed for each lot. 9. Submit fire department verification of coverage. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 20, 2005) Mr. James Dreher was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff requested the applicant provide the approval letter from Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality concerning the proposed wastewater collection and treatment system. Staff also requested the applicant provide written approval from Pulaski County Planning concerning construction within the Arkansas River Floodway. Staff also requested the applicant provide a building foot print for each of the indicated lots. Staff questioned the buildability of the proposed lots with the indicated setback. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a NPDES storm water permit would be required prior to construction. Staff also stated a minimum access easement of 45-feet would be required. Mr. Dreher stated the indicated access matched a previously approved access for lots located to the west of the proposed plat area. Staff stated they would support the reduced roadway design for the two additional lots. Pulaski County comments were addressed. Staff questioned if the current construction had received a flood construction permit from the County. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1477-B 5 Mr. Dreher stated he would contact the owner to verify the permit status. Staff also requested an original plat since the previously provide copies were not clear with regard to building lines. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the October 20, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated a building footprint for each of the proposed lots as requested by staff. The applicant has also provided a plat with clear building lines. The applicant has indicated on Tract 6 a 25-foot front and rear yard building line. The applicant has also indicated side yard setbacks sufficient to meet typical minimum ordinance requirements. The applicant has indicated proposed Tract 7 with a 25-foot front setback, 25-foot rear yard setback and six foot side yard setback. The proposed side yard setback along the northern perimeter will require a variance from the ordinance requirements. The northern boundary of the proposed plat is located adjacent to the Arkansas River. Typically, adjacent to a floodway, a 25-foot setback is required. As indicated, adjacent to the river the applicant has indicated a six foot side yard setback. The ordinance states no structure shall be closer than 25-feet to any established floodway line. Uses having a low flood-danger potential shall be permitted within the 25-foot setback to the extent they are not prohibited by ordinance and provided they do not require structural involvement. Examples of such uses including loading areas, parking areas, open storage of materials or equipment, and public and private recreational uses. Staff does not supportive the variance to allow construction of a structure within the 25-foot required setback. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the development of lots utilizing a private street. The applicant has indicated a 25-foot access and utility easement to serve the proposed lots as well as the previously approved five lots to the west. The applicant has indicated a minimum of 18-feet of hard surface roadway will be constructed to serve the proposed lots. Staff previously supported this request. Staff feels with the addition of the two additional lots, the indicated roadway is still sufficient. The applicant has provided an approval from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality concerning the proposed wastewater treatment system. A construction permit was issued for the site and is filed as Permit Number AR0050547C. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1477-B 6 The applicant has indicated the volunteer fire department for the area reviewed the proposed development of the two indicated lots with the previous plat request and indicated service would be available to the proposed lots. The applicant has indicated all other County comments will be addressed as a part of final platting. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request to allow proposed Lot 6 to be developed but not proposed Lot 7. The lot does not comply with the minimum requirements of the current City ordinances and staff feels the variance request to allow the development should not be granted. Staff feels construction within the floodway should be limited to a 25-foot setback as required by the current ordinances. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 10, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request dated November 7, 2005, requesting the item be deferred to the January 5, 2006, Public Hearing. Staff stated the applicant had indicated additional time is necessary to address staff’s concerns with regard to the development of proposed Lot 7. Staff stated the deferral request would require a By-law waiver with regard to the deferral request due to the date of receipt of the deferral request. Staff stated they were supportive of the By-law waiver and the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant has not contacted staff concerning the application request since the November 10, 2005, Public Hearing. Staff recommends this item be deferred to the February 16, 2006, Public Hearing to allow staff and the applicant additional time to resolve the outstanding issues related to the request. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1477-B 7 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 5, 2006) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item indicating the applicant had not contacted them concerning the application request since the November 10, 2005, Public Hearing. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred to the February 16, 2006, Public Hearing to allow staff and the applicant additional time to resolve the outstanding issues related to the request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to allow the item to be placed for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff addressing most of the issues raised in the previous analysis and recommendation. The applicant has indicated a 25-foot building setback adjacent to the floodway for proposed Lot 7 as previously recommended by staff. The developer has indicated a minimum building footprint of 60-feet by 100-feet to allow sufficient area for construction of a home. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. To staff’s knowledge there are no other outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff feels the request as proposed to allow two additional lots to the previously approved plat area should have minimal impact on the adjoining properties. Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above agenda staff report. Staff recommends approval of the request to allow the development of lots utilizing private streets. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above agenda staff report. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: B FILE NO.: Z-5718-A NAME: Magnolia Terrace Revised Short-form POD LOCATION: Located at 15100 and 15104 Cantrell Road DEVELOPER: Civil Design, Inc & J.J. Childers 15104 Cantrell Road Little Rock, AR 72223 ENGINEER: Civil Design, Inc 15104 Cantrell Road Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 4.03 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 310 LF CURRENT ZONING: POD ALLOWED USES: General and Professional Office and a Photography Studio PROPOSED ZONING: Revised POD PROPOSED USE: Mixed Use Development – Office and Retail VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 16,690 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on June 7, 1994, established South Hills Terrace Addition Short-form POD, for a portion of this site. Ordinance No. 16,691 allowed for a deferral of the required sidewalk, the required detention and the front yard landscaping for three years or to within sixty days of completion of the sewer main which was proposed for constructed along the Highway 10 frontage of the property. The proposal included (Phase I) the utilization of an existing residential structure located at the rear of the site as an office use for a civil engineering company and (Phase II) was to consist of the construction of a second office building (5,080 square feet) at the front of the property. The Phase I proposal included the remodeling of the existing structure and the utilization of the existing 12-foot driveway. The Phase II portion included the abandonment of the existing February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5718-A 2 driveway, closure of the existing curb cut, and construction of a new driveway and curb cut. The new curb cut was to be 24-feet. A new septic system was proposed on the site with connection to city sewer when service became available. The applicant indicated upon availability of sewer service Phase II would be initiated. Ordinance No. 18,211 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on February 15, 2000, established the Childress Short-form POD. The site contained a 9,400 square foot, two-story brick building which was previously used as a non-conforming photography studio. The applicant proposed the rezoning to allow redevelopment of the site with building and parking lot additions. The applicant proposed O-1, Quiet Office District uses as allowable uses for the site. The applicant proposed a two phased development for the property: Phase I included the construction of an asphalt drive extending from Cantrell Road, construction of 24 parking spaces on the south side of the existing building, dumpster location, use of the exiting building for O-1 permitted uses. Phase II was to consist of the construction of an 8,000 square foot addition to the existing building, extend the driveway along the east side of the building, construction of 32 additional parking spaces on the north side of the building, relocation of the dumpster area. The applicant noted a single sign would be placed near the entrance to the property, which would conform to the Highway 10 Design Overlay Standards. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now proposing a revision to the previously approved zonings as a single development plan to allow the redevelopment of these two sites with the construction of three new buildings. The applicant has indicated Civil Design Inc. proposes to construct a new building for its business operations and leasing to others. The applicant has indicated they are partnering with the adjoining property owner to the east to seek a rezoning and preliminary plat approval. The proposed development is a continuation of the property owners’ previous cooperation through a sewer improvement district in bringing public sewer service to this portion of Cantrell Road and adjacent areas of the tributary sewerage basin. The applicant has indicated the proposed development should encourage additional orderly development within the sewerage basin, thus assisting to defray annual debt service retirement costs for all property owners in the sewer improvement district. The applicant has indicated the properties are located very near the existing Rummell Road intersection with Cantrell Road. The applicant has indicated Rummell Road is a substandard roadway in the City street system, but provides the only access at present to a large piece of undeveloped property directly north of and adjacent to the proposed development as well as access to a substandard amount of currently undeveloped property farther north along and off of Rummell Road. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5718-A 3 The applicant has indicated the proposed project recognizes the need for a public street stub to the presently undeveloped properties to the north to facilitate orderly development and allow the eventual abandonment of the existing substandard Rummell Road intersection with Cantrell Road. A 60-foot public street right-of-way and collector standard street construction is proposed between the two properties to provide a collector street standard intersection with Cantrell Road and accommodate future public street extension to serve multiple properties located north of the proposed development. The development plan as proposed will eliminate four existing driveway connections to Cantrell Road in favor of a single public street access. The proposal will also allow future abandonment of the existing substandard Rummell Road intersection at such time as the property directly to the north of the proposed development develops. The project property owners are separate entities. The owners have indicated redevelopment of the properties will be independent. The applicant has indicated the development will be architecturally compatible to ensure a uniform development pattern for the area. The applicant has indicated a total of three detached structures will be constructed on two lots. The applicant has indicated Civil Design will construct a single two-story building containing 30,600 square feet and contained on approximately 2.53 acres (Lot 1). The applicant has indicated the second lot will contain two structures on 1.50 acres (Lot 2). The applicant has indicated the northern-most building will be constructed as a two-story building containing 12,000 square feet while the building located near Cantrell Road will be constructed as a single story building containing 3,000 square feet. The applicant has indicated the uses proposed are O-2, Office and Institutional District uses along with the conditional uses and accessory uses listed under the O-2 District for the ground floor of the building on proposed Lot 1. The upper floor will utilize only O-2 uses. The applicant has indicated the proposed Lot 2 will utilize the O-2, Office and Institutional District uses. The applicant has indicated the total square footage for the site is 45,600 square feet with 30,300 square feet utilizing O-2, District uses and 15,300 square feet utilizing O-2, District uses the allowable conditional uses and accessory uses with no limits place on these allowed uses. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an existing office building being used by Civil Design, Inc. an engineering firm and a vacant 9,400 square foot structure. Two single-family structures have been recently removed from the western end of the site. There is an existing gravel access drive from Cantrell Road extending to the eastern most building and a gravel drive extending from Cantrell Road to the previous home site. Civil Design has a paved access drive to their building. There is February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5718-A 4 undeveloped property located immediately north of the site and there is a single-family residence located immediately west of the site adjacent to Rummell Road. To the east of the site is a newly constructed branch bank facility. There are single-family residences to the southwest across Cantrell Road, with a pet grooming/boarding facility located to the southeast. Cantrell Road is a five-lane roadway with curb and gutter in place. There is no sidewalk located adjacent to the sites being proposed for rezoning. There is a sidewalk located immediately east of the site in front of the branch bank facility. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. The Westchester/Heatherbrae Neighborhood Association, all property owners located within 200-feet of the site and all residents who could be identified located within 300 feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: 1. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required along Cantrell Road in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. Sidewalk on neighboring property to the east is deferred until adjacent properties develop. 2. Private access is proposed west of these lots. In accordance with Section 31-207, private streets must be designed to the same standards as public streets. A minimum access easement width of 45 feet is required and street width of 24 feet from back of curb to back of curb. 3. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. 4. Street names and street naming conventions must be approved by Public Works. Contact David Hathcock at (501) 371-4808. 5. The proposed right-of-way dedication and boundary street improvements meet Master Street Plan requirements. Construct right turn lane into Magnolia Drive off Cantrell Road. 6. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 7. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. 8. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5718-A 5 E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Provisions for water service to the property to the north should be considered. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered connections off the private fire system. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: CATA requests that a bus turnout be included on westbound Highway 10 at the far side of Magnolia Drive. This improvement will enhance operating safety, as it will allow the bus to pull out of the traveled lane while discharging customers along Highway 10 at Magnolia Drive. As an alternative, a paved shoulder with a width of 10-feet or greater would also be sufficient to ensure a safe bus stop location. The site is located near CATA Bus Route #25 – Highway 10 Express Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Suburban Office for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision of two planned office developments to allow the construction of two new office buildings. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5718-A 6 Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial on the Master Street Plan. It may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. Bicycle Plan: There is a Class One bike trail that is close to the site that travels along the creek through Taylor Loop Park. The trail is located approximately 500 feet to the west of the property. A Class One bikeway is totally separated from the automobile lanes. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The Sustainable Natural Environment goal listed an objective of “promote vigorous enforcement of Landscaping and Excavating ordinances”. This may affect the application in relation to the height of retaining walls, and screening and buffering aspects of surrounding properties. Landscape: 1. Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. 2. The plan submitted does not provide for the minimum 25-foot landscape buffer along the western perimeter. The 15-foot access easement cannot count towards this requirement. The plan submitted does not provide for the 15-foot landscape buffer minimum along Magnolia Drive. A portion of the proposed parking lot encroaches into the required 40-foot landscape buffer along Highway 10. These are requirements of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. 3. A six foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen planting, is required along the sites northern, eastern, and western perimeters of the site; next to the residentially zoned property. 4. In addition to the proposed interior landscaping, a small amount of building landscaping between the proposed parking areas and buildings (or in the general area) will be required. 5. Berming is encouraged along the scenic Highway 10 corridor. 6. A controlled automatic irrigation system is required. 7. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. 8. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this tree-covered site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5718-A 7 G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 20, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff stated the indicated site plan did not meet the typically minimum requirements of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District with regard to front landscape strip, building setback and buffering. Staff also noted the proposed dumpster was located adjacent to the residentially zoned property and adjacent to the proposed public right-of-way. Staff requested the dumpster be relocated. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated sidewalks would be required per the Master Street Plan along the property frontage. Staff also stated the storm water detention ordinance would apply to the development of the site. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the areas set aside for buffers and landscaping did not comply with the minimum ordinance requirements. Staff also stated the plan submitted did not provide for the 15-foot minimum landscape buffer along Magnolia Drive. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies; suggesting the applicant contact them individually for further clarification. There was no further discussion of the item and the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the October 20, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated a desire to redevelop the site with reduced standards than typically required per the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The applicant has indicated a reduced front landscape strip, reduced front building line and a reduced street buffer along Magnolia Terrace. The applicant is proposing to provide additional landscaped areas to offset encroachments and enhance plantings in the provided landscaped areas. The applicant has indicated the proposed parking along Highway 10 at the western end of the development encroaches into the landscaped area by approximately 1080 square feet. The applicant has indicated additional landscaped areas will be provided totaling 1448 square feet. The applicant has also indicated a 10-foot landscape strip along Magnolia Drive on both proposed Lots 1 and 2. The applicant’s revised site plan indicates a portion of the building located on Lot 1 will be constructed within the 100-foot building setback. The applicant has indicated building setbacks and buffer areas along the northern and western February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5718-A 8 perimeters of the site complying with the typical minimum requirements of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The applicant is proposing the construction of a two story building with access to the second floor in the rear of the site. The site plan includes the placement of a service drive to the rear and parking for the second floor uses. The applicant has indicated the encroachment is necessary due to the shallowness of the lot. The applicant has indicated the building will contain 30,600 square feet of office and retail space as allowed in the conditional and accessory uses of the O-2 zoning district. The typical minimum parking required for a development as proposed would be 82 parking spaces based on the square footage proposed for retail uses and square footage proposed for office uses. The proposed site plan includes the placement of 107 parking spaces. The site plan includes two buildings on proposed Lot 2. The applicant has indicated a two story building containing 12,000 square feet and a single-story building containing 3,000 square feet. The proposed single story building is indicated at a 50-foot building setback adjacent to Cantrell Road, which typically requires a 100-foot building setback. The applicant has indicated the 40-foot front landscape strip as required by the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. Proposed Lots 2 contains 61 parking spaces. The applicant has indicated the site will be developed utilizing O-2, zoning district uses. The ordinance would typically require 37 parking spaces. The indicated parking is adequate to meet the typically minimum parking demand. The applicant has indicated a single ground mounted monument style commercial development sign located on each of the proposed lots. The applicant has indicated each sign will be a maximum of ten feet in height and 100 square feet in area. The applicant has indicated building signage will comply with typical building signage allowed per the zoning ordinance or a maximum of ten percent of the façade area. The applicant has indicated each of the proposed lots will contain a dumpster location. The applicant has indicated the dumpsters will be screened on three sides with a visual screening to best blend into the overall site appearances and be as visually appealing as possible. The applicant has indicated potential materials are brick, split-faced block or wood. Staff is not supportive of the applicant’s request. The applicant has not met the minimum requirements of the Highway 10 Deign Overlay District with regard to building setback or landscaped areas. Staff feels the integrity of the Design Overlay should be maintained and therefore is not supportive of the applicant’s request as proposed. Additionally, staff does not support the applicant’s request to utilize the ground floor of the 30,600 square foot building on Lot 1 for unlimited conditional uses and accessory sues listed in O-2. This would potentially create a commercial strip building. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5718-A 9 I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 10, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request dated November 4, 2005, requesting the item be deferred to the January 5, 2006, Public Hearing. Staff stated the applicant had indicated additional time was necessary to meet with staff and the neighborhood to resolve outstanding issues and concerns. Staff stated they were supportive of the applicant’s request. There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to approve the By-law waiver for the late deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant has not contacted staff concerning the application request since the November 10, 2005, Public Hearing. Staff recommends this item be deferred to the February 16, 2006, Public Hearing to allow staff and the applicant additional time to resolve the outstanding issues related to the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 5, 2006) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item indicating the applicant had not contacted them concerning the application request since the November 10, 2005, Public Hearing. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred to the February 16, 2006, Public Hearing to allow staff and the applicant additional time to resolve the outstanding issues related to the request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to allow the item to be placed for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5718-A 10 STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing staff’s concerns with the previous rezoning request. The applicant has decreased the overall building square footage, more closely adhered to the Highway 10 Design Overlay District and is now requesting the allowance of O-3 uses along with the allowance of 10 percent of the total building square footage in each building as the listed accessory uses under the O-3 zoning classification. The applicant has indicated the development of the site with three individual lots. The lots range in size from 1.18 acres to 1.53 acres. The construction of a single, single-story building has been proposed for Lots 1 and 2 and Lot 3 is proposed with a single-story building attached to a two story building utilizing an architectural covered walkway. The building proposed for Lot 1 contains 9,000 square feet and 28 parking spaces. An office development would typically require the placement of 22 parking spaces. The indicated parking for Lot 1 is more than adequate to meet the typical minimum parking demand. The site plan includes the placement of a 12,600 square foot building and 36 parking spaces on proposed Lot 2. The zoning ordinance would typically require the placement of 31 parking spaces for an office development as proposed. The indicated parking is more than adequate to meet the typically minimum parking demand. Proposed Lot 3 is indicated with the development of two structures connected with an architectural walkway. A single story building is proposed adjacent to Cantrell Road with 3000 square feet and a two story building is proposed near the rear of the site with a total of 12,000 square feet. The parking has been indicated at 43 parking spaces to serve the buildings. The zoning ordinance would typically require the placement of 37 parking spaces for an office development. The indicated parking is more than adequate to meet the typically minimum parking demand. The site plan includes the placement of a ground mounted monument style sign in the front yard area of each lot complying with the Highway 10 Design Overlay District standards or a maximum of six feet in height and seventy-two square feet in area. The applicant has also indicated building signage will comply with the typical signage allowed per the zoning ordinance or a maximum of ten percent of the façade area. The site plan indicated the placement of the 100-foot building line adjacent to Cantrell Road and a 40-foot landscape buffer as required per the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The site plan also includes the required side and rear 25-foot landscape strip. A six foot opaque screen will be placed along the perimeters of the site where abutting residentially zoned or used property. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5718-A 11 The request includes the allowance of a reduced side and rear yard setback. The site plan indicates the placement of a 25-foot rear yard setback which would typically require the placement of a 40-foot setback. The site plan indicates the placement of a 25-foot side yard setback which would typically require the placement of a 30-foot setback. Staff is supportive of this request. The site plan indicates the placement of a dumpster on each of the proposed lots. The dumpsters have been located near the rear of the lots and a note has been included concerning the required screening. The applicant has also indicated a note in the general notes section of the site plan stating the hours of service for the dumpster will be limited to 7 am to 7 pm. Staff is supportive of the current request. The site is shown as Suburban Office on the City’s Future Land Use plan, which allow for this type office development. In staff’s opinion, the requested variance to allow a reduced side and rear yard building setback will not significantly impact the adjoining properties. The buildings are indicated as single story buildings which should limit the impact on the abutting properties. Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There was one registered objector present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above agenda staff report. Mr. James Dreher addressed the Commission on the merits of his request. He stated he had worked closely with the neighborhood association to develop a proposal which was compatible with the neighborhood. Mr. Jay Hardman addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated his home was located at 48 Westchester Court, directly across Cantrell Road from the proposed development. He provided the Commission with photo’s of his lot looking to the north at Cantrell Road and the proposed development site. He stated his lot was located below Cantrell Road and currently he could see traffic on the roadway. He stated he felt an eight-foot fence would better screen his home for headlights exiting the site. He stated the fence would also aid in noise reduction. The Commission questioned the existing fence and the plantings which were located on his lot. He stated the fence was six feet and the trees located adjacent to Cantrell Road were one to two years old. He indicated the trees located along the eastern perimeter of his lot and stated they were four to five years old and had not fully shielded the view. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5718-A 12 Mr. Dreher stated the development would utilize low-level lighting and the night lighting would be security lighting only. He stated the development would be open from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm which would also limit the intrusion into the neighborhood. He stated for the majority of the year headlight spill over would not be an issue. Commissioner Adcock questioned Mr. Dreher if the lights would be turned down or off after business hours. Mr. Dreher stated the developers would commit to this request. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: C FILE NO.: LU05-18-02 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment – Ellis Mountain Planning District Location: West of Bowman Road, south of 36th Street Request: Suburban Office to Low Density Residential Source: Pat McGetrick PROPOSAL / REQUEST: Land Use Plan Amendment in the Ellis Mountain Planning District from Suburban Office to Low Density Residential. Low Density Residential represents a broad range of housing types including single-family attached, single family detached, duplex, townhomes, multi-family and patio or garden homes. Any combination of these and possibly other housing types provided that the density is between six and ten dwelling units per acre. A Planned Residential District has been applied for to construct a zero lot-line single-family subdivision of 57 homes. Prompted by this Land Use Amendment request, the Planning Staff expanded the area of review to include the remaining suburban office designate area to the south. With this change, the resulting Land Use Plan change would be for 17.1 acres. It is thought that the additional area would make the boundaries more logical. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property requesting the change is currently zoned ‘O-2’ - Office and Institutional and is twelve acres ± in size. To the north, south, east and west the land is zoned ‘R-2’ - Single Family. To the south is a horse farm and home. To the north are several homes and a non-conforming family business. To the southeast are single family homes and a non-conforming business. To the northeast and west is primarily vacant and wooded. To the far northeast is a new church complex – Church of Rock Creek. This is a developing section of the City near the current City Limits. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: July 20, 2004, A change was made from Mixed Use to Mixed Office Commercial along the north side of 36th Street between Bowman Road and I-430 – just east of the site. This change was made as a result of a re-zoning request for office zoning. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU05-18-02 2 April 6, 2004, A change was made from Single Family to Suburban Office at the southeast corner of Kanis and Pride Valley – over a mile to the northwest of the site. This change was for the redevelopment of a structure for an office use. February 4, 2003, A change was made from Multifamily to Mixed Office Commercial south of Brodie Creek west of I-430 – just to the east of the site. This change was made to incorporate all the land south of Brodie Creek into one large proposal for a shopping center development. January 7, 2003, A Change was made from Office to Commercial at Colonel Glenn and Lawson Roads – a mile to the south of the site. This change was made for the redevelopment and expansion of a non-residential site. August 20, 2002, A change was made from Low Density Residential to Multifamily at Cooper Orbit and Capital Lakes Blvd – over a mile to the northwest of the site. This change was made to accommodate a planned development for apartments. July 3, 2001, A change was made from Low Density Residential, Mixed Office Commercial, and Neighborhood Commercial to Single Family – to the northwest of the site. This change was made to change the proposed ‘Brodie Creek New Towne’ to the ‘Woodlands Edge’ residential subdivision. September 19, 2000, A change was made from Mixed Office Commercial to Low Density Residential – to the east and northeast of the site. This change was made to accommodate a church complex planned development and other future developments. The adopted Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use to the northeast and Mixed Office Commercial to the southeast. To the north is Suburban Office with Low Density Residential to the north and northwest. Brodie Creek is shown for Park Open Space, and is the southern boundary for the amendment application area. Beyond the creek the Plan shows Single Family use. MASTER STREET PLAN: Bowman Road and 36th Street are both shown as a Minor Arterials on the plan. Minor Arterial’s primary purpose is to move vehicles and goods around and through the urban area. Generally these roads provide a network at an interval of around one mile. Neither roadway is built to standard in this area and there are no funds committed for the construction of either. As the area develops, additional right-of-way will be required for both roads. Widening to Master Street February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU05-18-02 3 Plan standards is a likely requirement with future development of land adjacent to these roads. BICYCLE PLAN: The Little Rock Bike Plan proposes a Class 2 Bike route along Bowman Road. A Class 2 route has a designated part of the paved roadway for bicycle use. The Plan proposes a Class 1 Bike route along Brodie Creek. A Class 1 route is a separate paved path for the sole use of bicycles. PARKS: The application area is within the West Central Parks Planning Area. The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan recommends using the existing floodplains to connect recreation area within this district. Brodie Creek along the south and west boundary of the amendment area is such a floodplain. This application area is within a ‘Deficit Area’ identified by the Parks and Recreation Plan. There will be a need to identify open space and recreational opportunities in this area. HISTORIC DISTRICTS: There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this amendment. CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN: The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. ANALYSIS: The Plan change area is near the current City Limits in an area that has been within the City for several decades. Little to no development has occurred until recent years. Residential, single-family, development has been approaching from the north. First the Brodie Creek subdivision and then the Woodlands Edge subdivision have been adding homes west of Bowman Road from Kanis south toward this area. To the south at the Colonel Glenn Road and I-430 interchange commercial and office development has started in the last few years. Along 36th Street, Church at Rock Creek has started a large multiple use complex. During the last decade the areas east of Bowman Road at 36th Street have become less and less residential on the City Land Use Plan. Currently that area south of 36th Street is Mixed Office and Commercial and the area north of 36th February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU05-18-02 4 Street is Mixed Use. But the actual development has not changed with the exception of the Church at Rock Creek. There are hundreds of acres of Mixed Office Commercial, Commercial, Office and Suburban Office shown on the Plan along I-430 from the Shackleford interchange to south of the Colonel Glenn Road interchange, which are yet to develop. There are two large shopping centers, incorporating some of the design ideas from ‘town centers’, proposed at both Shackleford Road and Colonel Glenn Road. To date only a few auto dealerships, a movie theater, a couple of office showroom developments, a couple motels and a scattering of retail have actually been built. Most of the areas shown for non-residential use have been zoned though a majority is still to be developed. Single-family development has been moving south of Kanis over the last decade, with Cherry Creek, Brodie Creek and now Woodlands Edge Subdivisions developing most of the Panther Creek and now Brodie Creek watersheds. This development is moving toward the application area from the north and northwest. 36th Street, which is to be the north boundary of the proposed Planned Development, will be the connection to this growing single-family neighborhood. As noted the section of Little Rock from Kanis Road south of Colonel Glenn Road had not seen development until the last few years. Significant zoning had been put into place during the 1980s with modifications through the 1990s. Most of the changes in the 1990s increased the non-residential uses and decreased the residential. Development of single family has slowly moved south from Kanis Road and recently started south of the change area around David O Dodd and Stagecoach Roads. Commercial and office activity has started at the Colonel Glenn – I430 interchange. There remains significant undeveloped land for single family, commercial and office in the general area. There is no multifamily zoning in this general area, though the Land Use Plan shows two large areas. Both of these areas are current mobile home parks. There is some Low Density Multifamily on the Plan, but not zoned, generally to the west and northwest of the application area. The Plan shows a large Park/Open Space area to the south of the application, which is Brodie Creek. This section of Brodie Creek transverses a horse farm, thus the creek is a channel through pastureland. It does not provide a visual buffer. As noted above, this is a recreation deficit area based on the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Thus the proposed open space corridor along Brodie Creek should be preserved and other recreational options should be developed in the area. With Single Family proposed south of the creek, residential north of the creek would be appropriate. The introduction of differing residential types is a positive for the area. The zoning application is for zero-lot line homes. At this time only larger lot single family detached is being built in the area, with some moderate size single-family subdivisions to the south. The proposed change returns some February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU05-18-02 5 of the lost potential residential units from changes in the 1990s, while leaving abundant undeveloped areas of office type uses in the general vicinity. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Brodie Creek, John Barrow, and Sandpiper. Staff has received one neutral comment from an area resident. None of the Neighborhood Associations contact have indicated a position to the City on the change. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is appropriate. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 10, 2005) The applicant requested the item be deferred to January 5, 2006 prior to the meeting. The Commission placed this item on the consent agenda for deferral. By a vote of 9 for, 0 against, and 2 absent the consent agenda was approved. STAFF UPDATE: There has been on contact from the applicant. No new information on this item, Staff recommendation remains the same. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 5, 2006) The item was placed on consent agenda for deferral. By a vote of 11 for, 0 against the consent agenda was approved. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant has not contact staff as required. Therefore, Staff recommends this item be withdrawn with out prejudice at this time. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) This item was placed on the consent agenda for withdrawal. By a vote of 10 for, 0 against and one absent the consent agenda was approved as recommended. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: C.1 FILE NO.: Z-6049-B NAME: Thomas Park Estates Short-form PD-R LOCATION: Located on the Southwest corner of West 36th Street and South Bowman Road DEVELOPER: Thomas and Thomas P.O. Box 241803 Little Rock, AR 72223 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 10 Otter Creek Court, Suite A Little Rock, AR 72210 AREA: 12.7 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 54 FT. NEW STREET: 1,750 LF CURRENT ZONING: O-2, With a height limit condition ALLOWED USES: Office and Institutional Uses PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R PROPOSED USE: Residential - Zero Lot Line Single-family VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting an in-lieu contribution for the street construction of West 36th Street. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 18,813 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on February 18, 2003, rezoned this site from R-2, Single-family to O-2, with conditions (a maximum building height not to exceed three stories). The Little Rock Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit on October 31, 1995, for a church development on the site. The church development never took place and the Conditional Use Permit expired. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6049-B 2 A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing the development of 12.7 acres located at the Southwest corner of West 36th Street and Bowman Road. The applicant has indicated the owner is proposing to develop 54 zero lot line single-family lots through a Planned Residential Development. The applicant has indicated lots primarily of 40-feet by 110-feet or 4,400 square feet. Corner lots within the development will be 75-feet by 110-feet or 8,250 square feet. The development will be constructed in a single phase and the lots will be developed with a 45-foot gated private access and utility easement. Access to the development will be from Bowman Road and no access is planned from West 36th Street. The applicant has indicated four tracts of open space to be retained by the Homeowners Association as open space and park areas. The proposed site plan indicates three typical housing footprints for potential development of the lots. House Typical A indicates a single story footprint of 1,400 square feet or a two-story structure containing 3,240 square feet. House Typical B indicates a building footprint of 1,840 square feet with a two-story structure of 4,120 square feet. House Typical C indicates a building footprint of 2,100 square feet with a two-story unit containing 4,640 square feet. The applicant has indicated each of the units will be rear loaded with a two-car garage. The applicant has indicated a 30-foot access and utility easement located along the rear lot lines. The applicant has indicated a six-foot fence will be placed around the perimeter of the proposed development. Fencing within the required building setback along West 36th Street is desired to separate the proposed homes from the adjoining roadways. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains two single-family residences located at the northeast corner of the property, with the remainder of the property being undeveloped and partially wooded. The western portion of the site is located in the floodplain. The uses in the area are primarily residential uses. There is a horse farm located south of the site. Bowman Road is a two-lane road with open ditches for drainage and no sidewalk in place. West 36th Street along the northern boundary of the property has not been constructed. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. The John Barrow Neighborhood Association, all property owners February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6049-B 3 located within 200-feet of the site and all residents who could be identified located within 300 feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: 1. This property is traversed by the proposed re-alignment of Bowman Road and the proposed extension of 36th Street. The proposed right-of-way dedication appears sufficient as shown on the plans. Bowman Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from proposed centerline will be required. 36th Street is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from proposed centerline will be required. At intersection dedicate 62 feet of right-of-way to accommodate dual left turn lanes as required by Master Street Plan on both Bowman Rd and 36th Street. 2. A 75 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the proposed location of the intersection of Bowman Road and 36th Street. 3. With site development, provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to 36th Street including 5-foot sidewalks with planned development. Pay in-lieu for one-half street improvement to Bowman Road including 5-foot sidewalks with planned development. 4. The minimum Finish Floor elevation of the lots in the 100-year floodplain is required to be shown on plat and grading plans. 5. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per Section 8-283 prior to construction. 6. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 7. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 8. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Contact Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information regarding street light requirements. 9. Resubmit plans showing proposed re-alignment of 36th and Bowman to create a 90-degree (closer to 90 degrees) intersection so signalization will not be a problem in the future. 10. No residential waste collection service will be provided on private streets unless the property owners association provides a waiver of damage claims for operations on private property. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6049-B 4 E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for the proposed development. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Care must be taken to protect the existing 24-inch waterline crossing this property. Construction of permanent facilities including patios in this easement will not be allowed. Fences without foundations, driveways and parking areas will be allowed. A water main extension to each lot will be required. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered connections off the private fire system. Please submit two copies of the plans for the private fire line to Central Arkansas Water for review. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of private fire line. Approval of plans by the Arkansas Department of Health Engineering Division and Little Rock Fire Department is required. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located near a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Suburban Office for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Residential District for a zero lot-line residential subdivision. A land use plan amendment for a change to Low Density Residential is a separate item on this agenda (LU05-18-02). February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6049-B 5 Master Street Plan: Both Bowman Road and 36th Street are shown as Minor Arterials on the Master Street Plan. A proposed collector extends from 36th Street, west of Bowman Road and follows Brodie Creek to the north and west toward the Woodlands Edge residential development. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and will require street improvements. Bicycle Plan: The Little Rock Bike Plan proposes a Class 2 Bike route along Bowman Road. A Class 2 route has a designated part of the paved roadway for bicycle use. The Plan proposes a Class 1 Bike Route along Brodie Creek. A Class 1 route is a separate paved path for the sole use of bicycles. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 20, 2005) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff questioned if the development would utilize West 36th Street. Mr. McGetrick stated the development would not access West 36th Street and the only access would be from Bowman Road. Staff also questioned any proposed fencing. Mr. McGetrick stated he would note fencing on the revised site plan. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the developers would be required to construct West 36th Street and Bowman Road. Mr. McGetrick stated the developers were requesting an in-lieu contribution rather than street construction. Mr. McGetrick stated he would follow up with staff on this issue. Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies; suggesting the applicant contact them individually for further clarification. There was no further discussion of the item and the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing some of the issues raised at the October 20, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has provided fencing on the proposed site plan. The applicant has indicated an eight-foot brick and iron fence will be constructed around the perimeter of the site and a gate provided at the entrance along Bowman Road. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6049-B 6 The applicant has revised the site plan to clearly indicate there is no access to West 36th Street. The applicant has provided a turn-around along the western perimeter to allow an escape from the development other than traveling the entirety of the development along the rear access alley. The applicant has indicated 1 acre of common open space area. The planned development ordinance requires 10 to 15 percent of the site be developed as common open space area. The site contains 12.85 acres which would require 1.2 to 1.9 acres to be set aside as common open space. Staff would recommend the applicant provide additional common open space to meet the minimum requirement of the ordinance. The ordinance also requires a minimum of 500 square feet of usable private open space per unit. The applicant has indicated each of the lots will contain the minimum private open space requirement. The applicant is proposing the development of this 12.85 acre tract with 54 single-family zero lot line homes. The applicant has indicated an overall density of 4.2 units per acre; consistent with single-family development. The applicant is proposing the development with a single gated access point to Bowman Road. The applicant is requesting an in-lieu contribution for West 36th Street. The applicant’s entrance is located very near the intersection of West 36th Street and Bowman Road, two principal arterial roadways. Staff has concerns with the placement of the entrance to the proposed subdivision at this location. Based on potential traffic volume in the area, staff feels the location would generate traffic conflicts and safety concerns. Staff would recommend the applicant construct West 36th Street and take access from this roadway. Staff feels with the entrance located on West 36th Street, sufficient spacing could be obtained to allow the future homeowners easy ingress and egress from the proposed subdivision. Although staff is supportive of the development of the site with residential housing, staff is not supportive of the applicant’s indicated access. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 10, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant submitted a request dated November 8, 2005, requesting the item be withdrawn from consideration without prejudice. Staff stated the withdrawal request would require a waiver of the By-laws February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6049-B 7 due to the late withdrawal request on the part of the applicant. Staff stated they were supportive of the By-law waiver for the withdrawal request. There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to approve the By-law waiver for the late withdrawal request. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Withdrawal. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant has not contacted staff concerning the application request since the November 10, 2005, Public Hearing. Staff recommends this item be deferred to the February 16, 2006, Public Hearing to allow staff and the applicant additional time to resolve the outstanding issues related to the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 5, 2006) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item indicating the applicant had not contacted them concerning the application request since the November 10, 2005, Public Hearing. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred to the February 16, 2006, Public Hearing to allow staff and the applicant additional time to resolve the outstanding issues related to the request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to allow the item to be placed for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. STAFF UPDATE: There has been no activity on this application request since the previous public hearing. Staff recommends this application request be withdrawn without prejudice and re-filed when the proposed development plan is secured. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated there had been no activity on this application request since the previous public hearing. Staff presented a recommendation the application request be withdrawn without prejudice and re-filed when the proposed development plan is secured. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6049-B 8 There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Withdrawal. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: D FILE NO.: Z-7963 NAME: Kanis and Atkins HPR Short-form PD-R LOCATION: On the Northwest corner of Kanis Road and Atkins Road DEVELOPER: Flake and Kelly Management 425 West Capitol, Suite 300 Little Rock, AR 72201 ENGINEER: McClelland Consulting Engineers 900 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 4.12 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family Residential PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R PROPOSED USE: Townhouse Development VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing the development of this 4.12-acre tract as an attached single-family development to be sold under a Horizontal Property Regime. There are forty (40) units being proposed with twenty-eight (28) units located east of Trumpler Street and twelve (12) units located west of Trumpler Street. The units are proposed to be constructed with brick veneer and vinyl siding. The roofs are proposed as composition shingles and vinyl windows are being proposed. The units will be two story units with nine (9) foot ceilings down stairs and eight (8) foot ceilings upstairs. The units will range in size from 1,300 square feet to 1,500 square feet of heated and cooled space. Some of the units will contain a single car garage. The estimated sales price is $149,000 to $159,000. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7963 2 The applicant is also requesting the abandonment of Plaez Avenue located along the property’s northwestern boundary west of Trumpler Street. Plaez Avenue located along the northern boundary east of Trumpler Street was previously abandoned. According to the applicant there is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for the site. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a single-family structure and a scattering of trees. There is a large drainage way located near the northeast portion of the site visible from Atkins Road. The roads abutting the proposed development are substandard streets with open ditches for drainage and no sidewalks in place. Trumpler Street has not been constructed adjacent to the site. To the west of the site is a lodge for the Veterans of Foreign War. There are office uses located to the south of the site and a new office development is currently under construction located to the east of the site. North of the site is vacant property. Further north there are single-family homes along with several new homes currently under construction located along Arthur Lane and Atkins Road. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area resident. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site along with the Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Association and the Parkway Place Property Owners Association were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: 1. Being a minor arterial street the proposed right-of-way dedication of 45 feet from centerline on Kanis Road meets Master Street Plan requirements. 2. Atkins Road, Trumpler Street and Palez Avenue are classified on the Master Street Plan as residential streets. A dedication of right-of-way 25 feet from centerline will be required. 3. A 20-foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of Trumpler Street and Kanis Road, Atkins Street and Kanis Road, and Trumpler Street and Palez Avenue. 4. With site development, provide design of the streets conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. Curb and gutter on one side and 20 feet of pavement must be constructed on Palez Avenue or petition to close Palez Avenue. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7963 3 5. Driveway locations do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The portion of the development west of Trumpler Street must share a single driveway access. The width of driveway must not exceed 36 feet. 6. Turn around must be provided for cars attempting to enter security gate east of Trumpler Street. A stacking distance of 30 feet from pavement must also be provided. 7. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield). 8. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 9. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 10. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan will be required per Section 29-186 (e). 11. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for the project. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. The facilities on-site will be private. When meters are planned off private lines, private facilities shall be installed to Central Arkansas Water's material and construction specifications and installation will be inspected by an engineer, licensed to practice in the State of Arkansas. Execution of Customer Owned Line Agreement is required. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered connections off the private fire system. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of the hydrant(s) and February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7963 4 contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). If there are facilities that need to be adjusted and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. That work would be done at the expense of the developer. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Fire Department: Install a 20-foot access gate to the proposed development. Place hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Low Density Residential for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned District – Residential for residential town-home development. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Kanis Road is shown as a Minor Arterial on the Master Street Plan and Atkins Road is shown as Local street. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and will/may require street improvements. Kanis Road is shown with an alternative design standard of 90 feet with a four-lane section and 14-foot center median, median cuts limited to 600 feet minimum spacing, and additional requirements at major intersections. Access to the project should be off of Atkins Road since the median cults may limit eastbound traffic from entering the site. The purpose of a Minor Arterial is to provide connections to and through an urban area. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Bicycle Plan: There are not any bike routes shown in the immediate area. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan. The residential goal listed two objectives relevant to this case. They are “Ensure that future developments of existing undeveloped land meet neo-traditional design standards, including the placement of neighborhood passive green space and community services within developing neighborhoods” and “Support a continuous progression of intensity from single-family and multi-family in newly developing areas, placing the multi-family as a buffer between single-family and February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7963 5 non-residential uses.” This application provides for green space in the center of the area and provides for a denser use to the south towards Kanis, where some non-residential uses are. Landscape: Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. A 25-foot land use landscape buffer is required along the northern property line next to the residentially zoned property. If this area is tree covered, then 70 % of these trees are to remain undisturbed. However, if there are currently no trees in this area, then planting of trees and shrubs will be required. A 28-foot land use landscape buffer is required along the western property line next to the residentially zoned property. If this area is tree covered, then 70 % of these trees are to remain undisturbed. However, if there are currently no trees in this area, then planting of trees and shrubs will be required. A six foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen planting, is also required along this northern and western property lines next to the residentially zoned property. A controlled automatic irrigation system is required. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. Staff has concerns with the functionality of some of the proposed parking spaces. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (December 8, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff requested the applicant provide proposed building elevations, construction materials, total building height and total square footage for each of the units. Staff questioned if the units would have garages or covered parking. Staff also requested the applicant provide the total area of the indicated open space. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated right-of-way dedications per the Master Street Plan would be required along all abutting roads. Staff stated the indicated gate location did not allow sufficient stacking distance for February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7963 6 persons attempting to enter from Trumpler Street. Staff stated a minimum stacking distance of 30-feet from the edge of the roadway would be required. Staff stated a grading permit would be required prior to any land clearing and the storm water detention ordinance would apply to the proposed development. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated compliance with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinances was required. Staff stated the indicated buffer along the northern property line did not appear to meet the 25-foot minimum land use buffer requirement. Staff also stated screening would be required along the northern and western perimeters of the site. Staff stated landscape plans stamped by a registered landscape architect would be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Staff also stated an automatic irrigation system would be required to water the landscaped areas. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the December 8, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has provided building elevations, construction materials, total building height and total square footage for each of the units. The building elevation indicates the units will contain a single car garage but the applicant has indicated not all the units will contain a garage. The intent is to allow additional living space if the potential homeowner does not desire a garage. The units are proposed to be brick veneer with vinyl siding and composition shingle roofs with vinyl windows. Each unit is proposed with a minimum of 1,300 square feet of heated and cooled space exclusive of the garage. The units are proposed as two and three bedroom units. The units will have nine-foot ceilings on the ground floor with eight-foot ceilings on the second floor. The buildings are estimated to be a maximum of 24-feet in height. The proposal is to use the existing topography as much as possible. This will allow for the rooflines to be “stair-stepped” thus breaking the massing of the buildings. In addition, the use of the existing topography will allow limited site work and will allow the development to retain a greater number of the existing on-site trees. The original proposal indicated the placement of a gate for a portion of the development. The revised site plan has removed the gate allowing the site to be full access. The site plan also indicated screening will be placed around the perimeters of the site per City ordinance. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7963 7 The site plan includes the placement of thirty-two percent of the site as common green space. The site plan also indicates several areas of landscape within the parking areas and behind the buildings. The Planned Residential Development section of the ordinance typically requires the placement of ten to fifteen percent of the site as common open space. In addition, each of the units are to have a minimum of five hundred square feet of usable private open space per unit. The site includes the placement of a pavilion and play area for a common space. The indicated open space is more than adequate to meet the minimum requirements of the ordinance. The site plan includes the placement of one hundred fourteen parking spaces. In addition, a portion of the units will have a single car garage. Based on typical minimum parking requirements, 40-units would require 60 parking spaces. The indicated parking is more than adequate to serve the development. The site plan does not include the placement of signage. Staff would recommend if signage is proposed, signage be limited to signage allowed in multi-family zones or a maximum of six feet in height and not to exceed twenty-four square feet in area. The site is indicated as Low Density Residential on the City’s Future Land Use Plan. This designation allows for residential development up to ten units per acre. The applicant is proposing the development of this 4.09-acre site with 40 units of owner occupied residential housing, resulting in a density comparable to the current land use designation. The applicant is requesting the abandonment of Palez Avenue between Trumpler Street and Gamble Road as a part of this request. The applicant is the owner of the properties located adjacent to the right-of-way with the exception of the VFW owning one lot abutting the right-of-way. All parties have signed on to the abandonment request. Staff does not feel the abandonment will have any adverse impact on the adjoining properties. Palez Avenue between Atkins Road and Trumpler Street was previously abandoned and does not appear to have negatively impacted the area. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. The proposal is to develop the site with single-family residential units with a density consistent with the City’s Future Land Use Plan. The proposed site plan indicates the construction of new homes utilizing the existing topography to break the massing of the proposed structures. Staff feels the development of the site as proposed should have minimal impact of the adjoining properties. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7963 8 I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above agenda staff report. Staff recommends approval of the requested abandonment of Palez Avenue subject to the entirety of the abandonment being retained as a utility and drainage easement. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 5, 2006) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation the item be deferred to the February 16, 2006, Public Hearing. Staff stated the applicant failed to notify property owners as required by the Planning Commission’s By-laws. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to allow the item to be placed for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above agenda staff report. Mr. Jim McClelland addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant. He stated the developers intended to develop the site with townhouse units and the units would be owner occupied units. He stated the developer intended to break the massing of the structure with architectural features and by varying the color of brick on the structures. He stated the neighborhood had provided a proposal to construct the units as one story units. He stated if the units were one story the majority of the green space would be eliminated. He stated the desire of the developer was to provide each of the units with an outdoor area as well as common areas. He stated with the development of the site with one story units the entire site would require leveling and all the existing trees on the site would be lost. Ms. Mary Douglas addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated the neighborhood desired to get the best development that fit the existing character of the area. She stated the neighborhood was opposed to increasing the density from February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7963 9 25 units to 40 units. She stated many of the trees on the site had already been removed. She stated the development as proposed allowed for fragmented green space and did not allow for clustered areas of green space. She stated the development concept of patio homes was to give the appearance of green space while allowing for homes to be constructed on a single level. She stated the indicated development would appear office. She stated the parking was designed in front of the structures and driving by motorist would see parking and garage doors. Ms. Douglas provided the Commission with photo’s of the Stagecoach Village development located off Stagecoach Road. She stated the development allowed for common green spaces, the shielding of garage doors and parking areas. She stated the units appeared as individual homes and not a long solid faced structure. She stated most homeowners desired to buy homes similar in appearance to existing residential in the area. Mr. Keith Dover addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated traffic was a concern of the neighborhood. He provided the Commission with photo’s of traffic on Kanis Road in the morning and afternoon. He stated traffic typically backed up from the Bowman Kanis intersection to the proposed site. He provided traffic counts for the area indicating the numbers did not include 2005 traffic counts since they were not available. He stated with the current traffic congestion on Chenal Parkway motorist were looking for alternate routes and Kanis Road was used by many to travel from east to west and vise versa. He stated the traffic numbers would only increase as additional data became available. Ms. Shirley McFarlin addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated her property was immediately north of the site and was not vacant as staff had indicated but was a private park which they maintained. She stated the area was home to a number of animals and as development continued in the area more animals were moving to the site. She stated the neighborhood had concerns with the density of the proposed development. She stated currently 24 homes could be constructed on the site and the proposal included the construction of 40 homes. She stated the development would destroy most of the trees on the site with the construction of the new development. She stated the developer had constructed homes to the north of the site and many promises made by him had not been lived up to. She stated brick mailboxes, curbs and gutters and removal of construction debris had not been provided as indicated by the developer. She stated the development would have more than a minimal impact on the neighborhood. Mr. Ron Helton addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated the VFW post was not contacted. He stated the members were opposed to the request to increase the density of the area. The Commission questioned staff as to the notification. Staff provided the Commission proof the notification was mailed as required by the Commission’s By-laws. The Commission questioned who signed for the request. Staff stated return receipt was not a requirement. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7963 10 There was a general discussion of the proposed request. The Commission questioned the developer about the design of the buildings and how the massing would be broken. The developer stated bump outs would be used and different architectural styles and elements would be utilized. He stated the roof would be placed at different degrees to the roadway to also assist in breaking of the massing. The Commission questioned the number of parking spaces provided. The applicant stated each of the units would be provided parking along with an area for guest parking. The Commission indicated the site contained a great deal of parking spaces which did not appear to be necessary. The applicant indicated the parking around the center common area could be removed. The applicant stated they were willing to work with the neighborhood to address their concerns with design. The Commission questioned if the applicant was willing to defer the item to work with the neighborhood. The applicant requested a deferral to meet with the neighborhood. A motion was made to defer the item to the March 30, 2006, public hearing. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 recuse (Jeff Yates). February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: E FILE NO.: Z-7968 NAME: Central Arkansas Missionary Baptist Student Fellowship Center Short-form PD-O LOCATION: 5412 West 32nd Street DEVELOPER: Unity Missionary Baptist Church 1223 South Garfield Little Rock, AR 72204 ARCHITECT: Steelman, Connell, Moseley Architects P.A. 10411 West Markham Street, Suite 220 Little Rock, AR 72205 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: Roberts and Williams, Associates 1501 North University, Suite 430 Little Rock, AR 72207 AREA: 0.80 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-3, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PD-O PROPOSED USE: Student Fellowship Center VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A waiver of the Master Street Plan requirement for right-of-way dedication for West 32nd Street. The applicant submitted a request dated December 14, 2005, requesting this item be deferred to the February 16, 2006, Public Hearing. Staff is supportive of this request. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7968 2 A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing the rezoning of this site from R-3 to PD-O to allow the construction of a student fellowship center. The project will take a gravel parking lot and one single-family residential lot and transform them into a pedestrian friendly site on a visible corner. The applicant is proposing the construction of a single-story 5,478 square foot building. The project proposes a vast public open space on the immediate corner for pedestrian circulation and to welcome the public to this new fellowship and worship facility. Fair Park Boulevard has been improved to meet all the necessary changes for vehicular circulation in the area adjacent to the site. The developer proposes to widen the 32nd Street to meet the 31-foot commercial street standard with curb and gutter within a 50-foot right-of-way. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains two single-family homes located along West 32nd Street. The area abutting Fair Park Boulevard is currently vacant. To the north and east of the site are single-family homes. To the west of the site is the UALR Campus. South of the site is a small convenience store. There is a mixture of uses located in the area including a multi-family development located south of the site and a lumber yard located southeast of the site. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area resident. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site, all residents, who could be identified, located within 300-feet of the site, along with the Curran Conway Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: 1. The proposed land use would classify West 32nd Street and Tyler Street on the Master Street Plan as commercial streets. Dedicate right-of-way to 25 feet from centerline. 2. A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of West 32nd and Tyler Streets. 3. With site development, provide the design of the streets conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvements to West 32nd Street and Tyler Street including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. Construct back of curb to 15.5 feet from centerline. Install curb and gutter along Fair Park Boulevard frontage if not currently in existence. 4. Storm water detention will not apply to the proposed development. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7968 3 5. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 6. Provide sufficient maneuvering space to back vehicles from handicapped parking space on southwest side of parking lot. 7. Obtain permits prior to doing any street cuts or curb cuts. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way. Contact Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield) for more information. 8. Per Section 29-189(d), groups of trees and individual trees that are not to be removed or are located within required undisturbed buffer areas shall be protected during construction by protective fencing and shall not be used for material storage or for any other purpose. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding the size and location of the water meter. If there are facilities that need to be adjusted and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. That work would be done at the expense of the developer. Fire Department: Place hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #16 – the UALR Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the I-630 Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned District - Office for religious based student center. The proposal does not have a significant impact on the Land Use Plan, which would necessitate a Plan Amendment. The use would be appropriate under the Public Institutional category, which is located across the street to the west. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7968 4 Master Street Plan: Fair Park Boulevard is shown as a Minor Arterial on the Master Street Plan and 32nd Street east of Fair Park is shown as a local street. Fair Park has an alternative standard with a 70-foot right of way with a four-lane section with five lanes at major intersections. The primary function of a Local Commercial Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Local Commercial Streets are built to Collector standards because of adjacent zoning. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. Bicycle Plan: There are Class 3 bike routes in the area located on Fair Park Boulevard adjacent to the applicant’s property, on 32nd Street west of Fair Park and along Coleman Creek in the UALR campus. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Oak Forrest Neighborhood Action Plan. The plan does not address this particular application. Landscape: Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. The City of Little Rock and the City Beautiful Commission both commend you on the preservation of the large existing trees on site. Credit for the trees saved can be given towards meeting the City’s minimal landscape ordinance requirements. The site plan right-of-way is unclear. A minimum of 9 feet landscape and street buffer is required along West 32nd Street and next to the residentially zoned property to the north. As shown, in addition to this approval, the site plan will require City Beautiful Commission approval. Parking lot areas can be reduced to a minimum of 20 feet allowing for more green space in all three areas. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (December 8, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff questioned the days and hours of operation, the location of any proposed dumpsters and any fencing to be located on the site. Staff also requested details of the proposed building materials and a note concerning the proposed building height. Staff stated site lighting should be low level and directional, directed inward away from residentially zoned properties. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7968 5 Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated dedication of right-of-way for West 32nd Street and Tyler Street would be required per the Master Street Plan. Staff stated a 20-foot radial dedication would also be required at the intersection of West 32nd and Tyler Streets. Staff stated the storm water detention ordinance would apply to the proposed development of the site. Staff also stated protective fencing would be required during construction around any groups of trees to remain on the site. Landscape comments were addressed. Staff stated compliance with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance would be required. Staff also stated with the dedication of right-of-way there was little to no area remaining for landscaping outside the right-of-way. Staff stated a minimum of 9-feet of landscaping would be required along West 32nd Street. Staff stated the parking lot areas could be reduced to a minimum of 20-feet to allow for more green space along the roadways. Staff stated as indicated City Beautiful Commission approval would also be required. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan addressing most of the issues raised at the December 8, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the days and hours of activities, building materials and building height. The applicant has indicated there will not be a dumpster located on the site. The applicant has indicated the building will be constructed of brick and siding with a shingled roof. The revised site plan indicates a street buffer of 7.5 feet adjacent to the proposed parking area along West 32nd Street and 9-feet along Tyler Street. The site plan indicates a land use buffer along the northern property line ranging from 5.89 feet to 19.42 feet. The indicated buffering is not adequate to meet the minimum ordinance standards for both the Zoning and Landscape Ordinances. The applicant has indicated the primary function of the student center is to provide a place for students to fellowship, study, receive counseling or other activities during class breaks at UALR. These typical hours are from 9:00 am to 3:00 pm with the regular college meeting with UALR and other college students held on Tuesday nights beginning 7:00 pm. The ministry receives aid from area churches in providing a weekly lunch, either Wednesday or Thursday, which is open to the UALR student body. Attendance is anticipated between 15 and 100 students. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7968 6 Small group Bible studies and other discussion groups will meet at various times during the day and night through the week. A regular Bible study/worship service for college students may be held on Wednesday evenings during the school semester and discussion groups of 10 – 15 students typically arrange meetings to fit their schedule. These will change every semester but will fall within the hours of operation listed or 9:00 am to 3:00 pm. Unity Baptist Church, the sponsor of the Missionary Baptist Student Fellowship, may elect to have their Sunday morning college Bible study at the student center before their Sunday morning worship service which now starts at 10:30 am. The campus ministry provides various weekend fellowship activities for the college students and the student center will be used to house certain events on Saturday afternoon, or at least be used as a general meeting place for the students before leaving the center for off-site activities. A few times a year the student center may be used to host statewide youth activities on Friday night and/or Saturday. These events provide a service to area churches and promote the university and our campus ministry to future college students. In the event the Unity Baptist Church decides to relocate their current church plant, the student center may be used on a temporary basis for regular church worship services on Sunday and on Wednesday evenings. A single ground mounted monument style sign is proposed at the Fair Park Boulevard and West 32nd Street entrance. The sign is proposed with a maximum height of six feet and sixty-four square feet in area. The building is proposed as 5,478 square feet with 35 parking spaces. Based on typical minimum ordinance requirements for a place of assembly, 54 parking spaces would be required. Staff feels the indicated parking is more than adequate to serve the development based on the proposed use and in staff’s opinion the students will utilize parking at the campus and not burden the site for parking. Public Works has revised their comments to indicate the newly developed site plan allows sufficient right-of-way dedication and street improvements to the abutting roadways. The site plan indicated a 25-foot dedication along Tyler Street and a 25-foot dedication along West 32nd Street. Staff is not supportive of the request. Staff’s concerns are related to the protection and buffering of the adjoining single-family homes to the north of the proposed parking lot and to the east and northeast. The homes in this area are relatively well maintained and appear to be predominately single-family. Staff February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7968 7 feels with the encroachment of non-residential uses into the neighborhood this could potentially negatively impact these adjoining homes. Staff feels the site design and buffering of this area is critical to offer this needed protection. In addition staff has a concerns with expanding the non-residential uses away from Fair Park and allowing non-residential to abut Tyler Street. Staff fears this could create a domino effect and encourage the remaining homes located on West 32nd Street to convert to non-residential uses. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 5, 2006) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item indicating the applicant had submitted a request dated December 14, 2005, requesting this item be deferred to the February 16, 2006, Public Hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to allow the item to be placed for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: F FILE NO.: Z-6481-D NAME: Breshears Revised Short-form PD-C LOCATION: Located at 600 N. Tyler Street DEVELOPER: Nancy Johnson Poncho’s Villa Restaurant 600 North Tyler Street Little Rock, AR 72205 ENGINEER: Donald Brooks Surveying 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.14 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PD-C ALLOWED USES: Restaurant with a mixture of 36 seats; a catering-commercial use; C-1 permitted uses. PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD-C PROPOSED USE: Revision to the PCD to allow extended hours of operation and allow additional seating within the existing building VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On September 15, 1998, the City of Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,820, rezoning the site from R-3, Single-family to PD-C. Ordinance No. 17,821, which was also approved on September 15, 1998, deferred the right-of-way dedication on Tyler Street and Woodlawn Avenue for five years. The approved PD-C allowed the continuing use of the building as a deli/restaurant with seating for a maximum of 36 persons, allowing seating on a proposed 20 foot by 17 foot deck with proper screening and no outside speakers. C-1 permitted uses were February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6481-D 2 approved as alternative uses. The hours of operation were from 11:00 am to 6:30 pm Monday through Saturday. On February 16, 1999, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,933, approving two (2) minor revisions to the previously approved PD-C. The applicant was allowed to add “catering-commercial” as a permitted use of the property, in conjunction with the approved restaurant use. The applicant indicated there would be no expansion of the existing kitchen facility or additional employees required. There would also be no changes to the previously approved site plan. The applicant also requested a modification to the hours of operation. The applicant requested the daily hours of operation to be 10:30 am to 6:30 pm, Monday through Saturday. The applicant indicated the delivery vehicle for the catering operation would be a mini-van, the restaurant owner/manager’s personal vehicle, which he would drive to the restaurant daily. On May 17, 2001, staff approved a revision to the hours of operation allowing a restaurant to be open from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm. The applicant proposed to revise the previously approved PD-C and was scheduled to be heard before the Little Rock Planning Commission on February 20, 2003. The applicant withdrew his request prior to the Public Hearing. The request was to allow construction of a second structure on the site near the western property line adjacent to the alley. The applicant proposed to use the building as a contractor’s storage shed. The applicant was not proposing any plumbing to be located in the storage building. On April 4, 2003, staff rescinded their approval of the extended hours of operation. On June 12, 2003, the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request to extend the hours of operation for the site. The requested hours for the site were to be as approved at staff level on May 17, 2001. The applicant proposed the hours of operation to be from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm, Monday through Saturday. The applicant indicated all other terms of the PD-C would remain in effect. The applicant appealed the Planning Commission’s recommendation of denial to the Board of Directors. The Little Rock Board of Directors also denied this request at their July 15, 2003, public hearing. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant now proposes to revise the previously approved PD-C to allow the hours of operation to be extended and to increase the number of allowable seats. The applicant is requesting the closing hour to be extended from 6:30 pm to 9:00 pm remaining Monday through Saturday. The applicant is also requesting to increase the number of seats from 36 seats to 56 seats. Poncho’s Villa Restaurant is the current lessor of the property. The applicant has indicated the property was formerly occupied by Café Percito, which according to February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6481-D 3 the applicant operated from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm. The applicant has indicated the hours of operation were curtailed and the applicant is trying to avoid being penalized for the conduct of the previous operator. The applicant states to their understanding, the primary complaints against Café Percito were noise, alcohol, condition of the structure, live music and entertainment, outside speakers with amplified noise, drunken late-night encounters, and late-hour parties. The applicant has indicated these problems have been eliminated and will not be permitted to exist in the future. The applicant states Poncho’s does not serve beer or alcohol and will not permit them to be brought on the premises. The applicant states Poncho’s Villa Restaurant’s desire is to fill a legitimate need in the neighborhood. The applicant has indicated restaurants in residential neighborhoods have not been uncommon for many years in the Heights and Hillcrest areas. Repairs to the building were conducted by the applicant to “bring the building up to code”. The applicant has also indicated they will police the area daily to remove any litter and they will encourage customers to not park in areas that will interfere with the residents parking. The applicant states discussions have taken place with the school located across North Tyler Street and a near-by church to allow customers to utilize their parking facilities when there are not activities taking place at each of these facilities. The applicant has indicated the Bill of Assurance is outdated and does not prohibit the use of the site as proposed. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a one-story 1,373 square foot frame commercial building with a 16 foot by 10 foot deck on the rear corner. There are single-family residences to the north, west and south. Fairpark Elementary School is located to the east, across Tyler Street. There is a church located one block west of the site on the corner of Taylor, Polk and Woodlawn Streets. There is an existing wood fence running approximately ½ the distance of the north property line. Woodlawn Street has been constructed with curb and gutter but no sidewalk adjacent to the site. Tyler Street has not been constructed to Master Street Plan Standards and has open ditches for drainage. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls many indicating opposition and many indicating support from area residents. The Hillcrest Residents Associations was notified of the public hearing along with all property owners located within 200-feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300-feet of the site. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6481-D 4 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: 1. Per City of Little Rock Ordinance No. 17821 passed on September 15, 1998, a 5-year deferral was granted to this property for dedication of 5 feet of right-of-way on Tyler Street and Woodlawn Avenue, including a 20 feet radial dedication at intersection. Since 5 years has passed, the right-of-way must be dedicated or a second deferral requested from the Board of Directors. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located near a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights Hillcrest Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision to the Planned Commercial development to expand operating hours and dining area. This is the location of an old (mid 20th century) commercial structure, which has been various businesses in the past. The proposal does not have a significant impact on the Land Use Plan, which would necessitate a Plan Amendment. Master Street Plan: Tyler and Woodlawn Streets are shown as a Local Streets on the Master Street. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6481-D 5 Bicycle Plan: The closest bikeway is along “H” Street, three blocks to the north. It is a Class Three bikeway, which shares the pavement with the automobiles and only has special signage designating the route. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Action Plan. Most fitting goal is in the Zoning and Lad Use section that states, “The City’s land use and zoning policies should be enforces to preserve Hillcrest’s unique neighborhood scale.” Further definition of the goal states, “The scale, density, and commercial/residential mix of Hillcrest were conceived and built long before the existence of the post-World War II suburb and prior to the emergence of modern zoning and lad use practices. The look and feel of its neighborhoods and commercial centers results from an earlier paradigm of development that ranked the pedestrian over the car, mixed land use over separated uses and proximity over sprawl. Landscape: Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 20, 2005) The applicant was not present. Staff presented an overview of the proposed request to the Committee members present. Staff stated there were few outstanding technical issues associated with the proposed request. There was no further discussion of the item and the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: There were no additional items necessary to complete the review process raised at the October 20, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant is requesting to extend the hours of operation and the number of allowed seats for the site located at 600 North Tyler Street. The applicant’s request includes extending the closing hour from 6:30 pm to 9:00 pm. The applicant has also indicated the number of seats are proposed to be increased from 36 seats to 56 seats. Staff is not supportive of the applicant’s request. The original approval, allow for the reuse of an existing non-residential building as a restaurant/deli with a limited number of seats. Staff feels with the original approval the primary users of the business were neighborhood residents. With the proposed expansion of the seating capacity, the use is no longer a neighborhood establishment and becomes a restaurant drawing from areas outside the neighborhood. Drawing of customers from outside the neighborhood creates a parking concern. The site February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6481-D 6 does not contain any on-site parking and is served by on street parking only. Without parking available and customers driving to the site, the number of vehicles accessing the site creates a hardship on the existing residents, many with single car drives and also trying to utilize street parking. Typically a restaurant use is required to provide on-site parking at a rate of one space per 100 square feet of gross floor area. The building contains approximately 1550 square feet of gross floor area, which would typically require the placement of 15 on-site parking spaces. As indicated, no on-site parking is provided or proposed. In addition, the original approval limited the hours of operation to hours, which typically did not interfere with the surrounding residents. The original closing was 6:30 pm, the time when most residents are arriving home from work. Staff feels by increasing the hours of operation until 9:00 pm this will infringe into the residents “quiet time” and quality of life. As previously stated, staff is not supportive of the applicant’s request. Staff feels the proposed use is too intense for the site. Staff feels the hours of operation should remain as previously approved and the number of seats remain as was previously approved. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 10, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial of the request. Mr. Sam Laser addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. He stated the applicant was a hard working person who had been misguided by staff and the owner. He stated the applicant was told prior to leasing the building the hours of operation were from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm six days per week. He stated the applicant had invested a great deal of her own money in the building restoring the site and bringing the building up to code. Ms. Jane Krutz addressed the Commission in support of the request. She stated the site had historically been used as a business since construction. She stated part of the charm of the neighborhood was the small businesses and residential homes all located in close proximity. She stated the school was now a pre-k, which reduced the amount of traffic to the area. Ms. Krutz stated she felt the development an asset to the community and allowed the neighborhood a good clean business to enjoy. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6481-D 7 Mr. Brad Reed addressed the Commission in support of the request. He stated he walked his dog in the area and did not feel there was a traffic problem in the area. He stated the restaurant was a high quality restaurant and reasonably priced. He stated he did not feel the restaurant was a negative on the neighborhood. Ms. Johnson stated she had made improvements to the building totaling $30,000. She stated if the restaurant were forced to close at 6:30 she would lose her “dinner run”. She stated without the “dinner run” she would not be able to meet her overhead. Mr. Laser stated the site was zoned in 1998 for a deli. He stated later a restaurant was allowed to locate on the site, which was not neighborhood friendly. He stated the current business did not the problems with the neighborhood. He stated the problems were with the previous tenant. Ms. Amanda Prince addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated her home was located at 501 N. Tyler Street. She stated she went home for lunch and parking was a problem. She stated cars were double parked on Woodlawn Street and encroaching into the intersection. She stated with the way cars parked it was impossible to see around the cars and one was forced to enter the intersection causing a traffic concern. She stated the restaurant did cause a problem in the neighborhood. She stated the dinner hour interfered with the resident’s quiet time. Ms. Kathleen Oleson addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated the development did not comply with the City’s minimum ordinance requirements with regard to parking and hours of operation. She stated the site was granted an extension of the hours of operation and the extended hours did not work with the neighborhood. She stated with the expanded seating the parking problem would only be increased. Mr. Joe Justus addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated his home was located at 420 N. Tyler Street. He stated the hours and seating were a problem for the neighborhood. Ms. Sandi Formica addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated her home was directly across the street from the restaurant. She stated the hours of operation and the number of seats were creating a hardship on area residents. She stated she felt the applicant should be required to immediately comply with the previous approval. She stated the property values in the area had increased from $60,000 to $100,000 with minimal improvements. She stated with the restaurant she felt property values would be decreased. She stated she was the most impacted since she lived next door to the business. Mr. James Robinette addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated his home was located at 500 N. Tyler Street. He questioned if the Commissioners had received an e-mail he sent earlier in the day. He stated a brief February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6481-D 8 overview of the power point related to the impact traffic would have on the neighborhood. He stated the area was not appropriate for a commercial development of the intensity being proposed. He stated the 56 seats increased the commercial aspect of the development. He stated the applicant had moved from a four-lane roadway in North Little Rock to this quiet residential neighborhood. He stated with the restaurant the residents of the area were not able to fully utilize their property. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed request and the extended hours of operation and the increased number of seats. The Commission questioned Ms. Johnson as to if the number of seats was critical to her business. Ms. Nancy Johnson stated it was important she have the number of seats and the hours of operation to meet her overhead. The Commission questioned where the break down occurred concerning the hours of operation. Staff stated the zoning enforcement desk did not fully review the files and did not see the letter, which resend the hours of operation nor the file, which denied the extended hours by the Planning Commission and the Board of Directors previously. Staff stated this was an oversight and once the oversight was caught Ms. Johnson was issued a notice immediately. Staff stated there was no more than one week between the issuance of the privilege license and the notice of violation. A motion was made to approve the request as filed. The motion failed by a vote of 3 ayes, 6 noes and 2 absent. STAFF UPDATE: As indicated in the above minute record the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request at its November 10, 2005, Public Hearing to revise this previously approved PCD. This recommendation of denial was appealed to the Little Rock Board of Directors and on January 3, 2006, the Little Board of Directors was scheduled to hear the appeal request. At the Board meeting, the owner of the property, Mr. Don Breshears stated Ms. Nancy Johnson was no longer occupying the building. He requested the application be amended. His request was to revise the PCD to include the hours of operation only and eliminate the request to increase the number of seats. The Little Rock Board of Directors determined a modification would first require Planning Commission review and a recommendation be presented based on the current application request. The Board of Directors has requested the Commission review and provide a recommendation for the current application request. The previous request included extending the hours of operation from 6:30 pm to 9:00 pm and allowing the total seating capacity to be increased to 56 seats. The owner of the property has amended his request to remove the request for an increase in the number of seats and has is now seeking approval to extend the hours of operation to the 9:00 pm closing time. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6481-D 9 Staff was not supportive of extending the hours of operation in the original Commission review and continues to not support the extended hours of operation. With the current closing of 6:30 pm, most residents are arriving home from work as the commercial activity on the site is ceasing. Staff feels increasing the hours of operation will interfere with the surrounding residents; intruding into their quiet time, thus interfering with their quality of life. Staff continues to recommend denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the item had been referred back to the Commission for a recommendation of hours of operation only. Staff presented a recommendation of denial of the extended hours of operation. Mr. Don Breshears addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. He stated street construction adjacent to the site had been going on for the past five months. He stated the construction was causing a parking problem in the area not the retail business. He stated the property values in the area had only increased from 1991 to 2005 to $130.00 per square foot. He stated the last four homes that sold had sold for $142.00 per square foot. He stated his request was to increase the hours of operation to allow a small restaurant to stay open until 9:00 pm. He stated the limited number of seats would not generate a great number of cars. He stated his goal was to get the hours approved and then write into the lease the hours of operation and the number of seats available to avoid any future confusion as to what was allowed on the site. Mr. Mark Robinette addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated the neighborhood did not benefit from the development only the property owner. He stated the purpose and intent section of the planned zoning district outlined the requirements for the planned development process and the proposed development did not meet the requirement. He stated the parking problem with the previous restaurant was well documented. He stated a restaurant use would generate a parking demand on the neighborhood which needed most of the available parking for the residences. Mr. Scott Smith addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated he was representing the Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood Association and they were strongly opposed to the request. He stated the site had a history as a small grocery store and as a deli. He stated the use of the site as a restaurant was a more intense use and a nuisance to the neighborhood. Mr. Joe Justus addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated his home was located near the site and he was opposed to increasing the hours of operation. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6481-D 10 Ms. Julie Ahrend addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated she was opposed to extending the hours of operation as well. Ms. Sandi Formica addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated the site did not have any off street parking which was a problem for the area. She stated there was not a location for dumpster which was not located adjacent to a single-family home. She stated she had lived in the area for 15 plus years and was in her home when the site was used as a grocery store and a deli when the hours were limited to daytime hours. She stated those two uses were not a nuisance to the neighborhood. She stated the streets were narrow and safety was a concern. She stated with the placement of a restaurant on the site the customers were forced to park on the street which removed available parking for the residences. There was a general discussion between the Commission’s and the applicant concerning the potential uses of the site. Mr. Don Breshears stated a grocery store was not economically feasible for the location. He stated the site could potentially be developed as residential. He stated his concern was once the site was no longer commercial he would lose his non-conforming status. A motion was made to approve the request. The motion failed by a vote of 0 ayes, 11 noes and 0 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: G FILE NO.: Z-7969 NAME: Juarez Revised Short-form PCD LOCATION: 18321 Highway 10 DEVELOPER: Desiderio Juares 18321 Cantrell Road Little Rock, AR 72223 ENGINEER: Donald W. Brooks 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 2.0 + acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: PCD and R-2, Single-family (manufactured homes) ALLOWED USES: Restaurant and Single-family PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: Restaurant expansion – Outdoor dining and Parking, Single-family (manufactured homes) VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. The applicant submitted a request dated December 15, 2005, requesting this item be deferred to the February 16, 2006, Public Hearing. Staff is supportive of the deferral request. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing a revision to the currently approved PCD by expanding the PCD to the south. The applicant is proposing a deck and parking facility in the expanded area. The applicant has indicated the deck to be attached to the existing restaurant with only one entrance to the restaurant. The deck is proposed as a wooden construction, following the style of the existing restaurant facility. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7969 2 The parking lot is proposed of SB2 (gravel) with asphalt at a later date. The applicant has indicated fencing will be placed along the southern perimeter of the parking lot to screen the adjoining properties. The applicant is also requesting the relocation of the six manufactured homes on the rear portion of the site. There is an existing single-family residence located on the site as well. The site is located outside the City limits but within the City’s Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction. The site is currently connected to the City’s wastewater collection and treatment system. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a restaurant located adjacent to Highway 10 with several manufactured homes located on the rear portion of the site. There is a daycare center located to the west of the site on property zoned PD-O. To the north and east of the site are several properties zoned PCD which were zoned to recognize uses which existed when the property was brought within the City’s Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction. Other uses in the area include, single-family homes located on large lots, a church and vacant O-3, General Office District zoned property. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site along with the Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association, the Bayonne Place Property Owners Association, the Johnson Ranch Neighborhood Association, the Margeaux Property Owners Association and the Maywood Manor Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: 1. The proposed land use would classify Stones Road on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline for length of frontage. 2. Cantrell Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial. Dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline will be required. (Unable to tell by provided survey the existing right-of-way depth.) 3. With site development, provide the design of the street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvements to Cantrell Road and Stones Road including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7969 3 4. Driveway locations and widths on Cantrell Road do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The lot must have a single driveway access. The width of driveway must not exceed 36 feet. 5. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: The site is located outside the Service boundary. No comment. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Fire Department having jurisdiction to obtain information regarding the required placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). Fire Department: Place hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: Approved as submitted. CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #25 – the Highway 10 Express Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Business Node for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial District for an existing restaurant and associated parking. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial on the Master Street Plan and Stones Road is shown as a Local Street. Cantrell Road may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements while Stones Road will require dedication of right-of-way and will require street February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7969 4 improvements. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas, not to provide access to adjacent properties. Curb cuts should be limited to improve traffic flow. The primary function of a Local Commercial Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Local Commercial Streets are built to Collector standards because of adjacent zoning. Bicycle Plan: There is a Class 2 bike route along Cantrell Road adjacent to the applicant’s property. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. Landscape: Compliance with the City’s Landscape, Buffer Ordinances and the Highway 10 Design Overlay District minimum ordinance standards is required. A six 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, eastern and western property lines next to the residentially zoned property. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. A controlled automatic irrigation system is required. The proposed parking area should provide for the eight percent interior landscaping required by the Landscape Ordinance. The plan submitted appears to fall short of the ordinance requirement. A variance from this standard would require City Beautiful Commission approval. Staff has concerns with the functionality of some of the proposed parking spaces. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (December 8, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff stated the request was to allow the existing restaurant to expand their seating area by the addition of a deck and to allow additional parking in the rear yard area. Staff stated the proposed design did not work. Staff informed the applicant if they wished to proceed with the application request a design professional would be required to layout the parking and the proposed deck expansion area. Staff stated the indicated gravel parking was typically required to be constructed of a hard surface. Staff questioned the applicant as to the length of time the gravel surface was being requested. Staff also questioned the future of the existing manufactured homes located on the site. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7969 5 Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the indicated use of the property would classify Stones Road as a commercial street. Staff stated dedication of right-of-way 30-feet from centerline would be required. Staff also stated street construction would be required along Cantrell Road and Stones Road per the Master Street Plan requirements. Staff stated a permit from AHTD would be required prior to any construction in the highway right-of-way. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the indicated landscaping did not comply with the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. Staff also stated the plan did not comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance. Staff stated screening would be required along the southern perimeter to protect the adjoining single-family used property. Staff also stated the proposed parking lot did not allow for the required interior landscaping. Staff stated a variance from this standard would require City Beautiful Commission approval. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the December 8, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated there is a single-family residence along with six manufactured homes on the site located near the rear portion of the site. The existing restaurant will remain and a new deck and parking lot will be constructed to the rear of the restaurant building. The applicant is proposing a deck and parking facility along the rear of the existing restaurant building. The applicant has indicated the deck to be attached to the existing restaurant with only one entrance to the restaurant. The deck is proposed as a wooden construction, following the style of the existing restaurant facility. The deck is proposed as 40-feet by 40-feet or 1,600 square feet. The existing restaurant contains 3,280 square feet. Based on the indicated square footage of the restaurant use a total of 48 parking spaces would typically be required. The site contains approximately 28 existing parking spaces and an additional 20 parking spaces are being proposed with the new construction. The indicated parking is adequate to meet the typical minimum parking required for a restaurant use. The parking lot is proposed of SB2 (gravel) with asphalt at a later date. Staff would support a one year deferral of the required hard surface material. The February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7969 6 applicant will be required to place materials to contain the gravel within the proposed parking area. The applicant has indicated fencing will be placed along the southern perimeter of the site to separate and screen the adjoining properties. The applicant has not included the nine foot landscape strip as required by the Landscape Ordinance. In addition the applicant has not provided the interior landscape islands. Staff recommends the minimum landscaping strip and interior parking lot islands be included in the final development plan. The revised site plan does not address Public Works concerns related to the existing driveways and spacing along Cantrell Road. Staff feels the lot should have a single driveway access with a maximum width of 36 feet to meet current ordinance standard. Staff recommends one of the drives be removed from the site with the construction of the new deck and parking lot. The applicant is proposing to utilize Stones Road as an access to the proposed parking area. A 20-foot ingress/egress easement has been indicated on the site plan. The applicant has indicated a minimum of 20-feet of driving surface will be provided to allow access to the homes to the rear of the site and to the proposed parking area. Staff is supportive of the indicated access. The proposed deck has been located 20-feet from the western property line. The Highway 10 Design Overlay District typically requires a side yard setback of 30- feet and a landscape strip of 25-feet. As indicated the site plan does not meet either of these minimum criteria. Staff recommends the applicant move the deck to the east ten (10) feet to allow for the proper building setback and landscaping. All site lighting is to be low level, shielded and directed downward and into the site. The hours of operation of the restaurant are from 10:00 am to 10:00 pm seven days per week. The applicant has proposed the use of the deck will be limited to 10:00 am to 9:00 pm. The applicant has proposed music on the deck will be ambiance music with a maximum speaker wattage of 20 watts. Staff is supportive of allowing the deck and additional parking to be constructed as indicated above in this analysis section. Staff feels the parking should be paved within one year. The landscaping strip, interior islands and screening fence should be installed with the initial development of the parking area. The deck should be relocated to the east to allow adequate building setback and landscaping along the western perimeter. To staff’s knowledge there are no other outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7969 7 I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E, F and H of the above agenda staff report. Staff recommends the minimum landscaping strip along the southern perimeter and the interior parking lot islands be included in the final development plan. Staff recommends one of the drives along Cantrell Road be removed with the construction of the new deck and parking lot. Staff recommends a one year deferral be granted for the construction of the required hard surface material for the proposed parking lot. Staff recommends the applicant move the deck to the east additional ten (10) feet to allow for the proper building setback and landscaping. Staff recommends the hours of usage of the deck be limited to 10:00 am to 9:00 pm. The music on the deck will be ambiance music. All lighting is to be low level, shielded, directed downward and into the site. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 5, 2006) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item indicating the applicant had submitted a request dated December 15, 2005, requesting this item be deferred to the February 16, 2006, Public Hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to allow the item to be placed for inclusion on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E, F and H of the above agenda staff report. Staff also presented recommendations the minimum landscaping strip along the southern perimeter and the interior parking lot islands be included in the final development plan, one of the drives along Cantrell Road be removed with the construction of the new deck and parking lot, a one year deferral be granted for the construction of the required hard surface material February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7969 8 for the proposed parking lot, the applicant move the deck to the east additional ten (10) feet to allow for the proper building setback and landscaping, the hours of usage of the deck be limited to 10:00 am to 9:00 pm. The music on the deck will be ambiance music and all lighting is to be low level, shielded, directed downward and into the site. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: S-200-L NAME: Northwest Territory/The Divide Revised Preliminary Plat LOCATION: Located North of Cantrell Road, East of Chenal Parkway DEVELOPER: Pfeifer Development Company 900 South Shackleford Road, Suite 409 Little Rock, AR 72211 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 37.51 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 4 FT. NEW STREET: 6530 LF CURRENT ZONING: C-3 – General Commercial District, O-3 – General Office District and MF-18 – Multi-family District PLANNING DISTRICT: 20 – Pinnacle Planning District CENSUS TRACT: 42.05 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from the Master Street Plan requirement for the placement of sidewalk along the Divide Parkway and the placement of an 8-foot asphalt pedestrian path/trail in-lieu of sidewalk construction. BACKGROUND: The Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 19,054 on February 17, 2004, zoning the area to C-3, O-3 and MF-18. On December 2, 2004, the Little Rock Planning Commission approved a preliminary plat request for this site. The preliminary plat included four lots totaling 37.51 acres. Two of the lots were zoned C-3 and contained 3.23 acres and 1.72 acres. One lot was zoned O-3 containing 7.23 acres and one lot was zoned MF-18 containing 17.13 acres. The applicant proposed the development of 6,530 linear feet of new streets as a part of the development. Northwest Territory Parkway (the Divide Parkway), a collector street, was to be extended from Cantrell Road to the north/northwest intersecting with Chenal February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-200-L 2 Parkway and Northwest Territory Court was proposed with Commercial Street construction standards. The development was phased based on the market demand for the final platting of lots. The proposed preliminary plat indicated the source of water from Central Arkansas Water and the means of wastewater disposal from Little Rock Wastewater Utility. No portion of the site was located within a floodway/floodplain. Average slopes of ten percent with ranges from five to fifteen percent were indicated. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now proposing a revision to the previously approved preliminary plat to allow the placement of alternative pedestrian paths/trails along the Divide Parkway. The revised plat indicates the placement of an eight (8) foot asphalt pedestrian path/trail along the roadway. The Subdivision Ordinance (Section 31-175 – Sidewalks.) defines the minimum construction requirements for sidewalks. The ordinance indicates internalized pedestrian circulation system in the form of paved paths may be substituted for sidewalks along collector and residential streets upon the request of the applicant and the approval of the Planning Commission. All previous conditions of the proposed preliminary plat remain as were approved by the Commission at their December 2, 2004, Public Hearing. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The property is undeveloped and mostly tree-covered. The property has varying degrees of slope. There is one (1) single-family residence located at the southeast corner of the overall property (19400 Cantrell Road) which takes access from Cantrell Road. The general area contains a mixture of uses and zoning. There is a convenience store, mini-warehouse development, apartment complex and Easter Seals residential facility located along Chenal Parkway, within the Northwest Territory Subdivision. There are single-family residences on large tracts located to the northwest, with undeveloped R-2 zoned property located to the north. There are single-family homes on large tracts and undeveloped C-3 zoned property to the south across Cantrell Road. There is undeveloped R-2 zoned property and a private school located to the east along the north side of Cantrell Road. A church, single-family residences and undeveloped R-2 zoned property are located to the west. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area neighborhood association. The abutting property owners along with the Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association, the Duquesne Place Property Owners Association, the Margaux Place Property Owners Association, the February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-200-L 3 Maywood Manor Neighborhood Association and the Pinnacle Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: 1. The standard conditions shown on the plans as "Public Works Notes" apply to the project. 2. Additional right-of-way and turn lanes will be required at the intersection of the Northwest Territory Parkway with Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway. At Cantrell Road, provide five (5) lanes with 250 feet of stacking space (NB through, 2 SB left turn lanes, SB through and SB right). At Chenal Parkway, provide four (4) lanes (NB through, 2 SB left turn lanes, SB right/through). 3. Temporary cul-de-sacs maybe required depending on phasing of development. 4. Edge of paved pedestrian walkway should be construct at property line. 5. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Contact Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information regarding streetlight requirements. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for the project. Contact Little Rock Wastewater at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A water main extension will be required in order to provide service to this property. There will be limits to floor elevations allowed in this area. The limits will be determined by the uses and the required fire flows. The hilltop area adjacent to these lots cannot be served because the developer chose to install a main that is inadequate to supply the elevations in that area. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-200-L 4 development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Fire Department: Install fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #25 – the Highway 10 Express Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (January 26, 2006) Mr. Joe White and Mr. Tim Daters of White-Daters and Associates were present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed request indicating there were few outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff stated the applicant was requesting the placement of an eight (8) foot pedestrian path/trail in-lieu of sidewalks. Staff stated the request would require Commission approval per Section 31-175 of the Subdivision Ordinance. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the pedestrian trail would require construction in the right-of-way. Mr. Daters stated the pedestrian path would meander along the roadway with portions constructed within the right-of- way and others outside the right-of-way. He stated the entirety of the path would be located within an easement. Staff stated they were supportive of the request. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: There were few outstanding issues associated with the request raised at the January 26, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated an easement for the pedestrian path on the proposed preliminary plat. The applicant has also indicated compliance with Public Works comments. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-200-L 5 The proposal includes the construction of an eight (8) foot pedestrian path/trail in-lieu of sidewalks along the Divide Parkway. Per Section 31-175 of the Subdivision Ordinance along residential and collector streets internalized pedestrian circulation system in the form of paved pathways may be substituted for sidewalks upon the request of the applicant and the approval of the Planning Commission. Sidewalks are not required to be constructed at the same grade as the street curb, nor in a straight line if such straight line construction would damage trees. The applicant has indicated the alternative pedestrian circulation system to conform to the topography of the area and to add visual interest for pedestrians. All previous comments and conditions of the previous approval remain as were approved by the Commission at their December 2, 2004, public hearing. Staff is supportive of the request. Staff feels the sidewalk as proposed will have limited impact on the area. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above agenda staff report. Staff recommends approval of the requested internalized pedestrian circulation system in-lieu of typical sidewalk construction as presented by the applicant. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Staff stated Northwest Territory at Cantrell Road would be constructed as previously approved by staff. Staff stated construction would include four lanes at Cantrell Road instead of five lanes as outlined in paragraph D of the above agenda staff report. Staff also presented recommendation of approval of the requested internalized pedestrian circulation system in-lieu of typical sidewalk construction as presented by the applicant. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: S-548-Q NAME: Candlewood East Subdivision Replat Lot 4 LOCATION: North of Cantrell Road, East of Highland Drive DEVELOPER: Scott Schoen 5400 Highland Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 2.4 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: O-3, General Office District PLANNING DISTRICT: 1 – River Mountain CENSUS TRACT: 42.05 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from the Subdivision Ordinance Section 31-231 to allow the development of a lot without public street frontage – Proposed Lot 4B. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The Little Rock Planning Commission approved a preliminary plat on August 23, 2004, creating six (6) lots within the Candlewood East Subdivision. A final plat for Lot 4 of the Candlewood East Subdivision was executed on August 27, 2004. The applicant is now requesting the replatting of Lot 4 of the Candlewood East Subdivision into three lots. A variance from the Subdivision Ordinance (Section 31-231) is being requested to allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage, proposed Lot 4B. The proposed preliminary plat indicates cross access and parking agreements between proposed Lots 4A and 4B. A 30-foot access easement has been provided to allow proposed Lot 4B access to Highland Drive. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-548-Q 2 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a newly constructed office building on the northern portion of the property. There is a large drainage ditch located on the southern boundary of the property. There are few remaining trees on the site since most were cleared for the construction of the office building. Highland Drive is constructed with curb, gutter and sidewalk in place adjacent to the site. Other uses in the area include an apartment development currently under construction to the north and two newly constructed office/retail buildings to the south. The area to the east has not developed and is currently wooded. On the northeast corner of Cantrell Road and Highland Drive there is a site zoned PD-O, recently approved by the Little Rock Board of Directors, to allow the construction of a branch bank facility. Immediately west of the site is the Kroger Shopping Center. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. All property owners abutting the site along with the Pankey Community Improvement District, the Secluded Hills Neighborhood Association and the Westbury Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: 1. A four (4) way crossing is not permitted with 75 feet of Highland Drive. 2. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan will be required per Section 29-186 (e). Drainage from the property on the north empties on subject property. 3. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 4. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 5. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for Lot 4B. Contact Little Rock Wastewater at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-548-Q 3 Center-Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: A utility easement and water main extension will be required in order to provide service to Lot 4B. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). Fire Department: Fire hydrants may be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located near CATA Bus Route #25 – the Highway 10 Express Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (January 26, 2006) Mr. Joe White and Mr. Tim Daters of White-Daters and Associates were present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed request indicating there were few outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff stated the proposal was a plat request on O-3 zoned property and not a site plan review as indicated on the drawing. Staff requested the drawing be revised as a plat including all platting documentation. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a four (4) way intersection was not permitted within 75-feet of Highland Drive. Staff also stated the storm water detention ordinance would apply to the proposed development. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-548-Q 4 H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plat drawing to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the January 26, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has provided the required certifications, the requested additional information in the general notes section and the storm drainage analysis and storm drainage plan. The applicant has also revised the proposed plat to relocate the proposed four (4) way intersection away from Highland Drive. The proposal is the replatting of a previously platted lot to allow the creation of three lots. One of the indicated lots, proposed Lot 4B, will require a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the development of a lot without public street frontage. Per Section 31-231 of the Subdivision Ordinance all lots shall abut a public street, except where private streets are explicitly approved by the Commission. The applicant is proposing to serve the indicated lot with an access and utility easement extending from Highland Drive. The proposed plat indicates the service easement will provide a driving surface that accommodates two free flowing lanes of automobile traffic as required by the ordinance. Staff is supportive of the request. The indicated minimum lot size of 0.59 acres is more than adequate to meet the minimum lot size required for O-3, General Office District zoned property or 14,000 square feet. In addition the minimum lot width proposed is also more than adequate to meet the 100-foot minimum lot width required per the Zoning Ordinance for O-3, General Office District zoned property. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff feels if the plat is approved as indicated there should be minimal impact on the adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above agenda staff report. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance from the Subdivision Ordinance Section 31-231 to allow the development of a lot without public street frontage – Proposed Lot 4B. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Staff also presented a February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-548-Q 5 recommendation of approval of the requested variance from the Subdivision Ordinance Section 31-231 to allow the development of a lot without public street frontage – Proposed Lot 4B. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 3 FILE NO.: S-1042-OO NAME: Villages of Wellington Phase 12 Revised Preliminary Plat – (Block 23, Lots 2 – 9, 16 – 29) LOCATION: On the Southeast corner of Blackburn Drive and Longwell Loop DEVELOPER: Winrock Development Company 2222 Cottondale Lane Little Rock, AR 72203 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 53.73 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 158 FT. NEW STREET: 7,720 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, R-3 and MF-6 PLANNING DISTRICT: 19 – Chenal Planning District CENSUS TRACT: 42.10 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 1. A variance to allow the creation of two (2) pipe stem lots (Section 31-232(f)) – Lots 26 and 27. 2. A variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow advanced grading of proposed Lots 21 - 28. 3. A variance to allow an increased Lot Depth to Width Ratio for Lots 23 – 25 (Section 31-232(b)). BACKGROUND: A preliminary plat was approved by the Little Rock Planning Commission at their August 20, 2004, public hearing to allow 53.7 acres located south of Wellington Village Road and west of Wellington Woods Drive to develop with 158 single-family lots. The development included several phases with Phase I and III containing patio style lots. The average lot size proposed in these phases was 60-feet by 120-feet. The applicant also requested a variance to allow a reduced side yard setback and a reduced rear yard February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-OO 2 setback for these lots. The setback was proposed as five feet to allow for additional buildable area on each of the lots. Phases II, IV and V were proposed as medium size lots similar to those previously developed to the east. Average lot sizes in these phases were 80-feet by 130-feet. A variance to allow a reduced front building line along a collector street was approved as a part of the request. The applicant indicated a 25-foot front building line adjacent to Wellington Village Road for Lots 1, 8 and 9 Block 24 and Lot 1 Block 22 and Lot 64 Block 23. A variance to allow a reduced building line adjacent to cul-de-sac streets was also approved at 15-feet. Variances from the Master Street Plan to allow Durham Court to exceed the maximum length of a minor residential street and a variance to not require sidewalk placement along Yorkshire Lane were approved. Staff recommended the zoning of the properties contained within the proposed preliminary plat which were zoned MF-6 be rezoned prior to final platting of the proposed subdivision. The applicant has filed this rezoning request, which will be heard by the Commission at their March 2, 2006, public hearing. A final plat has been executed for Phases I and II with new homes currently under construction. The infrastructure is currently being developed in Phases III and V with final platting anticipated within the next 60 days. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now proposing a revision to a portion of the previously approved preliminary plat and is requesting variances from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of two pipe stem lots (Lots 26 and 27) and an increased lot depth to width ratio for three of the indicated lots (Lots 23 – 25). The applicant is requesting a variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow advanced grading of the Lots 21 - 28. All previously approved variances are to remain as in the original approval. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant and tree covered with slightly rolling hills to steep grades. The area to the north is developing with new single-family homes and to the east, the streets are currently in place with water and sewer lines being extended, preparing for final platting. The area to the west is vacant and was formerly the pasture for the Shackleford Dairy. The area is zoned MF-6. South of the site is an apartment complex accessed from Wellington Village Road. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-OO 3 C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from the area residents. The Margeaux Place Property Owners Association, the Pinnacle Neighborhood Association, the St. Charles Community Association and all abutting property owners were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: 1. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. Sidewalk should be installed on Blackburn Drive from the existing sidewalk on the north leg to the existing sidewalk on the south leg. 2. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Contact Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information regarding streetlight requirements. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for the project. Contact Little Rock Wastewater at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. A portion of this property will be served off the Highland Show easements for existing water mains. If there are facilities that need to be adjusted and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. That work would be done at the expense of the developer. Additional water main extensions will be required in order to provide service to this property. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection Fire Department: Install fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-OO 4 County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (January 26, 2006) Mr. Joe White and Mr. Tim Daters of White-Daters and Associates were present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed request indicating there were few outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff stated the proposed revision was to allow the creation of two pipe stem lots and three of the indicated lots would require a variance to allow an increased lot depth to width ratio. Staff also stated the indicated pipe stem lot widths would require a variance. Staff questioned if the pipe stem lots would share a common access easement. Mr. White stated this was the intent. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the sidewalk along Blackburn Drive would need to be extended connecting the existing north and south legs. Staff also stated a letter addressing street light requirements would need to be submitted to Traffic Engineering prior to development. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the January 26, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the lot width of the indicated pipe stem lots and indicated a building line outside the proposed pipe stem lot. The revised plat indicates a 30-foot width for each of the proposed pipe stems. Proposed Lots 26 and 27 have been indicated as pipe stem lots. The applicant is seeking a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of two pipe stem lots. Per Section 31-232(f) pipe stem lots are prohibited in residential subdivisions. According to the applicant the pipe stem lots are necessary to allow the development of the indicated area. Section 31-2, the definition section February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-OO 5 of the Subdivision Ordinance, outlines the criteria for creating a pipe stem lot. The lots are to have a minimum lot width of 30-feet, a maximum depth of 300-feet and minimum square footage of 10,000 square feet with a minimum body width of 60-feet. The preliminary plat indicates the pipe stem width of 30-feet for each of the proposed lots. Per Section 31-232(b) no residential lot shall be more than three times as deep as it is wide, except subdivision lots approved abutting a freeway, an expressway or occupied mainline railroad right-of-way. Proposed Lots 23 – 25 have been indicated with a lot depth to width ratio greater than typically allowed by the Subdivision Ordinance. The applicant is seeking a variance from this section to allow the indicated lots to develop as proposed. The applicant is requesting a variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow advanced grading of proposed Lots 21 – 28. According to the applicant clearing and grading in this area is necessary to eliminate a “big draw”. The developer proposes to pipe the storm water through this area to the nearby detention facility. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. Staff does not feel the indicated variances from the Subdivision Ordinance and the Land Alteration Ordinance will have a significant impact on the adjoining properties. Similar variances have been approved in other phases of the subdivision and have not appeared to negatively impact the overall development. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above agenda staff report. Staff recommends approval of the variance request from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of two (2) pipe stem lots (Section 31-232(f)) – Lots 26 and 27. Staff recommends approval of the variance request from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow advanced grading of proposed Lots 21 – 28. Staff recommends approval of the variance request from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow an increased Lot Depth to Width Ratio for Lots 23 – 25 (Section 31-232(b)). February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-OO 6 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the variance request from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of two (2) pipe stem lots (Section 31-232(f)) – Lots 26 and 27, the variance request from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow advanced grading of proposed Lots 21 – 28 and the variance request from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow an increased Lot Depth to Width Ratio for Lots 23 – 25 (Section 31-232(b)). There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: S-1451-B NAME: Easthaven Addition Preliminary Plat LOCATION: On the Northeast corner of Frazier Pike and Riddick Street DEVELOPER: Roger Doyne 4501 Frazier Pike Little Rock, AR 72206 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 1.76 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 8 FT. NEW STREET: 0 L.F. CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT: 24 – Sweet Home CENSUS TRACT: 40.01 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 1. A waiver of the required Master Street Plan improvements to Frazier Pike. 2. An in-lieu contribution for the required storm water detention. 3. A variance to allow a reduced lot width for proposed Lot 8 (Section 31-232(e)). 4. A variance to allow reduced side yard setbacks (5-feet) for the proposed lots. The applicant submitted a request dated February 3, 2006, requesting this item be deferred to the March 30, 2006, public hearing. Staff is supportive of this request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item indicating the applicant had submitted a request dated February 3, 2006, requesting this item be deferred to the March 30, 2006, public hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1451-B 2 There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: S-1454-A NAME: Whispering Hills Phase II Revised Preliminary Plat LOCATION: South of Alexander Road, East of Whispering Drive DEVELOPER: P.E. Investments, LLC 2212 South Broadway Little Rock, AR 72202 ENGINEER: ETC Engineers 1510 South Broadway Little Rock, AR 72202 AREA: 5.09 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 10 FT. NEW STREET: 450 L.F. CURRENT ZONING: PD-R PLANNING DISTRICT: 16 – Otter Creek Planning District CENSUS TRACT: 41.04 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. The applicant failed to notify property owners as required by the Commission’s By-laws. Staff recommends this item be deferred to the March 2, 2006, public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had failed to notify property owners as required by the Commission’s By-laws. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred to the March 2, 2006, public hearing. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: Z-4336-V NAME: Children’s Hospital Zoning Site Plan Review LOCATION: 1900 Battery Street DEVELOPER: Arkansas Children’s Hospital 800 Marshall Street Little Rock, AR 72202 ARCHITECTS: Wilcox Group 2222 Cottondale Lane Little Rock, AR 72202 AREA: 1.92 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 zoning lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 L.F. CURRENT ZONING: O-2, Office and Institutional District PLANNING DISTRICT: 8 – Central City Planning District CENSUS TRACT: 10 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 1. A variance from Section 36-280(e)(1) to allow reduced a setback along the southern perimeter of the site. 2. A variance from Section 36-280(b)(3) to allow an increase area of building coverage. 3. A variance from Section 36-280(d) to allow an increased building height. 4. A variance to allow a reduced landscape strip along the north and south perimeters. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The site is currently zoned O-2, Office and Institutional District and is being reviewed as a Zoning Site Plan Review per ordinance requirement. The site plan indicates a parking deck with at-grade entries to each of the four levels of parking, all off Maryland Street which forms the south boundary of the property. The levels will stair step back into the hillside. The deck will be used solely by Arkansas Children’s Hospital (ACH) staff which will lease these spaces from the hospital. The top level of the deck is roughly at the same grade as Battery Street February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4336-V 2 to the east. The deck will be immediately adjacent to a surface parking lot which is accessed off of Battery Street by visitors to the ACH Office Building, however the two will be separated by an access control gate so visitors to the Office Building will not be allowed to use the deck. The surface parking lot has been temporarily paved and its final paving will be a part of this parking deck project. The site design calls for a new sidewalk the length of Maryland Street with a landscape buffer between the sidewalk and the parking deck. At the west end of the deck an existing storm water retention structure will be retained and will be reworked to adapt it to the configuration of the new deck. This retention structure will continue to serve the entire block of property as it does now. The parking deck is proposed with 1,003 parking spaces including dedicated accessible spaces. Hospital staff will have access to the main hospital building through an existing tunnel under Battery Street which connects to the office building as well. The applicant is also proposing the placement of a temporary parking lot at Wolfe and 13th Streets to help replace some of the spaces which will be lost during construction of this parking deck. The site was recently used as a “lay-down” area for the construction of the new research building. Compacted SB2 will be used as the surface material for the temporary parking lot. Existing curb cuts on Wolfe Street will be closed and access from West 13th Street will be provided. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is currently being used as a lay down area for the construction of the new office building located at 8th and Battery Streets. There are hospital and office facilities located to the east and south of the proposed site also owned by Arkansas Children’s Hospital. There is a high-rise residential tower owned by the Housing Authority located to the southeast of the site. The streets are currently in place around the area some with sidewalk and some without. Curb and gutter is in place along most streets. The Schiller Street right-of-way has been abandoned and ACH owns the property on the west side of the former right-of- way. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site along with the Capitol Hill Neighborhood Association and the Central High Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public Hearing. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4336-V 3 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: 1. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. The minimum width of sidewalk at back of curb is 5 feet. 2. Repair or replace any street, curb and gutter, or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. All repairs and improvements to Battery Street must be completed prior to occupancy. 3. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Contact Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philpott) for more information regarding streetlight requirements. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Existing sewer main on site. No construction is allowed over existing sewer main. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. 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: Install fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #3 – the Baptist Medical Center Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4336-V 4 Landscape: Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. The southern perimeter of the site does not allow for the six foot nine inch (6’-9”) minimum landscape strip. This is a requirement of both the Landscape Ordinance and the Zoning Ordinance. A variance from this minimum requirement must be granted from the City Beautiful Commission. The Landscape and Buffer Ordinances requires that one-third (1/3) of the trees planted next to the proposed structure be a minimum of thirty (30’) foot in height at maturity. The Landscape Ordinance requires a thirty (30’) foot wide landscape strip along freeways or expressways. This site is located in the designated mature area of the city; therefore, there is some flexibility to this requirement. However, special attention should be made to address the site’s visibility to both Interstate 630 and the adjoining properties to the west. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this tree-covered site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (January 26, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff questioned the building separation of the office building and the parking deck. Staff stated the ordinance would typically require a building separation of not less than 20-feet. Staff also stated the maximum aggregated building coverage for O-2 zoned property was 40 percent. Staff requested the applicant provide the total building coverage for the proposed deck. Staff also stated the typical building setback for O-2 zoned property was 25-feet from all property lines. Staff requested the applicant provide all building setbacks from property lines. Staff also stated the applicant was requesting to utilize an existing vacant lot located on 13th and Marshal Streets for temporary parking. The applicant stated February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4336-V 5 the site was previously used as a lay-down yard and stated the current request was to allow the temporary use of the site as parking for the duration of the parking deck construction which is contracted for completion in less than a year. The applicant noted that part of the site was already paved, that the fence was existing, and that the applicant was preserving the majority of the good sized trees. According to the applicant after the construction period, the site would either actively or passively be put back into grass. The applicant stated the long term plans had not been determined. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the indicated sidewalk was inadequate to meet the current requirements. Staff stated they would support a reduced sidewalk (4-feet) if passing areas were provided. The applicant stated the grade of the street was 18 percent which was not compliant with ADA requirements. Staff stated the sidewalk width was important and a minimum of four feet was all they would support. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the indicated site plan did not allow the required landscaping along the southern perimeter of the site. Staff stated a variance would be required from City Beautiful Commission as well as the Commission. Staff also stated one-third of the trees planted next to the proposed structure must be a minimum of 30-feet in height at maturity. Staff questioned how the massing of the building would be minimized. The applicant indicated the structure would be constructed of precast panel screens 42-inches in height. The applicant stated the automobiles would be screened. Staff questioned if planters would be placed on the deck to add visual interest to the structure. The applicant indicated this would be considered. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the January 26, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated all building setback dimensions, the building separation, the proposed sidewalk construction per ordinance requirement and the proposed landscaping plan. The parking deck is proposed as a four story parking structure to accommodate 1,005 automobiles. The structure is approximately 50.6 feet above grade at the highest point (western side) and contains a total of 320,744 square feet. The ordinance typically allows a maximum building height of 45-feet with one February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4336-V 6 additional foot added for each foot of setback. The building height along the western property line meets the required setback. Along the southern property line, the setback is not adequate to meet the typical minimum ordinance requirement. The developers have indicated each of the lower parking levels of the parking deck will have an at-grade entrance from Maryland Street. The upper level of the parking deck ties into a surface parking lot which has been provided near the Battery and Maryland Streets intersection for visitors to the Professional Office Building which is currently under construction. Gates will be used to control entrance into each of the levels of parking. A twenty-four (24) hour security guard will man the gates to allow persons who mistakenly enter the structure the ability to exit without having to back into the street. The site plan indicates the proposed parking deck will be set at 3.11-feet from the southern property line at the southeast corner (adjacent to the surface parking lot) increasing to 4.92 feet at the southwest corner. The structure is proposed at 19.81 feet from the access drive located along the western boundary which is the eastern boundary of the former right-of-way line for South Schiller Street. (The Little Rock Board of Directors abandoned the 60-foot right-of-way for South Schiller Street on April 5, 2005, by the adoption of Ordinance No. 19,306.) The surface parking lot has a landscape strip varying from 2.97 feet to 3.11 feet at the southern perimeter. The applicant is seeking a variance from Section 36-280(e)(1) to allow a reduced setback along the southern perimeter. The ordinance typically requires a 25-foot building setback adjacent to property lines. Based on the size of the parking structure and area necessary to provide the required maneuvering area for the structure, the required setback in this area can not be achieved. Staff is supportive of the variance request. The area in question is located adjacent to ACH owned and developed property. The area to the west is undeveloped hospital owned property and the area to the south is a parking lot. A variance is being requested from the Landscape and Buffer Ordinances. The site plan indicates a reduced landscape strip along the southern perimeter of the site. The site plan also indicates reduced buffering along the northern perimeter of the site. A variance request from Section 36-280(b)(3) to allow an increased area of building coverage is also being requested. The ordinance typically allows an aggregate building coverage of not more than forty (40%) percent. The applicant has indicated the additional building coverage is necessary to develop the deck with the least impact on the area. The structure is proposed to “fit” the topography of the site. When the structure is viewed from the east the structure will appear as a single level parking structure. When viewed from the west the February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4336-V 7 structure will appear as a four story structure. According to the applicant, to reduce the overall building coverage would require the structure to be increased in height. Staff feels this increased building coverage is a more acceptable alternative than increasing the height of the structure to obtain the desired number of parking spaces. The applicant has provided a landscape plan with details of how the massing of the structure will be broken. The landscape plan indicates the placement of Southern Magnolia’s along the western perimeter and the northern perimeter (Interstate 630) of the development. This species of trees typically grows 40 – 60 feet with a maturity height of 100-feet. The proposal includes the placement of Lacebark Elm trees along the Maryland Street, which are smaller shade trees. In addition, at the entrances to the parking structure, Crape Myrtles will be used to provide additional plantings. Autumn Blaze Red Maples are proposed along Battery Street, the eastern perimeter of the site and Savannah Holly will be planted along the service drive and behind the office building currently under construction to break the massing when viewed from the Interstate. The landscape plan also indicates the placement of shrubs as required by the Landscape Ordinance. The proposed tree size at planting exceeds ordinance requirements. The site plan indicates the structure will be constructed of precast concrete spandrel panels. Vinyl coated chain link security fencing is also being proposed. The site plan indicates concrete shear walls with thorocoat finish to match the precast panels. The site plan indicates a color scheme to match the office building located adjacent to the structure. The applicant is also proposing the placement of a temporary parking lot at Wolfe and 13th Streets. The site was recently used as a “lay-down” area for the construction of the new research building. Compacted SB2 will be used as the surface material for the temporary parking lot. Existing curb cuts on Wolfe Street will be closed and access from West 13th Street will be provided. Staff is supportive of this request. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The development of the parking structure to service 1,005 automobiles in staff’s opinion is an asset to the campus. The developers have indicated the construction of the deck utilizing the topography of the area to the maximum extent possible to minimize the impact on the area. Although, there are several variance requests being sought for the development of the structure, staff does not feel the variance requests will negatively impact the area. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4336-V 8 I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E, F and H of the above agenda staff report. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance from Section 36-280(e)(1) to allow reduced setback along the southern perimeter of the site. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance from Section 36-280(b)(3) to allow an increase area of building coverage. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance from Section 36-280(d) to allow an increased building height. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow a reduced landscape and buffer strip along the south and northern perimeters. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E, F and H of the agenda staff report. Staff also presented recommendations of approval of the requested variance from Section 36-280(e)(1) to allow reduced setback along the southern perimeter of the site, the requested variance from Section 36-280(b)(3) to allow an increase area of building coverage, the requested variance from Section 36-280(d) to allow an increased building height and the requested variance to allow a reduced landscape and buffer strip along the south and northern perimeters. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: Z-4555-D NAME: Ardoin Zoning Site Plan Review LOCATION: On the Northwest corner of Clearwater Drive and Shackleford Road DEVELOPER: Pete Ardoin – Capital City Packing 7400 Enmar Drive Little Rock, AR 72209 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 10 Otter Creek Court, Suite A Little Rock, AR 72210 AREA: 4.42 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 L.F. CURRENT ZONING: I-1, Industrial Park District PLANNING DISTRICT: 12 – 65th Street West CENSUS TRACT: 24.05 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance to allow a reduced land use buffer along the northern perimeter. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The proposal includes a 20,000 square foot addition to the existing 19,800 square foot industrial building. The current site contains 2.5 acres with additional acreage of 1.92 acres. The site plan indicates the hours of operation are from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm six days per week. The site lighting is proposed as low level and directional, directed inward to the site. The building construction is proposed as tilt wall, with 10-foot concrete and 10-foot metal walls with a metal roof. The applicant has indicated the site will be utilized as an office warehouse use. The site is currently zoned I-1, Industrial Park District which requires site plan review by the Planning Commission prior to development. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4555-D 2 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is cleared and undeveloped. The property is located in an industrial park setting that currently contains several office/warehouse buildings. Property along this portion of Shackleford Road is zoned I-1, PID and R-2. Many properties, including those to the north and east are undeveloped. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site along with the Stagecoach Dodd Neighborhood Association and Southwest Little Rock United for Progress were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: 1. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 2. South Shackleford Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be required. 3. A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of South Shackleford Road and Clearwater Drive. 4. With site development, provide the design of the street on South Shackleford Road conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one- half street improvement to the street including 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development. 5. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 6. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The minimum driveway spacing from an intersection and between driveways on a commercial street is 250 feet. Remove the proposed driveway. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4555-D 3 SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. If a fire service or larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required a Capital Investment Charge based on the size of connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. The property to the north is zoned residential; therefore, the Zoning Ordinance requires an average of a twenty-three (23’) foot wide land use buffer. The buffer ordinance requires that seventy percent (70%) of this area remain undisturbed. The property to the north is zoned residential; therefore, a six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the northern perimeter of the site. The proposed parking areas do not provide for the eight percent (2,496 square feet) interior landscaping required. The plan submitted is 1,951 square feet less than this requirement. A variance from this standard would require City Beautiful Commission approval. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (January 26, 2006) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating the applicant was proposing an addition to an existing building. Staff stated the site plan indicated the placement of office/showroom/warehouse. Staff stated this was not an allowable use. Mr. McGetrick stated the development was for office/warehouse and showroom activities would not take place on the site. Staff questioned if any overhead February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4555-D 4 doors or loading docks were proposed. Mr. McGetrick stated docks were not proposed but overhead doors were being proposed. Staff also questioned if there would be any areas of outdoor storage. Mr. McGetrick stated there would not be any areas of outdoor storage. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the indicated right-of-way dedication and street construction would be required prior to occupancy. Commissioner Yates questioned the location of the proposed sidewalk. Mr. McGetrick stated the sidewalk was indicated adjacent to the roadway. Commissioner Yates questioned if he would be willing to relocate the sidewalk to the back of the right-of-way. Mr. McGetrick stated he would review this request. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the indicated interior landscaping was not adequate to meet the minimum ordinance requirements. Staff also stated there were concerns with the undisturbed percentage required by the ordinance along the northern perimeter. Mr. McGetrick stated the detention existed in this area. He stated he would be required to expand the detention but could provide the required buffer in the expansion area. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the January 26, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the overhead doors on the proposed site plan. No exterior loading docks are being proposed. The site plan indicates there will not be any outdoor storage located on the site. The site plan also indicates the sidewalk will be placed at the back of the right-of-way to allow additional separation between pedestrian and automobiles. The revised site plan indicates interior landscaping as required by the Landscape Ordinance. The revised site plan also indicates 24 parking spaces as typically required by the Zoning Ordinance for an office warehouse use. The indicated site plan includes the placement of a 100-foot building setback along the northern property line. A variance is being requested to allow a reduced land use buffer in this area. The property located to the north of the site is zoned R-2, which typically requires the placement of a 23-foot wide land use buffer with a minimum of seventy percent to remain undisturbed. The site plan indicates the majority of the northern land use buffer remaining undisturbed with the exception of the area indicated for detention. A six foot fence has been indicated along the northern perimeter to screen the adjoining property. Staff is supportive of the decreased February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4555-D 5 land use buffer. Although, the property to the north is currently zoned R-2 staff does not feel the property will develop residentially. The proposal includes a 20,000 square foot addition to the existing 19,800 square foot industrial building. The current site contains 2.5 acres with additional acreage of 1.92 acres. The site plan indicates the hours of operation are from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm six days per week. The site lighting is proposed as low level and directional, directed inward to the site. The building construction is proposed as tilt wall, 10-foot concrete and 10-foot metal walls with a metal roof. The site is currently zoned I-1, Industrial Park District which requires site plan review by the Planning Commission prior to development A single sign is proposed at the intersection of Shackleford Road and Clearwater Drive. The site plan indicates the sign will be consistent with signage allowed in industrial zones or a maximum of 30-feet in height and 72 square feet in area. The wall signage is proposed to comply with the Zoning Ordinance requirements or a maximum of ten percent of the façade area. The site plan indicates a maximum building coverage of 47 percent. The Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum coverage of 50 percent. The indicated building coverage is adequate to meet the ordinance requirement. The site plan indicates the placement of three dumpsters on the site. A note on the site plan indicates the dumpsters will be screened per code requirements. Staff is supportive of the proposed request. The indicated site plan meets most of the minimum requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for I-1, Industrial Park District zoned property with the exception of the land use buffer along the northern perimeter. In staff’s opinion this reduced buffer is not significant since the property to the north will more than likely not develop residentially and will most likely develop with a similar type use. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed site plan subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above agenda staff report. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow a reduced land use buffer along the northern perimeter. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4555-D 6 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the proposed site plan subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the requested variance to allow a reduced land use buffer along the northern perimeter. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: Z-5097-J NAME: Murphy Oil Zoning Site Plan Review LOCATION: 23800 Chenal Parkway DEVELOPER: Murphy Oil USA 200 Peach Street – P.O. Box 7000 ElDorado, AR 71731-7000 ENGINEER: CEI Engineering, Inc. 3317 SW “I” Street Bentonville, AR 72712 CURRENT ZONING: C-3, with conditions - General Commercial District with site plan review. ALLOWED USES: General Commercial PROPOSED ZONING: C-3, with conditions - General Commercial District with site plan review. PROPOSED USE: C-3, General Retail –Murphy Oil fueling station outdoor display VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On December 20, 1988, the Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 15,603, which rezoned several tracts of land as a part of the Deltic Master Plan from Residential zoning to various multi-family, office and commercial zoning districts. That action rezoned 7.860 acres located at the southeast corner of Highway 10 and Chenal Parkway from R-2 to C-3. The approval of the C-3 zoning was conditioned upon a site plan review, by the Planning Commission, prior to development and a provision of a 40-foot landscaped setback adjacent to Highway 10 and the Chenal Parkway. Ordinance No. 16,459 rezoned additional properties contained within the proposed site. The Ordinance was approved by the Board of Directors on July 20, 1993, and rezoned 8.7051 acres from R-2 to C-3, General Commercial. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5097-J 2 Ordinance No. 18,628, adopted by the Board of Directors on January 2, 2002, rezoned an additional 10.92 acres from R-2 to C-3, General Commercial. This area was to the south of the C-3 zoned property and adjacent to Chenal Parkway. At the time of rezoning the applicant also requested and was approved rezoning further south. The zoning approved was O-2 on 10 plus acres adjacent to the Parkway and 10 plus acres of OS zoning nearer the single-family neighborhood to the east. As a condition of the 1988 zoning, approximately six (6) acres of the site was subject to site plan review. The applicant submitted a proposed site plan for review by the Little Rock Planning Commission at their October 31,2002, Public Hearing. The Commission approved the proposed site plan with a modification to the pole height of the proposed lighting in the parking lot. The applicant intended to develop the 28.4 acres as a 210,396 square foot Wal-Mart Super center, associated parking and service areas. The parking lot consisted of 988 parking spaces, including 24 handicap accessible parking spaces. Two driveways were to provide access to the proposed project from Cantrell Road and two driveways from Chenal Parkway. The southernmost driveway on Chenal Parkway would align opposite Northfield Drive and was proposed to be signalized. This drive would be a shared drive with the currently undeveloped property to the south (zoned O-2), thus helping to limit future access points on the Parkway. On May 11, 2004, the Little Rock Planning Commission approved a request to allow the placement of a gas station on Lot 4 of the proposed Chenal Valley Phase 2 Commercial Subdivision. The applicant indicated the station would include two 20,000-gallon tanks located on the southwest corner of the canopy. There would be eight fuel islands, and two of these islands were for diesel fuel only. A large landscape berm was provided on the west side of the lot to help screen the lot from the residential area across Chenal Parkway. The applicant proposed a dumpster that would be enclosed in brick with wooden doors with a maximum height of six feet. The canopy columns would be wrapped in the same type brick that was proposed for the Wal-Mart Super center. The proposed site plan included the placement of a single location for dispensing air and water, a separate location for a phone booth and ice machine. The applicant indicated a single ground mounted sign located near the northern drive and a sign easement for the Wal-Mart signage on proposed Lot 4. The applicant indicated wall signage to include a logo sign fronting Chenal Parkway and pricing information signage on the Chenal Parkway façade of the canopy. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now proposing to revise the previously approved site plan for Lot 4 to allow the placement of two outdoor displays cases containing automotive products and two outdoor storage bins containing soft drinks. The applicant has February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5097-J 3 indicated all other aspects of the development remain as were previously approved. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is developed with a Murphy Fuel Station. The area to the north is a branch bank facility and the area to the east is a Wal-Mart Super Center. Chenal Parkway has been constructed to Master Street Plan standard adjacent to the site. Other uses in the area include a Quick Stop Service Station on the northwest corner and mini-warehouses on the northeast corner of Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway. The southwest corner of Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway is zoned C-3, General Commercial and is currently undeveloped. Vacant O-2 zoned property is located to the south of the site with OS zoned property located between the office zoning and the single-family residential located further southeast. South and west of the proposed development are also single-family residences adjoining vacant O-2 and C-2 zoned property across Chenal Parkway. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. The Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association, the Bayonne Place Property Owners Association, the Margeaux Property Owners Association, the Pinnacle Neighborhood Association, the DuQuesne Place Property Owners Association and all owners of property located within 200-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: No comment. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: No comment. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5097-J 4 Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located near CATA Bus Route #25 – the Highway 10 Express Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (January 26, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the development indicating there were few outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff questioned if the boxes could be relocated away from the main drive to reduce any potential conflicts. The applicant stated moving the boxes to the north and/or south sides of the buildings was acceptable. Staff also questioned the products sold in the automotive display cases. The applicant stated typical automotive products such as antifreeze, oil, transmission fluid and washer fluid. The applicant stated these products were offered as a service to the customers and were a very small portion of the overall sales for the site. Staff noted there were no comments from the other reporting departments and agencies. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing the concerns raised at the January 26, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has relocated the soft drink storage bins to the north and south sides of the existing kiosk increasing the driveway width to the original approval and reducing the visual clutter in this area. The applicant has indicated planter boxes around the pump islands. The site plan notes the planter boxes are not a part of the immediate development plans and will be constructed in a future phase. According to the applicant the desire is to place the planter boxes on the site to aid in reducing the appearance of paving on the site. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5097-J 5 The applicant has indicated the automobile display cases contain products for customers as a convenience item. Items provided include a small quantity of anti-freeze, oils, windshield wiper fluid, transmission fluid, brake fluid and wiper blades. Staff is supportive of the request. The applicant has indicated the placement of outdoor storage boxes and displays on the site to offer items for sale the customers as a convenience. With the relocation of the drink storage bins to the north and south of the kiosk and the opening of the driveway staff feels the placement of these items on the site will have minimal impact on the site as well as adjoining properties. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above agenda staff report. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 9 FILE NO.: Z-4343-Q NAME: The Ranch Tract D Short-form PCD LOCATION: On the Northwest corner of Cantrell Road and Ranch Boulevard DEVELOPER: FCC Tract D Partnership 900 South Shackleford Road, Suite 300 Little Rock, AR 72211 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 1.55 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 L.F. CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District ALLOWED USES: General Commercial Uses PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: C-3, General Commercial District VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing the rezoning of this site from C-3, General Commercial District to PCD to allow the future development of the site with a building not to exceed 10,000 square feet and 74 parking spaces. The applicant has indicated should the end user be a restaurant use the maximum building square footage would be 7,300 square feet. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is grass covered and the topography is relatively flat. There are commercial, office and public institutional uses in the area to the east and north of the site. To the south of the site is a new strip commercial center located on February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-Q 2 the corner of Chenonceau Boulevard and Cantrell Road. Also to the south of the site is a single-family subdivision; Chevaux Court. West of the site is vacant property and northwest of the site is a multi-family development. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. All residents who could be identified located within 300-feet of the site, all property owners located within 200-feet the site along with the Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association, the Johnson Ranch Neighborhood Association, the Margeaux Place Property Owners Association and the Pinnacle Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: 1. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 2. Storm water detention will apply to the proposed development. Ranch Properties has provided a regional detention facility for the Ranch Development. 3. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 4. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. A ramp should be installed at the intersection of Ranch Boulevard and Cantrell Road. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all connections including metered connections off the private fire system. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the required February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-Q 3 placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). Fire Department: Install fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located near CATA Bus Route #25 – the Highway 10 Express Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Pinnacle Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial District for C-3 uses. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial on the Master Street Plan and Ranch Boulevard is shown as a Local Street. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Cantrell Road since it is a Principal Arterial. Local Streets (Ranch Boulevard), which are abutted by non-residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes, are considered as “Commercial Streets”. These streets have a design standard the same as a Collector. Bicycle Plan: The closest bike route is one that is along Chenonceau Boulevard and Cantrell Road west of Chenonceau Boulevard. This site is about 850 feet to the west. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. Landscape: Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. The deletion of one parking space along the western perimeter of the site is needed to allow for the twenty-five (25’) foot wide landscape strip per requirement of the Highway 10 Design Overlay. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-Q 4 Interior islands are to be evenly distributed throughout the parking area(s). An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this tree-covered site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (January 26, 2006) Mr. Tim Daters and Mr. Joe White were present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff questioned the proposed uses of the site. Mr. Daters stated the developers were proposing C-3, General Commercial District uses but if a restaurant developed on the site the building footprint would be limited to the available parking. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated detention had been provided with previous developments. Staff also stated any broken sidewalk, curb or gutter would require replacement prior to occupancy. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the indicated landscaping was not adequate to meet the typical minimum requirement along the western perimeter of the site. Staff stated with the removal of one parking space the minimum requirement could be met. Staff stated compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances would be required at the time of development. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the January 26, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the hours of operation in the general notes section of the proposed site plan, the proposed uses of the development and the proposed signage for the development. A single dumpster has been located on the site with a note concerning the required screening per code requirements. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-Q 5 The applicant has indicated the hours of operation will be from 5:00 am to 2:00 am seven days per week. The applicant has indicated the hours are necessary to accommodate a restaurant user providing breakfast, lunch and dinner service. The applicant has indicated a single ground mounted monument style sign not to exceed six feet in height and seventy-two square feet in area. The sign is proposed in the landscaped area near the intersection of Ranch Boulevard and Cantrell Road. The indicated signage is consistent with signage allow in the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The applicant has indicated the development will utilize C-3, General Commercial District uses as allowable uses for the site. The site plan includes the placement of a 10,000 square foot building footprint and 73 parking spaces. According to the site plan if the development is constructed as a restaurant use the maximum building area will be 7,300 square feet. The applicant has indicated the proposed use will comply with the minimum required off-street parking requirement as defined in Section 36-502. The site plan indicates the placement of a 50-foot landscape easement along Highway 10. The Highway 10 Design Overlay District requires the placement of a 40-foot landscaped area. The indicated landscaping along Highway 10 is more than adequate to meet typical minimum ordinance requirements. The Highway 10 Design Overlay District requires the placement of a 25-foot landscape strip along the side property lines. The site plan indicates the removal of one of the parking spaces along the western perimeter of the site, as recommended by staff, to comply with this minimum requirement. Site lighting and parking lot lighting are to be designed and located in such manner so as not to disturb the scenic appearance preserved in the Highway 10 Corridor. Lighting should be directed to the parking areas and not reflected into the adjacent properties. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The indicated site plan has been designed consistent with the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The maximum building height noted is 35-feet and building setbacks are indicated at 100-foot front yard, 30-foot side yards and 40-foot rear yard. The indicated uses are consistent with uses located in the area. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff feels if the site is developed as proposed there should be minimal impact on the adjoining properties. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-Q 6 I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above agenda staff report. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 10 FILE NO.: Z-4343-R NAME: Parkland Heights Long-form PD-R LOCATION: 6800 Chenonceau Boulevard DEVELOPER: ARD Real Estate LLC - Dr. Shabbir Dharamsey 7200 South Hazel Street Pine Bluff, AR 71603 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 ARCHITECTS: Williams and Dean Architects 18 Corporate Hill Drive Little Rock, AR 72205 AREA: 18.4 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 L.F. CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R PROPOSED USE: Townhouse/Condominiums Development – 102 Units VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A deferral of the Master Street Plan requirement for the construction of Patrick Country Road for five years or until adjacent development. BACKGROUND: On November 29, 1994, the Planning Commission reviewed and approved a site plan for the development of a 260-unit apartment complex just south of this site. The development included eleven buildings and a clubhouse/office building. The development was never constructed. Also approved by the Board of Directors was an February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-R 2 Ordinance (Ordinance No. 16,814 dated December 20, 1994) to amend the Master Street Plan and to allow a waiver of the Subdivision requirements with regard to double frontage lots (S-285-S). The Master Street Plan amendment included the deferral of the requirement to provide Master Street Plan improvements on Patrick Country Road. The deferral was approved to allow the developer to construct the Master Street Plan required widening when one of the following occurred: 1) any additional development (exclusive of the apartment development on Tract G) which abuts or takes access to Patrick Country Road at the southwest corner of the Ranch, Tract G; 2) any development within the Ranch along Patrick Country Road south of said creek; 3) development of over 50% of the office tract in The Ranch at the northeast corner of Patrick Country Road and Highway 10; 4) extension of any street from the Ranch to Patrick Country Road. On May 1, 2003, the Little Rock Planning Commission approved a site plan review for the proposed construction of 260 apartment units on 15.1 acres located immediately south of the proposed site. The site was proposed as a limited access with the placement of gates along Chenonceau Boulevard. The applicant was granted a deferral of boundary street improvements to Patrick Country Road based on the previous commitment. Since no access from the apartments was being proposed the deferral approved in 1994 was extended to the proposed development. On January 20, 2005, the developer requested to revise the agreement for the Master Street Plan requirement to allow the development of Tract E-2 and allow the construction of an access drive onto Patrick Country Road along the north side of Tract E-2 without constructing the entire roadway. Tract E-2 is located on the Northeast corner of Cantrell Road and Patrick Country Road. The developer proposed to construct the required improvements adjacent to Tract E-2 as a part of the proposed final platting or approximately 250-feet from Cantrell Road. The developer indicated various development scenarios for the property in the area that would result in a change in status of Patrick Country Road, north of the Baptist Church property located to the west of Tract E. The developer requested additional time for adjacent development to occur which would further dictate the need for the proposed roadway. The Commission allowed an additional two year deferral of the required street improvements to Patrick Country Road to allow the applicant additional time to seek a Master Street Plan amendment. To date a Master Street Plan amendment has not been filed. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing the development of 84 two story town homes ranging from 2,024 square feet to 2,220 square feet and 18 one and a half story condominiums ranging from 2,460 to 3,130 square feet. Amenities include a 2,500 square foot clubhouse, pool, putting green, playground half-court basketball, and walking and biking path. The project is to be constructed in two phases with the first phase to include the site improvements, grading, roads, and infrastructure, (18) condominiums, (34) townhouse and the complete amenities February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-R 3 package. The second phase will be the completion of the remaining 50 town homes. The proposal includes the utilization of Patrick Country Road for construction access for the development for the Phase II development. The developer is requesting a five year deferral of the required street improvements to Patrick Country Road as a part of the application request. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is tree covered located at the current terminus of Chenonceau Boulevard. There is a single-family subdivision located to the east of the site and apartments located to the south of the site. The remainder of the area is undeveloped and currently zoned R-2, Single-family. Patrick Country Road located along the western boundary is an unimproved narrow roadway with open ditches for drainage. South of the site is a private school. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area resident. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site, all residents located within 300-feet of the site who could be identified and the Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association, the Johnson Ranch Neighborhood Association, the Margeaux Place Property Owners Association and the Pinnacle Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: 1. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per Section 8-283 prior to construction. 2. The minimum Finish Floor elevation of 265 feet is required to be shown on plat and grading plans. 3. Patrick Country 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. 4. With site development, provide the design of Patrick Country Road conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to the street including 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development. 5. Damage to Patrick Country Road or other public streets from construction activities must be repaired prior to occupancy. Construction cannot use Buckland Drive (residential street) for access to the site. 6. A cul-de-sac should be constructed at the end of Chenonceau Boulevard prior to the entrance into development. Existing concrete apron from neighboring development should be removed and tied into a cul-de-sac. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-R 4 7. With the closure of Chenonceau Boulevard, Buckland Road that crosses the creek (floodplain) is the only provided access to the existing subdivision. 8. No residential waste collection service will be provided within development. 9. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 10. Storm water detention will apply to the proposed development. 11. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 12. Street improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Traffic Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction. 13. Obtain permits prior to doing any street cuts or curb cuts. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way. Contact Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield) for more information. 14. Per Section 29-189(d), groups of trees and individual trees that are not to be removed or are located within required undisturbed buffer areas shall be protected during construction by protective fencing and shall not be used for material storage or for any other purpose. 15. Per the land alteration regulations, a minimum strip twenty-five (25) feet wide, undisturbed except for reasonable access, shall be provided along each side of streams having a ten (10) year storm of greater than one hundred fifty (150) cubic feet per second. The twenty-five (25) foot strip shall be measured from the top of bank. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for the project. Capacity Analysis required for this project. Contact Little Rock Wastewater at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A portion of the water lines serving this development will be public mains in easements in order to enhance fire flows and reliability of service in this area. Other water facilities on-site will be private. When meters are planned off private lines, private facilities shall be installed to Central Arkansas Water's material and construction specifications February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-R 5 and installation will be inspected by an engineer, licensed to practice in the State of Arkansas. Execution of Customer Owned Line Agreement is required. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered connections off the private fire system. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Fire Department: Install fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located near CATA Bus Route #25 – the Highway 10 Express Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Pinnacle Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Development Residential for development of condominium and townhouses. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Chenonceau Boulevard is shown as a Local Street on the Master Street Plan. It may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. Local Streets, which are abutted by non-residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes, are considered as “Commercial Streets”. These streets have a design standard the same as a Collector. Bicycle Plan: The closest bike route is one that is along Chenonceau Boulevard and Cantrell Road west of Chenonceau Boulevard. This is about 850 feet to the west. Also, about one quarter of a mile to the northeast is a route along the railroad tracks. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. Landscape: Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-R 6 The area that is shown as a fifty-foot buffer seemingly doesn’t appear to be on the property. Delineation of this fifty-foot area is needed. Fifty foot of undisturbed buffer area is needed next to this residentially zoned property to the east. The buffer ordinance requires that seventy percent (70 %) of this area remain undisturbed. Both the grading plan and the landscaping plan will require this area be delineated as “trees in this area to remain undisturbed”. Property to the north is zoned residential; therefore, the Zoning Ordinance requires an average thirty-four (34’) foot wide land use buffer. The property to the north does not allow for this minimum requirement. The buffer ordinance requires that seventy percent (70 %) of this area to remain undisturbed. Both the grading plan and the landscaping plan will require this area be delineated as “trees in this area to remain undisturbed”. A 50-foot street buffer is required along Patrick Country Road. The property to the north is zoned residential; therefore, a six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the northern perimeter 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. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this tree-covered site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (January 26, 2006) Mr. Joe White and Mr. Tim Daters were present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the development indicating there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff requested the applicant provide all building setbacks and the typical building separation. Staff also requested the applicant indicate any proposed fencing on the site plan. Staff questioned signage, the location of any proposed signage and the total height and area of any proposed signage. Staff also requested the applicant provide the proposed construction materials and maximum building height. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the indicated turn-arounds were not adequate. Staff requested a cul-de-sac be placed at the end of February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-R 7 Chenonceau Boulevard. Staff also requested the applicant provide details of the proposed extension of Buckland Road into the development. Mr. Daters stated the intent was for an emergency access. He stated the construction material would be such that it would appear to be a grass covered area. Staff stated grading permits would be required prior to development and all protected buffers would require fencing prior to any clearing activities. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the northern perimeter did not appear to meet the minimum ordinance requirement for a land use buffer. Staff also stated screening would be required along the northern perimeter of the site adjacent to the residentially zoned properties. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the January 26, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated all building setbacks, the building separation and all proposed fencing. The revised site plan also indicates the proposed sign location and the proposed construction materials of the units. A cul-de-sac has been placed within the development and labeled as an access easement to allow motorist and service vehicles an area to turn-around once Chenonceau Boulevard is no longer connected to Buckland Road. The site plan indicates the construction materials as brick, siding, hardi-board siding and stone with standing seam metal and architectural shingle roofing materials. The clubhouse will contain 3,400 square feet and house the leasing office, fitness room, meeting rooms and a large gathering room. There will not be an on-site manager for the development. The project is to be constructed in two phases with the first phase to include the site improvements, grading, roads, and infrastructure, (18) condominiums, (34) townhouse and the complete amenities package. The second phase will be the completion of the remaining 50 town homes. The developer is proposing to utilize Patrick Country Road for construction access to the site for Phase II of the development. The intent is to provide a hard surface material within the landscape area to provide access to the site for construction and during the final phase of the Phase II construction the paving material will be removed and landscaping will be installed. The application also includes a request for a five-year deferral of the required street improvements to Patrick Country Road. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-R 8 The development is proposed with 84 two-story town homes ranging from 2,024 square feet to 2,220 square feet and 18 one and a half-story condominiums ranging from 2,460 to 3,130 square feet. Each of the units is proposed with a two-car garage accessed from internal drives. The site plan indicates building setbacks from all property lines and landscape buffer areas. The site plan indicates a minimum building setback along the northern and southern perimeter of 70-feet and the minimum setback along the western perimeter of 25-feet. The site plan indicates a 30-foot landscape strip increasing to 40-feet along the northern perimeter of the site. The southern perimeter of the site indicates a 30-foot landscape strip decreasing to 12-feet. The Zoning Ordinance requires an average thirty-four (34’) foot wide land use buffer along the northern perimeter. The indicated buffer appears to be adequate. The property located to the southwest is a similar use and is zoned MF-18 which does not require a land use buffer. The applicant has indicated a six-foot screening fence will be placed along the northern perimeter to screen the adjacent single-family zoned property. The indicated 50-foot buffer along the eastern perimeter of the site, abutting the single-family subdivision, has been included in the proposed development. The site plan indicates a 30-foot landscape strip in addition to the 50-foot buffer area. The required street buffer along Patrick Country Road has not been provided. The ordinance would typically require the placement of a 50-foot average street buffer. The site plan indicates a 25-foot building setback and landscaping which does not appear to meet this minimum average requirement. A six-foot fence has been indicated on the site plan around the perimeter of the site. The site plan indicates the fence as opaque and decorative fencing. As noted in Public Works comments per the land alteration regulations, a minimum strip twenty-five (25) feet wide, undisturbed except for reasonable access, shall be provided along each side of streams having a ten (10) year storm of greater than one hundred fifty (150) cubic feet per second. The twenty-five (25) foot strip shall be measured from the top of bank. The site plan does not indicate the top of the bank therefore it is difficult to tell the allowed location of the fence. Staff recommends the previous comment be adhered to when the fence is placed along the stream located to the south. As stated the site plan includes the placement of a cul-de-sac within the applicant’s property to act as a turn-around for Chenonceau Boulevard. An emergency access has been indicated at the west end of Buckland Road. The access has been indicated with a crash gate through the fence and a geotextile grid with solid sod for the driving surface. The developers have indicated access to the adjoining subdivision will be provided through the subdivision should there be damage to the bridge that currently serves this neighborhood. Staff has February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-R 9 concerns with terminating the connection of Buckland Road/Chenonceau Boulevard. The only access to the single-family subdivision located to the east of this development is across a bridge which is located over a floodway. Staff is concerned that if this bridge is closed the persons in the subdivision will not have an entrance or exit to their homes. The site plan indicates a single ground mounted sign located near the entrance to the development. The site plan indicates the signage will comply with signage allowed in multi-family zones or a maximum of six feet in height and twenty-four square feet in area. The site plan also indicated a maximum building height of 35-feet. The indicated building height is typical of building heights located in single-family and multi-family zoning districts. The development is proposed at a density of 5.5 units per acre. The indicated density is somewhat similar to allowable densities of single-family development. The site indicates a total building coverage of 207,800 square feet or 25.8 percent and a total landscaped area of 381,840 square feet or 47.4 percent. The Planned Residential District Zoning District typically requires a minimum of ten to fifteen percent of the site be designated as common usable open space and single-family, duplex, zero lot line and townhouse developments are to have a minimum of five hundred square feet of usable private open space per unit. The indicated open space is more than adequate to meet this minimum standard. Each of the units have been designed with a two car garage and additional surface parking spaces have been provided through-out the development to serve as guest parking. Eight parking spaces have been indicated around the clubhouse/pool facility to provide parking for visitors of this amenity. Although, staff is supportive of the development concept, staff is not supportive of the request as filed. Staff has concerns with the applicant’s request for a five-year deferral of the improvements to Patrick Country Road. As indicated in the Background Section of this report the applicant was given a two-year deferral in January 2005, to allow construction of the roadway or a Master Street Plan amendment be filed. Over the past several years there have been a number of deferral requests granted for the construction of Patrick Country Road and staff feels the roadway should be constructed or the applicant should file the previously indicated Master Street Plan amendment to remove Patrick Country Road from the Master Street Plan as a collector street. Staff is supportive of the allowance of a one-year deferral of the street improvements to coincide with the deferral request granted in January 2005. Staff also has concerns with the construction traffic accessing the site from Patrick Country Road. A bridge located on Patrick Country Road is currently substandard and in need of reconstruction. Staff fears with the construction February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-R 10 traffic utilizing this bridge the condition of the bridge will only worsen and could potentially become unsafe and inpassable for motorists. Staff feels the required street buffer along Patrick Country Road should be provided. The purpose and intent of the buffer ordinance states the article is designed to provide for the establishment of livability, green open space and maximum required visual screening between dissimilar uses and public thoroughfares. The property to the west will develop as an office use and the required buffer will offer separation and protection to the future owners of the proposed condominiums. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) Mr. Tim Daters was present representing the request. There were objectors present. Staff presented the item indicting modifications had been made to the application request and staff was now supporting the proposed development. Staff stated the applicant had indicated a planting plan for the northern buffer which exceeded ordinance requirements. Staff also stated the applicant had provided a cul-de-sac at the end of Chenonceau Boulevard which meet current City standards. Staff stated the applicant was no longer requesting access to Patrick Country Road for construction of the Phase II portion of the development and the applicant was no longer requesting a deferral of the street improvements other than the one year which was previously approved. Staff presented a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above agenda staff report. Mr. Tim Daters addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. He stated the development was an owner occupied development which would develop as residential housing for 102 families. He stated the site had forty foot of fall and the developers were requesting to grade the land use buffer area. He stated the developers would identify and retain as many mature trees as feasible within the buffer area. He stated the development would have a three to one slope along the northern perimeter and no retaining walls were proposed other than those necessary to save trees. Mr. Sam Storthz addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated his property adjoining the site to the north. He stated his property contained 174 acres and the only access was from Patrick Country Road. He stated the density of the area was rural and not developed with intense densities. He stated his property was located in the County and no improvements were located on the property. He stated his desire was to develop luxury single-family homes on the site. He stated a portion of the February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-R 11 property was steep which would not allow smaller lot sizes. Mr. Storthz stated his desire was for additional buffer areas. He requested the developers provide a 45-foot buffer along the northern perimeter and to provide the seventy percent of undisturbed as required by the ordinance. He stated based on elevation changes a six foot fence would not offer protection to the future lots and requested the developer provide an eight foot fence. He stated a fifty-foot buffer was being requested along Patrick Country Road as required by the current ordinance. He stated he had not seen grading plans for the proposed development and stated without grading plans he did not know how his property would be affected. He stated he was agreeable to the allowance of a one year deferral of the required street improvements to Patrick Country Road as was being requested by the developer. Ms. Phyllis Storthz addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated the developers were not providing sufficient buffering. She stated along the east side of the development a fifty foot undisturbed buffer along with a thirty foot landscape strip was being provided. She stated the developers were only proposing a thirty foot strip for a portion of the site and a forty foot strip along the remainder of the northern perimeter. She questioned the developers intent of the street buffer along Patrick County Road. Staff stated the developer was required an average of fifty feet and no less than one-half the fifty foot requirement or twenty-five feet and the allowance of a thirty percent transfer to another portion of the site. Staff stated the indicated plan would meet the required street buffer. There was a general discussion between the Commission and the Storthz’s concerning the future development of their property and at what stage in the planning process they were in. Mr. Storthz stated plans had been drawn for development but they were not ready to begin development at this point. The Commission questioned if the property was located in the City or County. Mr. Storthz stated the property was located in the County. Mr. Tim Daters once again addressed the Commission. He stated the proposed cut areas would be sodded and stabilized. He stated the developers were intending to place plantings within the buffer area that exceeded ordinance requirements. He stated the development would have gates located internally which would only be closed at night. The Commission questioned storm water detention. Mr. Daters stated the Ranch Development planned for storm water detention during the early during the planning process. He stated oversized pipes were put in place and bridges were designed to handle development flows post development. A motion was made to approve the request. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z-5038-I NAME: Seven Acres Business Park Revised Long-form POD LOCATION: On the Southwest corner of Cantrell Road and Seven Acres Drive DEVELOPER: Bank of Little Rock 10 Otter Creek Court, Suite A Little Rock, AR 72210 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 319 President Clinton Avenue, Suite 202 Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 2.60 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: POD ALLOWED USES: O-1, Quiet Office Uses PROPOSED ZONING: Revised POD PROPOSED USE: O-1 Quiet Office Uses – Placement of a six foot fence along the southern property line. VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: The Little Rock Board of Directors by Ordinance No. 16,319, adopted on December 15, 1992, established the Seven Acres Business Park containing four lots. This followed a recommendation of approval by the Planning Commission on November 3, 1992. The approved POD allowed office/showroom/warehouse uses on all lots except Lot 1. The building on Lot 1 was to be used for accessory commercial uses. On February 20, 1996, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,118, amending the POD to allow the Golden Collision Center (auto repair business) to be constructed on Lot 4. An Alltel cellular tower and Comcast cable equipment building were approved for placement on Lot 4 at a later date. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5038-I 2 On July 7, 1998, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,764 amending the site plan for Lots 1 and 2. The office, showroom/warehouse building for Lot 2 was increased to 17,114 square feet in area and the revised plan maintained the 50 foot landscape buffer along the west property line. On December 20, 1999, the Little Rock Board of Directors approved Ordinance No. 18,161 amending the site plan for Lot 2. Lot 2 was subdivided into two lots with separate buildings on each lot. The total area for the two buildings was 12,816 square feet, a decrease from 17,764 square feet that was previously approved for Lot 2. The 50-foot wide landscape area along the west property line was maintained. The Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request to revise the previously approved site plan for Lot 1 only on January 3, 2002. The applicant proposed to develop Lot 1 of Seven Acres Business Park with an office/commercial development. The development would have consisted of all office uses facing Cantrell Road and a mini-storage development to the rear. The applicant proposed mini-storage in four separate buildings ranging from 20 feet x 150 feet to 20 feet x 185 feet. The site also contained a resident manager office and apartment (1880 square feet) for the mini- storage facility. There were 42 parking spaces proposed as a part of the development. On January 6, 2004, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 19,019 amending the previously approved POD for Seven Acres Business Park. The applicant proposed to split Lot 1 of the Seven Acres Business Park into two separate parcels. Each individual lot would contain a building to be used as an office use. Lot 1A would contain a bank building with drive-through lanes and Lot 1B would contain a mortgage company. The applicant indicated O-1, Quiet Office District uses as alternate uses for each lot. Lot 1A was proposed at 1.11 acres with a proposed building square footage of 2,888 with a proposed expansion area of 2,598. The applicant indicated 38 parking spaces on the lot. The maximum building height proposed was 25.0 feet. Lot 1B was proposed at 1.30 acres and building square footage of 3,975 and a 2,601 square foot expansion area. The applicant indicated 53 parking spaces to be contained on Lot 1B. The maximum building height proposed for Lot 1B was also 25.0 feet. These two lots have developed as were previously proposed. The expansion area has not been developed but remains as a request for potential future development. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to revise the previously approved POD to allow the placement of a six foot wood fence along the southern perimeter of Lots 1A and 1B. All requirements of the previous approval remain in effect with the current request. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5038-I 3 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is developed with a branch bank facility and a mortgage company. All the lots within the Seven Acres Subdivision have developed. The uses include; an auto collusion repair business, an office/warehouse showroom, an office building with two suites and the bank and mortgage company located on the lots currently under review. There is a wireless communication facility tower located on the south property line of this site. Other uses in the area include single-family residences immediately to the west of the site along Bella Rosa Drive and Cantrell Road to the north. There is a landscaping nursery to the east of the site. A creek and floodway are located along the south property line of this subdivision. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: All property owners within 200 feet of the site, all residents within 300 feet of the site who could be identified and the Westchester Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public Hearing. As of this writing, staff has received one phone call in opposition to the request from an adjoining property owner and one phone call requesting additional information. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: No comment. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. Fire Department: Install fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located near CATA Bus Route #25 – the Highway 10 Express Route. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5038-I 4 F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Transition for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision of a Planned Office Development for fencing changes. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial on the Master Street Plan and Seven Acres Drive is shown as Local Street. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Cantrell Road since it is a Principal Arterial. Local Streets (Seven Acres Drive), which are abutted by non-residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes, are considered as “Commercial Streets”. These streets have a design standard the same as a Collector. Bicycle Plan: There is a Class I Bike route on the north side of Cantrell Road along the creek. A Class I bikeway is built separate from or alongside a road. Additional paving and right of way may be required. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. Landscape: Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. The fence is to be six feet in height, opaque, and face side directed outward. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (January 26, 2006) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. Staff presented the item indicating there were no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: There were no outstanding issues associated with the request remaining from the January 26, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant is proposing the placement of a six (6) foot wood fence along the southern property February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5038-I 5 line of the existing development. The site plan notes the fence will be constructed with the decorative or face side toward the property located to the south. The applicant has indicated the fence will not be placed within any required building setbacks. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. Typically fence placement is allowed on property lines to act as screening and buffering from adjoining properties. The property to the south would not typically require screening or buffering since the property is zoned POD and is currently developed as an office use. The developer has indicated the fencing is desired to enhance the property and provide additional security. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the request. Staff does not feel the placement of a fence in this location will negatively impact the adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There was one registered objector present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above agenda staff report. Mr. Pat McGetrick addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant. He stated the owners of the property were requesting the placement of a six-foot wood fence along their southern property line to enhance their development. He stated if the property were not zoned POD the developers would be allowed the placement of the fence by- right. Mr. Doug Becker addressed the Commission in opposition. He stated his property was located behind the bank facility and the proposed fence would be located forty feet from his front door. He stated currently he looked out and could see Cantrell Road. He stated with the fence he would be looking at a six-foot fence all day long. He stated he would support the placement of a six-foot fence along the portion of the property which did not front his property lowering to a three foot fence in front of his property. He stated with a six-foot fence in front of his property security would be a concern for his building. He stated the street ended at his development and there was little activity within the development at night. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5038-I 6 The Commission questioned Mr. McGetrick as to the need for the fence. Mr. McGetrick stated the bank wanted the fence to improve the appearance of their site. He stated the fence would be a two-sided shadow box fence. There was a general discussion concerning the fence and the need for the fence. The Commission indicated there would be an impact on the adjoining property if the fence were allowed. A motion was made to approve the request. The motion failed by a vote of 2 ayes, 9 noes and 0 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 12 FILE NO.: LU06-08-02 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Central City Planning District Location: Roosevelt Road to 24th, Summit to Battery Request: Public Institutional to Multifamily Source: Yael West, Fennell Purifoy Hammock Architects PROPOSAL / REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the Central City Planning District from Public Institutional to Multifamily. Multifamily represents residential development of ten (10) to thirty-six (36) dwelling units per acre. The application is for a Planned Development Residential for a 32 unit multifamily development. On Friday January 20, 2006, Staff received a letter requesting this item be withdrawn from consideration. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends the item be withdrawn without prejudice. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) This item was placed on the consent agenda for withdrawal. By a vote of 10 for, 0 against and one absent the consent agenda was approved as recommended. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 12.1 FILE NO.: Z-5445-B NAME: Mitchell Place Short-form PD-R LOCATION: 2410 South Battery Street DEVELOPER: Neighborhood Builder, Inc. 2121 Watt Street, Suite 1620 Little Rock, AR 72227 ARCHITECT: Fennell, Purifoy, Hammock Architects 111 Center Street, Suite 1620 Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 2.5 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 zoning lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-4, Two-family District ALLOWED USES: One and two family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R PROPOSED USE: 32 units multi-family housing VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. The applicant submitted a request dated January 20, 2006, requesting this item be withdrawn from consideration. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s requested withdrawal. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There was one registered objector present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request dated January 20, 2006, requesting this item be withdrawn from consideration. Staff stated they were supportive of the applicant’s requested withdrawal. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Withdrawal. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 13 FILE NO.: Z-6019-C NAME: GMAC Revised Long-form POD LOCATION: On the Southwest corner of LaGrande Drive and Chenal Parkway DEVELOPER: Deltic Timber Corporation 7 Chenal Club Boulevard Little Rock, AR 72223 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 9.91 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 4 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: POD ALLOWED USES: Office PROPOSED ZONING: Revised POD PROPOSED USE: Office – allow the creation of four additional lots. VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from the Subdivision Ordinance (Section 31-231) to allow the creation of lots without public street frontage. The applicant submitted a request dated February 3, 2006, requesting this item be deferred to the March 30, 2006, public hearing. Staff is supportive of this request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request dated February 3, 2006, requesting the item be deferred to the March 30, 2006, public hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 14 FILE NO.: Z-6453-B NAME: Value Health Short-form PD-R LOCATION: On the Southwest corner of Labette Drive and Barrow Road DEVELOPER: Dr. Betty Orange 5100 West 12th Street Little Rock, AR 72204 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineer 10 Otter Creek Court, Suite A Little Rock, AR 72210 AREA: 6.27 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 L.F. CURRENT ZONING: MF-18 ALLOWED USES: Multi-family – 18 units per acre PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R PROPOSED USE: Senior Assisted Living Facility - 220 units VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. In response to issues raised at the January 26, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting, the applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the technical concerns related to the site layout but has not addressed staff concerns regarding the proposed use of the property. Staff recommends this item be deferred to the March 30, 2006, public hearing to allow the applicant additional time to provide staff with the requesting information concerning the specifics of the proposed use of the site. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated in response to issues raised at the January 26, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting, the applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6453-B 2 addressing most of the technical concerns related to the site layout but had not addressed staff concerns regarding the proposed use of the property. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred to the March 30, 2006, public hearing to allow the applicant additional time to provide staff with the requesting information concerning the specifics of the proposed use of the site. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 15 FILE NO.: Z-7699-A NAME: Highway 10 Development Revised Short-form POD LOCATION: 16603 and 16623 Cantrell Road DEVELOPER: Hart Lazenby Commercial 11500 Rodney Parham, Suite 15 Little Rock, AR 72212 ENGINEER: Rickett Engineering, Inc. 78 Aberdeen Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 AREA: 2.33 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 zoning lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family and POD ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential and O-3, General Office District uses PROPOSED ZONING: POD PROPOSED USE: O-3, General and Professional Office VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: The Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 19,202 on October 5, 2004, establishing the Highway 10 Development Short-form POD. The applicant proposed to construct a 5,600 square foot two story office building and associated parking on a 0.44 acre lot. Fourteen parking spaces were proposed. The proposed site plan indicated signage consistent with signage allowed in the Highway 10 Design Overlay District or a ground mounted monument style sign a maximum of ten feet in height and one hundred square feet in area. The applicant indicated O-3, General Office uses would be utilized as uses for the site. The office hours were proposed as 8:00 am to 5:00 pm Monday through Friday. The maximum building height proposed was 30-feet. The site plan included the placement of a February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7699-A 2 dumpster on the site along the eastern boundary. The building is currently under construction and near completion. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant now proposes to revise the previously approved POD to expand the developed area to the east by 1.89 acres and to allow the construction of two additional buildings. The proposal includes the construction a single story office/retail building containing 8,456 square feet and a two-story office building containing 7,000 square feet. The site plan indicates a total building square footage of 21,056 square feet for all three buildings with 12,600 square feet of office and 8,456 square feet of retail. The site plan indicates 90 parking spaces. The site contains a total of 101,495 square feet with 61,642 (63.2%) square feet of impervious area and 39,853 (36.8%) square feet of green space. The applicant’s proposed uses for the site are as follows: Existing Building: O-3 uses only, no accessory uses. Proposed Building A: O-3 uses, unlimited accessory uses and the following additional commercial uses: small commercial establishments selling gifts, electronics, phones movies or games, home décor including paint and wallpaper, sporting goods, liquor sales, furniture and tanning Proposed Building B: O-3 uses only, no accessory uses. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a single-family residence and shop building formerly used as a small sandblasting business. There are non-residential uses, office and commercial, located to the west of the site located in the converted single-family structures. To the east of the site is a large vacant tract abutting Cantrell Road and the west leg of Taylor Loop Road. The area south of the site is a newly developing single-family subdivision accessed from South Katilus Road. There have been homes constructed along the western and southern boundary of the site. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: The Johnson Ranch Neighborhood Association, the Margeaux Property Owners Association, the Pinnacle Neighborhood Association, all residents located within 300-feet of the site and all owners of property located within 200-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. As of this writing staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7699-A 3 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: 1. Cantrell Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial. Dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline will be required. 2. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. 3. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. 4. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan will be required per Section 29-186 (e). 5. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 6. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 7. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The lots must share a single driveway access near the contiguous property line. The width of driveway must not exceed 36 feet. 8. Shared access easements must be provided. 9. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for the project. Contact the Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. The facilities on-site will be private. When meters are planned off private lines, private facilities shall be installed to Central Arkansas Water's material and construction specifications and installation will be inspected by an engineer, licensed to practice in the State of Arkansas. Execution of Customer Owned Line Agreement is required. A February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7699-A 4 Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered connections off the private fire system. A water main extension will be required in order to provide service to this property. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #25 – the Highway 10 Express Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Transition for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision of a Planned Office Development for expansion of an existing office development. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial on the Master Street Plan and may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Cantrell Road since it is a Principal Arterial. Bicycle Plan: There is a Class I Bike route on the north side of Cantrell Road along the creek east of the west intersection of Taylor Loop Road about two thirds of a mile to the east. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. Landscape: Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. The proposed land use buffer along the western and eastern perimeter abutting residential property is less than the 25-feet average width required by the Highway 10 Overlay District Ordinance. The buffer ordinance requires that February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7699-A 5 seventy percent (70 %) of this area to remain undisturbed. Both the grading plan and the landscaping plan will require this area be delineated as “trees in this area to remain undisturbed”. The buffer ordinance requires that seventy percent (70 %) of the area along the southern property line also remain undisturbed. The landscape ordinance requires a minimum of eight percent (8 %) of the paved areas be landscaped with interior islands of at least 7 ½ feet in width and 150 square feet in area. The proposed plan does not currently reflect this minimum. Berming is encouraged along Scenic Highway 10. A small amount of building landscaping is also required; however, not shown. A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the eastern, southern, 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. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this tree-covered site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (January 26, 2006) Mr. Mark Rickett was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating there were additional items necessary to compete the review process. Staff stated the site plan indicated the placement of 105 parking spaces, more than adequate to meet the typical minimum parking demand. Staff stated there was concern with the indicated parking along the western perimeter and stated the indicated parking did not allow for sufficient buffering. Staff stated with the removal of the parking the required buffering could be obtained and additional protection offered to the adjacent single-family homes. Staff questioned any proposed fencing. Staff stated all fencing should be indicated on the site plan. Staff also noted the February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7699-A 6 proposed sign height and area should be included on the proposed site plan. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the right-of-way for Cantrell Road should be included on the proposed site plan. Staff noted a dedication of 55-feet from centerline would be required. Staff also stated they were not supportive of two driveway locations. Staff suggested the applicant redesign the existing drive to a maximum of 36-feet and provide a cross access easement. Staff also stated a cross parking agreement would be required if the developer intended to utilize the new parking for the existing building. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed land use buffer along the eastern perimeter abutting the residentially zoned property was less than the required 25-feet. Staff also stated the interior landscaping was not adequate to meet the minimum ordinance requirements. Staff stated a small amount of building landscaping would be required and requested the applicant indicated building landscaping on the site plan. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the technical issues raised at the January 26, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has removed the proposed parking along the western perimeter of the site, indicated the proposed fencing and provided details of the proposed signage on the site plan. The revised site plan also indicates a 30-foot building setback and a 25-foot landscape strip along the eastern perimeter. The revised site plan indicates a single drive shared between the two properties as requested by staff. The site plan does not include the placement of any additional signage. The previous approval allowed for the construction of a ground mounted monument style sign not to exceed ten feet in height and one hundred square feet in area. Building signage is to comply with signage allowed in office zones or a maximum of ten percent of the façade area. The revised site plan indicates landscape interior landscape islands adequate to meet the minimum ordinance requirement and a landscape strip around the perimeter complying with the Highway 10 Design Overlay District requirements. The proposal includes a 100-foot building setback adjacent to Cantrell Road, a February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7699-A 7 40-foot rear yard setback and a 30-foot side yard setback along the eastern perimeter. The indicated setbacks comply with the minimum setback requirements to the Highway 10 Design Overlay District standard. The site plan indicates the expansion of the previously approved POD to increase the area by 1.89 acres and allow the construction of two additional buildings. The site plan indicates the construction of a single story retail building (utilizing the uses indicated in paragraph A of this report) located adjacent to Cantrell Road and a two story office building located at the southeast corner of the site. The retail building has been indicated with a total of 8,456 square feet and the office building with 7,000 square feet. A single dumpster has been located on the site along the eastern perimeter of the site. The applicant has indicated a note concerning the required screening and no hours have been placed on the service hours of the dumpster. The site plan indicates a total area of 101,495 square feet, a building area of 21,056 (20.8%) square feet, parking area of 43,040 (42.4%) square feet and landscaped area of 39,853 (36.8%) square feet. The site plan includes the placement of 90 parking spaces. Based on the minimum parking required for an office/retail development 59 parking spaces would typically be required. Although, there are few remaining technical issues associated with the proposed request, staff is not supportive of the applicant’s request. The development is proposed as an office/retail development with 60 percent of the development proposed as O-3 uses and the remaining 40 percent designated as potential retail. As proposed, the entire 8456 square feet of Building A could be developed with the O-3 Accessory (commercial) and specified commercial uses. The site is shown as Transition on the Land Use Plan which does not typically allow retail development. The Transitional Land Use classification allows for residential, both single-family and multi-family, and office uses. Staff feels the office developed in Transition should be compatible with residential uses and be developed as suburban office type developments. The existing office building was constructed as a two story building adjacent to residential property. There were limits placed on the openings of the building adjacent to the homes. The proposed two story office structure will face the back yards of the single-family homes potentially impacting the outdoor livability of these residents. In the past staff has supported the allowance of the ten percent accessory uses as allowed in office zones when appropriate. Staff has traditionally not supported the placement of the commercial activity within a single structure in a multiple building development. The request is to allow the development of a strip center with the pretext of an office development. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7699-A 8 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. Mr. Todd Hart addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. He stated the development was a small scale office development with the allowance of limited commercial activities. He stated the retail uses were the uses allowed in O-3 as accessory uses and a portion of the C-1, Neighborhood Commercial uses. He stated most of the technical issues had been resolved related to the site plan. He provided the Commission with an elevation of the proposed buildings indicating the “retail” building would be constructed with an office look to fit the neighborhood. He stated he did not feel the proposed development would increase the traffic in the area since the retail uses were limited in scale. Ms. Mary Dornhoffer addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated she was the representative of the West Little Rock Collation of Neighborhoods and they were opposed to increasing the commercial activity on Cantrell Road in areas not previously identified as commercial nodes. She stated the objection was to the retail portion of the development. She requested the City adhere to the adopted plan for the Highway 10 Corridor. Mr. Phil Kaplan addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated his home was located in the adjacent subdivision and he was representing the subdivision. He stated currently there were 60 lots approved and 34 homes constructed. He stated the developer was aware some type of non-residential development would occur along Highway 10 but understood the development potential was for office. He stated the project was requesting accessory uses as listed in O-3 but questioned the need for liquor sales. He stated the hours of this type business were not conducive to office hours. He mentioned the 1994 project located immediately west of the proposed site indicating the rezoning of the site was overturned by the Supreme Court. He stated the City had an adopted plan and the proposed site was not located in a commercial node. He stated there was no need for additional commercial zoning in the area since there were a number of sites zoned commercially which were not developed. He stated the developer of Montagne Court was aware office would develop on the site with the proper screening and buffering. Mr. Rice addressed the Commission stating the development was 60% O-1 and 40% O-3 uses. He stated the comparison to an 80,000 square foot box was not a fair assessment. He stated the development would be designed for tenants to have an office or a small scale retail space. He stated the concept of Business Nodes made no since when the Commission approved developments outside the nodes for retail development quiet often. He stated Highway 10 was struggling to find it’s identity and the development should not be so much about the use but how the development fit with the area. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7699-A 9 There was a general discussion concerning the proposed development and the treatment of the rears of the structures. Commissioner Yates questioned the need for the C-1 commercial uses. Mr. Rice stated they were not required and he would amend his application to remove these uses from the application. The Commission questioned Mr. Kaplan as to the neighborhoods stand on the amended application. Mr. Kaplan stated the neighborhood was opposed to the allowance the retail portion of the proposed development. A motion was made to approve the request. The motion failed by a vote of 3 ayes, 8 noes and 0 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 16 FILE NO.: Z-7922-A NAME: Roberts Short-form PCD LOCATION: 2701 West 7th Street DEVELOPER: The Hathaway Group – Todd Rice 1001 North University Avenue Suite 100 Little Rock, AR 72207 ENGINEER: Richburg Service Group 2004 Arkansas Valley Drive, Suite 201 Little Rock, AR 72211 AREA: 0.48 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 zoning lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 L.F. CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District ALLOWED USES: General Commercial PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: Dog daycare and grooming facility VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing the rezoning of 2701 West 7th Street from C-3, General Commercial District to PCD to allow the utilization of the site as a dog daycare and grooming facility offering pet services and retailing of pet supplies. There is to be no outdoor kenneling of any animals at the facility. There will be outdoor pens to allow the pets to exercise and allow staff to clean the indoor facilities during normal business hours. A 2,000 square foot building expansion is proposed adjacent to the existing 1,760 square foot office building. The new building will be constructed as a single story steel building with a metal façade. The new building will house the office and retail portion of the business. The existing structure will accommodate February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7922-A 2 the grooming and indoor kennels. The new building will be constructed adjacent to the north elevation of the existing building, allowing space on the southwest corner of the site for an area for the animals to exercise. Parking will be provided at the existing approach from West 7th Street to a parking lot slightly larger than the existing parking lot. All setbacks and landscape requirements, as prescribed in the PCD will be adhered to. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site has been operated as a general construction office and contractor materials storage yard from the early 1980’s until late 2004. The building is currently vacant. To the east, north and south of the site are industrial development warehouse structures and to the west is a church. There are single-family homes located one block to the west fronting Appianway. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area resident. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site along with the Capitol View Stifft Station Neighborhood Association and the Capitol Hill Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: 1. West 7th Street 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. The proposed land use would classify Jones Street on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 3. A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of West 7th Street and Jones Street. With the site development, provide the design of West 7th Street and Jones Street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvements to these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. 4. Improve corner curb radius to 25 feet with construction (existing radius is 10 feet). 5. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 6. Close existing curb cuts and removed concrete from right-of-way. 7. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield). February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7922-A 3 E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. Fire Department: Install fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located near CATA Bus Route #3 – the Baptist Medical Center Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the I-630 Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Service Trades District for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned District - Commercial for dog daycare and grooming facility. The proposal does not have a significant impact on the Land Use Plan, which would necessitate a Plan Amendment. Master Street Plan: West 7th Street is shown as a Collector on the Master Street Plan and may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. A Collector street’s primary purpose is to link Local Streets and activity centers to Arterials. Bicycle Plan: There is a Class III bike route along West 7th Street. A Class III bikeway is a signed route on a street shared with traffic. No additional paving or right-of-way is required. Class III bicycle route signage may be required. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by both the Stephens Neighborhood Action Plan and the Capital View Stiff Station Plan. The Stephens Plan’s Economic Development section has a goal of “To entice local businesses to locate in the Stephens Area.” This would be a new business locating in the area and could work toward fulfilling this goal. The Capital View Stiff Station Plan’s Private Investment Goal: states February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7922-A 4 “Promote private investment in the neighborhood” with an objective of “Increase commercial investment by forming a Stiff Station commercial area.” This is the most relevant objective in the report. Landscape: Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. Areas set aside for buffer and landscaping appear to meet with the landscape and buffer ordinances. Property to the west is zoned residential; therefore, the zoning ordinance requires a nine (9’) foot wide land use buffer. This is a requirement of both the Zoning Ordinance and the Landscape Ordinance. The buffer ordinance requires that seventy percent (70 %) of this area to remain undisturbed. Both the grading plan and the landscaping plan will require this area be delineated as “trees in this area 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 western perimeter of the site. Credit towards fulfilling this requirement can be given for existing trees and undergrowth that satisfies this year-around requirement. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (January 26, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating there was additional information necessary to complete the review process. Staff requested the applicant provide the total number of “rooms” proposed along with the anticipated number of animals to be kenneled. Staff also requested the applicant provide the days and hours of operation, any dumpster location and signage details. Staff stated the indicated parking was adequate to serve a commercial development based on the typically minimum parking requirement. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated Jones Street and West 7th Streets were indicated on the Master Street Plan as commercial streets. Staff stated improvements to these abutting roadways would be a condition of approval. Staff recommended the applicant contact an engineer to determine the cost of street construction and if the improvements were a substantial portion of redevelopment cost a hardship could be requested. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the indicated landscaping appeared to meet minimum ordinance requirements. Staff stated screening would be required along the western perimeter of the site where the property abutted single-family zoned property. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7922-A 5 Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the January 26, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the total number of rooms, the total number of animals to be kenneled and the days and hours of operation for the proposed use. The applicant has also indicated the proposed dumpster location and the proposed signage to serve the development. The revised cover letter indicates a total of 43 kennels in the 2,010 square foot new building and 20 “overnight suites” will be placed on the site. According to the applicant 60 animals can be boarded during peak times. The applicant has also indicated accommodations for 60 animals for daycare service. A total of 120 animals could be on the site at a time. The cover letter indicates two (2) grooming stations will be located on the site. According to the applicant grooming will account for 4.4 percent of the sales activity. The hours of operation are indicated at 6:00 am to 6:30 pm Monday through Friday and 9:00 am to 12:00 pm on Saturday. No dogs will be kenneled outdoors. The applicant has indicated all outdoor activities will be supervised by staff members and contained within the outdoor play areas. The play areas will be equipped with play equipment including toys and wading pools to allow the dogs to stay cool in the summer months. The dogs will be allowed outdoors in groups of 15 with a maximum of 19 dogs. Bathroom breaks for the boarded animals are scheduled from 5:15 am to 6:15 am, 11:30 am to 12:30 pm, 3:30 pm to 4:30 pm, 7:30 pm to 8:30 pm Monday through Friday. Saturday bathroom breaks are scheduled from 5:15 am to 7:00 am, 10:30 am to 11:00 pm, 11:00 am to 12:30 pm and 8:00 to 9:00 pm. Sunday bathroom breaks are scheduled from 6:15 am to 7:45 am, 12:30 pm to 2:00 pm and 8:00 pm to 9:30 pm. Daycare groups outside activities have been indicated at one hour intervals from 9:00 am to 11:30 am and afternoons from 1:00 pm to 3:30 pm. No daycare activities are scheduled for Saturday or Sunday. Statistics provided by the applicant from the American Boarding Kennel Association indicated the average occupancy rate for dog boarding was 58.76 percent in 2004. Based on these statistics the applicant indicates with a February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7922-A 6 total capacity of 63 dogs boarding, on average they anticipate 37 dogs boarding at one time. The peak months are November and December, when occupancy is at its highest of 70% or 44 dogs. American Boarding Kennel Association statistics for daycare attendance for a facility of the applicant’s size is 62.57 percent with a capacity of 60 animals the maximum attendance would be 38 dogs. Staff is not supportive of the applicant’s request as filed. The site plan indicates the majority of the site being developed with activities including the building and outdoor pens. In addition, staff has concerns with the level of attendance both in boarding and daycare activity (60 boarded and 60 daycare for a total of 120 animals). Seven days a week there will be outdoor activities taking place from 5:15 am to 8:30/9:00 pm. Staff feels this is an intensive use of the site. There are single-family homes located to the southwest of the site and commercial businesses located to the south of the site. The businesses located adjacent to this site do not generate outdoor activity thus do not infringe into the neighborhood. Staff feels this site would be more compatible if developed with a retail use that does not generate this level of outdoor activity. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request dated February 10, 2006, requesting the item be withdrawn from consideration. Staff stated they were supportive of the applicant’s requested withdrawal. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Withdrawal. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 17 FILE NO.: Z-7987 NAME: Pearlstein Short-form PCD LOCATION: On the Northeast corner of West 2nd Street and Schiller Street DEVELOPER: Judy Pearlstein P.O. Box 5010 North Little Rock, AR 72119 ENGINEER: Brooks Surveying 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.16 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 L.F. CURRENT ZONING: I-2, Light Industrial District ALLOWED USES: Light Industrial PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: C-3, General Commercial District uses VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The existing building is currently vacant and zoned I-2, Light Industrial District. There are six parking spaces located along the eastern side of the building. The applicant is proposing a rezoning to Planned Commercial District (PCD) to allow the reuse of the site with residential and commercial activities. The applicant has indicated C-1, Neighborhood Commercial District uses as the base zoning classification as allowable uses for the lower level of the structure and residential for the upper unit. The request includes limits placed on the C-1, Neighborhood Commercial District uses limiting the uses to those which do not generate a great parking demand. The applicant has excluded eating place inside as an allowable February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7987 2 use for the site. However, in conjunction with the bakery or confectionary shop the applicant is requesting the placement of a limited number of tables to allow customers an area to have a cup of coffee along with a pastry. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an existing two story building which appears to have been commercial on the lower level accessed from West 2nd Street and residential on the second level accessed from Schiller Street. West 2nd Street has been constructed to Master Street Plan standard, Schiller Street is a narrow roadway with open ditches for drainage. To the south of the site is a multi-story office building and to the east of the site is a vacant lot. To the north, east and northwest of the site are residential uses appearing to be single-family and two family residences. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site, all residents, who could be identified, located within 300-feet of the site, along with the Capitol View Stifft Station Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: 1. The proposed land use would classify West 2nd and Schiller Streets on the Master Street Plan as commercial streets. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 2. A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of West 2nd and Schiller Streets. 3. With the current location of the driveway, vehicles back into right-of-way creating an unsafe condition. 4. Signs, awnings or any other encroachment into the right-of-way must obtain a franchise permit. Contact John Barr at 371-4646. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7987 3 Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. Due to the nature of this facility, installation of an approved reduced pressure zone backflow preventer assembly (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: Install fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is located near CATA Bus Routes #1 and #8 – the Pulaski Heights CATA Bus Route and the Rodney Parham CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights Hillcrest Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Multi-Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial District for the redevelopment of this site in the existing structure. The proposal does not have a significant impact on the Land Use Plan, which would necessitate a Plan Amendment. This application is an existing structure that housed residential and non-residential uses and the request does not change the size of the structure. Master Street Plan: West 2nd and Schiller Streets are shown as a Local Streets on the Master Street Plan and may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. Local Streets, which are abutted by non-residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes, are considered as “Commercial Streets”. These streets have a design standard the same as a Collector. Bicycle Plan: There is a Class III Bike Route along West Markham Street, one block to the north. A Class III bikeway is a signed route on a street shared with traffic. No additional paving or right-of-way is required. Class III Bicycle Route signage may be required. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Capital View Stiff Station Neighborhood Action Plan. The February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7987 4 Private Investment Goal: “Promote private investment in the neighborhood” listed an objective of “Encourage the utilization of existing business properties in the area rather than duplicate businesses (and business structures) that may or may not be utilized.” The Community Preservation Goal: “Involve all segments of the neighborhood to identify key structures and places, protect them, and enhance them” has an objective of “Preserve housing stock in the neighborhood” and an action statement of “Enact a 'No Net Loss' policy in the neighborhood, that is no net loss of housing units due to changes in land use, etc.” The Community Development Goal: “Plan and implement community development projects that will improve the neighborhood such as rehabilitating older homes, building new infill homes, revitalizing commercial areas or providing needed community facilities: has an objective of “Improve housing in the area around Monarch Mills, the Whitewater and near the Executive building”. This application could work toward fulfilling these goals, objectives, and action statements, by utilizing an existing commercial structure and residential unit. Landscape: Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. All existing paving, therefore, a six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the northern perimeter of the site. Credit towards fulfilling this requirement can be given for existing trees and undergrowth that satisfies this year-around requirement. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (January 26, 2006) The applicant’s son, David Pearlstein, was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview indicating the applicant was requesting C-3 uses as allowable uses for the site. Staff stated the applicant’s cover letter indicated the request was to allow office uses on the top floor. Staff stated they were not supportive of C-3 uses. They felt the uses should be more neighborhood friendly and uses which did not generate a great deal of traffic. Staff also questioned if a dumpster would be located on the site and if so to provide the location along with a note concerning the required screening. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a survey indicating the right-of-way was needed to verify the existing right-of-way for Schiller Street and West 2nd Street. Staff stated Schiller Street would require a 30-foot, from centerline, right-of-way dedication if not currently existing. Mr. Pearlstein stated this could cause the building to be located in the right-of-way. Staff requested an updated survey to verify the right-of-way. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7987 5 Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated screening would be required along the northern perimeter of the site. Staff stated a fence or dense evergreen plantings could be utilized for screening. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant provided additional information to address concerns raised at the January 26, 2006, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated C-1, Neighborhood Commercial District uses as allowable uses for the down stairs portion of the building removing the request for an eating place inside and a single residence in the upstairs portion of the building. The applicant has however requested the placement of a few tables within the building should a bakery or confectionary shop locate in the building. The site contains an existing building with approximately 1,450 square feet of space on the lower level and similar space on the upper level. The site plan also indicates six on site parking spaces. The ordinance would typically require the placement of four (4) on-site parking spaces for retail uses other than a restaurant use. If the site were developed solely as a restaurant use, fourteen (14) parking spaces would typically be required. The residential portion of the development would typically require the placement of one parking space. The hours of operation have been indicated from 6:00 am to 9:00 pm seven days per week. The applicant has indicated without a committed user it is difficult to determine the exact hours of operation but has indicated the hours of a bakery would be the most intense hours to operate from the site. The revised survey indicates a 60-foot right-of-way for West 2nd Street and a 40-foot right-of-way for Schiller Street. Staff had requested a right-of-way dedication for each street at 30-feet from centerline. Staff now feels a dedication of 25-feet on Schiller Street is sufficient. Although the use would classify the street as a commercial street, with the exception of this corner lot, staff does not feel the remainder of the street will develop with commercial uses. The applicant will be required to franchise any projecting signage and/or buildings which are located in the right-of-way. No dumpster nor ground mounted signage has not been indicated on the site plan. As such they will not be permitted. Building signage will comply with signage allowed in commercial zones or a maximum of ten percent of the façade area. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7987 6 I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the following and conditions: 1) Compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E, F and H of the above agenda staff report. 2) Use of the building is to be as follows: a) The second floor is to be a single residential unit. b) The first floor is to be limited to C-1 uses less and except eating place inside. 3) The hours of operation are to be 6:00 am to 9:00 pm seven days per week. If a bakery locates in the building, the hours of operation apply to customer service. 4) If a bakery locates in the building it is permitted to have a maximum seating capacity of 16. 5) No dumpsters or ground mounted signs are permitted. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the following and conditions: Compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E, F and H of the agenda staff report. Staff stated the use of the building is to be as follows: the second floor is to be a single residential unit and the first floor is to be limited to C-1 uses less and except eating place inside. Staff stated the hours of operation are to be 6:00 am to 9:00 pm seven days per week. Staff stated if a bakery located in the building, the hours of operation would apply to customer service. Staff stated if a bakery located in the building it is permitted to have a maximum seating capacity of 16 seats. Staff stated no dumpsters or ground mounted signs were permitted. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 18 FILE NO.: Z-5936-D NAME: The Village at Chenal PCD Revocation LOCATION: On the Northwest corner of Rahling Road and Chenal Parkway DEVELOPER: Deltic Farm and Timber Co. Inc. #7 Chenal Club Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 ENGINEER: White Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 90.52 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PCD ALLOWED USES: Mixed Use Development including, office, residential and commercial PROPOSED ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District, MF-18, Multi-family District and O-2, Office and Institutional District PROPOSED USE: Residential, Commercial and Office VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: The adoption of Ordinance No. 16,851 by the Little Rock Board of Directors on February 21, 1995, approved the site plan for the Village at Chenal. The development plan included a conceptual Planned Commercial Development containing 138.4 acres. The developer proposed a mixture of residential, commercial, office, and civic uses to co-exist in a village setting. Of the total acreage 80.6 acres was proposed for single-family uses, 14.0 acres for multi-family, and 43.5 acres for retail, office and civic. The proposed uses consisted of over 1 million square feet of building areas, exclusive of the building areas of the single-family dwellings. The development was proposed in two principal phases, with development beginning in the areas west of the future “Outer February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5936-D 2 Loop” (Rahling Road) which bisected the site, and involved about ¼ million square feet of multi-family, retail-office and civic building area. Ordinance No. 18,292 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on June 20, 2000, revoked a portion of the PCD zoning. The area located to the south of the proposed “Outer Loop” (Rahling Road) was revoked restoring the previously held C-2, Shopping Center District zoning classification. This site contained 47.88 acres. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant submitted a request dated January 9, 2006, requesting the current PCD zoning of the remaining 90.52 acres be revoked and the previous C-3, General Commercial District, MF-18, Multi-family District and O-2, Office and Institutional District zoning classification be restored. The applicant has indicated the proposed mixed use development will not be constructed on the site as proposed. Per Section 36-454(d) the Owner may for cause request repeal of the ordinance establishing the development. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a wooded site located on the west side of Chenal Parkway at the intersection with Rahling Road. Rahling Road has been constructed east of Chenal Parkway but has not been constructed west of Chenal Parkway. A traffic light has been installed at the intersection of Rahling Road and Chenal Parkway. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site, all residents, who could be identified, located within 300-feet of the site, along with the Parkway Place Property Owners Association and the Margeaux Property Owners Assocaition were notified of the Public Hearing. D. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request for the revocation of the current PCD zoning classification and the restoration of the zoning classification to C-3, O-2 and MF-18. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request for the revocation of the current PCD zoning classification and the restoration of the zoning classification to C-3, O-2 and MF-18. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5936-D 3 There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 19 FILE NO.: Z-7773 NAME: Whispering Hills Short-form PD-R Revocation LOCATION: South of Alexander Road, East of Whispering Hills Drive DEVELOPER: P.E. Investments, LLC 2212 South Broadway Little Rock, AR 72202 ENGINEER: ETC Engineers 1510 South Broadway Little Rock, AR 72202 AREA: 5.09 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 15 FT. NEW STREET: 0 L. F. CURRENT ZONING: PD-R ALLOWED USES: Single-family PROPOSED ZONING: R-2, Single-family PROPOSED USE: Single-family VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 19,271 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on February 1, 2005, established Whispering Hills Short-form PD-R. The rezoning was from R-2 to PD-R to allow the development of a residential subdivision. There were several variances requested with the development of the site therefore the planned development process was utilized. The developer intended to develop the subdivision with 15 single-family homes. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant submitted a request dated January 9, 2006, requesting the current PD-R zoning be revoked and the previous R-2, Single-family District zoning February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7773 2 classification be restored. The applicant has indicated the proposed residential development will not be constructed on the site as proposed. Per Section 36-454(d) the Owner may for cause request repeal of the ordinance establishing the development. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a vacant tree covered site located south of Alexander Road. Access to the site is from Whispering Drive a substandard street surfaced as a “chip-seal” roadway and open ditches for drainage. There is a pond located to the east of the site on an adjoining parcel. To the west of the site is a single-family neighborhood, Whispering Hills Subdivision Phase I. To the south of the site is vacant R-2, Single-family zoned property. North of the site has developed with single-family homes located on large lots accessed by Alexander Road. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents concerning the proposed development. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site, all residents, who could be identified, located within 300-feet of the site, Southwest Little Rock United for Progress and the Alexander Road Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request for the revocation of the current PD-R zoning classification and the restoration of the zoning classification to R-2. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had failed to notify property owners as required by the Commission’s By-laws. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred to the March 2, 2006, public hearing. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 20 FILE NO.: LA-0002 NAME: Winrock Office Add. Advanced Grading Variance LOCATION: 11500 Executive Center Dr.; Westrock Office Add. Lots 10 & 11 APPLICANT: Westrock Partnership ENGINEER: White-Daters & Associates AREA: Approx. 1.8 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 CURRENT ZONING: O-3 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: To clear and grade a multi-lot or multi-phase development where construction is not imminent on all phases of the development. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Applicant is requesting a variance from the Land Alteration Regulations to clear and grade a multi-lot or multi-phase development where construction is not imminent on all phases of the development. The applicant is requesting to clear two (2) wooded lots to balance the fill material between the lots and minimize the haul off. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: These wooded lots total approximately 1.8 acres and are adjacent to Executive Center Drive and Executive Center Court in the Westrock Office Addition between Centerview Drive and Bowman Road. These lots are zoned O-3 and all adjacent properties are zoned office. The properties to the north, west, and south across Executive Center Drive are wooded and undeveloped. Three (3) lots are located east of this property across Executive Center Court. One (1) lot is an office development and the other two (2) are undeveloped wooded lots. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. All property owners located adjacent to this development and across Executive Center Drive and Executive Center Court have been notified. It is unknown if the neighborhood association was notified of the Public Hearing. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0002 2 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: 1. Open areas not planned for immediate use shall be seeded or sodded. Soil which is exposed for more than twenty-one (21) days with no construction activity shall be seeded, mulched or revegetated in accordance with code. 2. A grading permit in accordance with section 29-186 (c) & (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 3. If disturbed area is 1 or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 4. A driveway has already been approved for Lot 11 taking direct access to Executive Center Drive. 5. After grading, all paving, seeding, sodding, or mulching shall be performed in accordance with a reasonable schedule approved by the city official. 6. A perimeter buffer strip shall be temporarily maintained around disturbed areas on the north and west for erosion control purposes and shall be kept undisturbed except for reasonable access for maintenance. The width of the strip shall be six percent (6%) of the lot width and depth. The minimum width shall be twenty-five (25) feet and the maximum shall be forty (40) feet. In no event, shall these temporary strips be less than the width of the permanent buffers required for the development. E. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (January 26, 2006) The applicant was present. Staff explained the Public Works comments and conditions shown in paragraph D. Staff stated the applicant was requesting to clear and grade two (2) lots where construction is not imminent. Applicant said he understand the comments. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. F. ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting to clear two (2) wooded lots totaling approximately 1.8 acres. The applicant requests the variance to minimize the amount of haul off of fill material. The current grading plan shows 11,000 cubic yards of fill material to be balanced on site. The grading plan shows a future parking area on the east side of the lots. Accesses for the lots will be taken at the cul-de-sac of Executive Center Court and directly onto Executive Center Drive. These February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0002 3 locations have been approved by staff. Applicant has told staff construction of one (1) building on one (1) lot and the entire parking area on both lots would occur in the near future but proof of imminent construction has not been provided. Considering the applicant’s request, Section 29-186(b) of the Land Alteration Regulations states no land alteration which includes grading and clearing shall be permitted until construction is imminent. Imminent construction is defined as the installation of a foundation or erection of a structure without reasonable delay following land alteration activities. Since proof of imminent construction has not been provided for either lots, staff is unable to issue a grading permit for clearing and grading. Knowing this, the applicant is requesting a variance as outline in Section 29-187(e). The code pertaining to variances states variances to clear and grade a multi-lot or multi-phase development where construction is not imminent on all phases of the development may be granted to the extent that the change will not be contrary to the purposes set forth in Section 29-168. The purposes set forth in Section 29-168 include to: prohibit the indiscriminate clearing of property; prevent pollution of streams, ponds and other watercourses by sediment; and preserve natural vegetation which enhances the quality of life of the community. As of this writing, staff has not received any comments from area residents or property owners. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this tree-covered site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. If the variance is approved by the Planning Commission, staff feels erosion controls and protective fencing of undisturbed area should be in place prior to any clearing or grading activity commences and the land alteration activities should be conducted in accordance with paragraph D. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval for the grading of both lots in advance of building construction, subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraph D of the above agenda staff report. Immediately following grading activities, all areas not scheduled for construction within 21 days shall be seeded, sodded, mulched or otherwise stabilized from erosion. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: 21 FILE NO.: LA-0003 NAME: Chenal Mini-Storage Wall Height Variance LOCATION: 24400 Chenal Parkway; Northwest Territory Add., Lot 2 APPLICANT: Chenal Mini-Storage ENGINEER: McGetrick & McGetrick AREA: approx. 5 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 CURRENT ZONING: Conditional Use Permit VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Exceed the maximum height of an architectural stone wall allowed by the Land Alteration Regulations, Sec. 29-190(1)(d). A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Applicant is requesting a variance from the Land Alteration Regulations to construct an architectural stone wall to a maximum height of 22 feet high. Sec. 29-190(1)(d) allows a single architectural stone wall to be constructed to a maximum height of 15 feet. All permits for construction have been issued and construction has commenced. The current approved grading plan shows two (2) terraced architectural stone walls to be constructed with each wall less than 15 feet tall. The applicant is requesting to replace the two (2) terraced architectural stone walls with one (1) architectural stone wall. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: This approximate 5 acre site is adjacent to Chenal Parkway north of Hwy 10. A phased conditional use permit was approved for this lot 2 and lot 1 in December, 2000. The first phase of Chenal Mini-Storage was constructed on lot 1 as part of the C.U.P. The undeveloped properties to the east are zoned O-3, C-3 and MF-12. The zoning of the undeveloped property to the north is O-3. The zoning of the undeveloped property to the south is C-3 and a utility substation. The property to the west across Chenal Parkway is zoned C-2 with a P.C.D. on the northwest corner of Chenal Parkway and Hwy 10. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. All property owners located adjacent to this development and across Chenal Parkway. It is unknown if the Chenal Parkway Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public Hearing. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 21 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0003 2 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: 1. Additional information is needed because of discrepancy in existing site layout plan and proposed site layout plan. E. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (January 26, 2006) The applicant was present. Staff stated there was a discrepancy in the location of property lines as shown on the existing plan and proposed plan. Staff stated the applicant was requesting to exceed the maximum wall height requirement of the land alteration regulations. The applicant desires to construct a single architectural stone wall up to a height of 22 feet. The Land Alteration Regulations allow an architectural stone wall to be a maximum height of 15 feet. At this time, plans are approved for the construction of two (2) terraced architectural stone walls each less than 15 feet high instead of the one (1) wall. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. F. ANALYSIS: Construction of phase 2 of Chenal Mini-Storage has begun. All plans including a grading and drainage plan are approved and all permits including a grading permit have been issued. Approved plans show two (2) terraced architectural stone walls to be constructed along the northern property lines to a maximum height of 26 feet with each wall 15 feet or less. The applicant is requesting a variance from the Land Alteration Regulations, Sec. 29-190(1)(d) to construct one (1) architectural stone wall that is approximately 22 feet high at its highest point. This variance request exceeds the code by 7 feet. The Land Alteration Regulations state that variance may be granted by the Planning Commission, to the extent that the change will not be contrary to the purposes set forth in Sec. 29-168. These purposes include: to preserve natural vegetation which enhance the quality of life of the community; to conceal hillside scars; and to preserve the contours of the natural landscape and land forms. Staff has visited the site and believes this wall will not be viewable from Hwy 10, Chenal Parkway, and the neighboring properties. The wall will be viewable from within the development. Currently, a 6-foot wood fence is approved to be placed on the northwest property line. The plans show that with either one (1) or two (2) walls the storage buildings will be constructed in the same location. By replacing the two (2) terraced walls with one (1) wall, less trees will be cleared, less excavation of the hill side is needed, and a wider natural vegetated strip along the northern property lines will remain. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this site. Credit February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 21 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0003 3 toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request to build a single, 22 foot tall wall with no terraces, in lieu of constructing two walls at a maximum height of 15-feet each separated by a landscape terrace. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.