Loading...
pc_08 26 2004sub LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION SUBDIVISION HEARING SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD AUGUST 26, 2004 4:00 P.M. I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present being nine (9) in number. II. Members Present: Pam Adcock Bob Lowry Robert Stebbins Norm Floyd Mizan Rahman Bill Rector Jerry Meyer Fred Allen, Jr. Darrin Williams Members Absent: Gary Langlais Chauncey Taylor City Attorney: Cindy Dawson III. Approval of the Minutes of the July 15, 2004 Meeting of the Little Rock Planning Commission. The Minutes were approved as presented. LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION SUBDIVISION AGENDA AUGUST 26, 2004 I. DEFERRED ITEMS: A. Homes at Granite Mountain Phase II, Long-form PD-R (Z-7604), located on the Northwest corner of Gilliam Park Road and Granite Mountain Circle. B. The Ridges at Nowlin Creek (S-1422), located North of Highway 10 approximately five miles West of the Chenal Parkway intersection. C. Keifer Subdivision Site Plan Review (S-1430), located at 27024 Kanis Road. D. Donnie’s Foreign Car Short-form PD-C (Z-7634), located at 1311 South Bowman Road. E. Rose Street Revised Short-form PD-R (Z-7258-A), located at 321 – 325 Rose Street. F. Parkway West Commons Replat Lots 9R – 11R (S-1292-D), located on Westhaven Drive at the Wynnsong Theater. G. Treadway’s Replat (S-1438), located at 1115 Jefferson Street. H. Islamic Center Short-form PD-R (Z-2502-A), located on the Southeast corner of Potter Street and West 40th Street. I. LU04-01-04 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the River Mountain Planning District along Summit Road from Suburban Office to Commercial and Public Institutional. I.1 Pleasant Ridge Revised Long-form PCD (Z-4411-D), located South of Cantrell Road, East of Pleasant Ridge Road. J. MSP04-04 A Master Street Plan Amendment in the Chenal Planning District to remove a Collector street named Dorado Beach Road Extension. J.1 Hickory Grove Revised Long-form PD-R (Z-4562-D), located on the West side of Hinson Road, just South of Pebble Beach Drive. Agenda, Page Two II. PRELIMINARY PLATS: 1. Sach’s Suburban Tract’s Replat Block 17 (S-878-B), located near the Kanis Road and Cooper Orbit Road intersection. 2. The Villages of Wellington Phase XII Revised Preliminary Plat (S-1042-HH), located on the Southwest corner of Wellington Village Road and Bristol Court. 3. Bella Rosa Estates Revised Preliminary Plat (S-1440-A), located on the West side of Bella Rosa Drive, South of Snyder Creek. 4. Ranch Highlands West Revised Preliminary Plat (S-1441-A), located on Valley Ranch Drive, North of Cantrell Road. 5. McMurry Subdivision Preliminary Plat (S-1444), located on the Northwest corner of Vinson Road and Arch Street Pike. 6. Thomas Park Estates Preliminary Plat (S-1445), located on the Northwest corner of Thomas Park Road and Sorrell Road. 7. Davis Addition Preliminary Plat (S-1446), located on the North side of West 36th Street between I-430 and Bowman Road. III. SITE PLAN REVIEWS - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS: 8. Matthews Subdivision Site Plan Review (S-1447), located at 3008 and 3012 Vinson Road. 9. Mangan Dental Clinic Zoning Site Plan Review (Z-4029-B), located on the Southeast corner of Evergreen Street and University Avenue. 10. Gilbert Zoning Site Plan Review (Z-7337-A), located on the Northeast corner of West 18th Street and Aldersgate Road. 11. Muradian Zoning Site Plan Review (Z-7418-A), located at 1617 Aldersgate Road. Agenda, Page Three IV. LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENTS - PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS: 12. Hillcrest Camshaft Revised Short-form PD-I (Z-2638-C), located at 5502 West 65th Street. 13. Freeway Business Park Revised Long-form POD (Z-4249-E), located at 18 Freeway Drive. 14. West Tree Service Revised Long-form PD-I (Z-5718-B), located at 6300 Forbing Road. 15. The Village at Rahling Road Revised Long-form PCD – Lot 11 (Z-6323-J), located on the Southeast corner of Rahling Road and Chenal Parkway. 16. Gillum Revised Short-form PD-C (Z-6446-B), located at 14116 Taylor Loop Road. 17. Arkansas Teachers Retirement Revised Long-form PRD (Z-6532-B), located on the Northeast corner of Rahling Road and Chenal Valley Drive. 18. McKinstry-Threet Revised Short-form PCD (Z-6881-B), located on the Northwest corner of Cantrell Road and Townsend Street. 19. MSP 04-05 A Master Street Plan Amendment in the I-430 Planning District to remove an unnamed Collector Street, located north of West 36th Street between I-430 and Bowman Road. 19.1. Church at Rock Creek Revised Long-form POD (Z-6886-A), located on the North side of West 36th Street between I-430 and Bowman Road. 20. Malstrome Revised Short-form POD (Z-7433-A), located on the Northwest corner of Kanis Road and Autumn Road. 21. Montgomery Short-form PD-C (Z-7694), located at 7908 Mabelvale Cut- off. 22. Smith Short-form PD-R (Z-7695), located at 1600 South Battery Street. 23. Carter Short-form PCD (Z-7696), located at 3516 Baseline Road. 24. Ransom Short-form PD-R (Z-7697), located at 14105 Taylor Loop Road. Agenda, Page Four IV. LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENTS - PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS: (CONT.) 25. Kathy’s Long-form PD-C (Z-7698), located at 13810 Colonel Glenn Road. 26. HWY 10 Executive Suite Short-form POD (Z-7699), located at 16601 Cantrell Road. 27. LU04-01-05 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the River Mountain Planning District from Transition to Commercial. 27.1 Basham Cantrell Long-form PCD (Z-7700), located South of Cantrell Road, West of Taylor Loop Road. 28. LU04-18-03 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Ellis Mountain Planning District from Suburban Office to Commercial. 28.1. Sach’s Suburban Tract’s Short-form PD-C (Z-7701), located near the Kanis Road and Cooper Orbit Road intersection. V. OTHER ITEMS: 29. Lot 7 Tall Timber West PRD Revocation (Z-4506), located at 5413 Timberland Drive. 30. Kenwood Estates Lot 86 Revised Preliminary Plat (S-1261-C), located at 22 Waldron Circle. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: Z-7604 NAME: Homes at Granite Mountain Phase II, Long-form PD-R LOCATION: On the Northwest corner of Gilliam Park Road an Granite Mountain Circle DEVELOPER: Little Rock Housing Authority 1000 Wolfe Street Little Rock, AR 72202 ARCHITECT: Fennell Purifoy Hammock Architects 111 Center, Suite 1620 Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 11.0 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family District ALLOWED USES: Single-family Residential PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R PROPOSED USE: 60 Units Senior Multi-family housing VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. The applicant submitted a request on April 6, 2004 for the item to be deferred to the June 3, 2004 Public Hearing. Staff is supportive of this request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 22, 2004) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request on April 6, 2004, requesting the item be deferred to the June 3, 2004 Public Hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the June 3, 2004, Public Hearing. The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7604 2 STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted a letter dated May 21, 2004 requesting this item be deferred to the July 15, 2004 Public Hearing. Staff is supportive of this request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 3, 2004) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a letter dated May 21, 2004, requesting this item be deferred to the July 15, 2004, Public Hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the request. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as presented by staff by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted a request dated June 29, 2004 requesting this item be deferred to the August 26, 2004 Public Hearing. Staff is supportive of this request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 15, 2004) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request dated June 29, 2004, requesting the item be deferred to the August 26, 2004, Public Hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of this request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair placed the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval of the deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had requested the item be deferred to the October 7, 2004 Public Hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: B FILE NO.: S-1422 NAME: The Ridges at Nowlin Creek Preliminary Plat LOCATION: North of Highway 10, approximately 5 miles West of the Chenal Parkway Cantrell Road intersection DEVELOPER: Deltic Timber 7 Chenal Club Boulevard Little Rock, AR 72223 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 1170 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 302 FT. NEW STREET: 56,800 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family and An area not zoned PLANNING DISTRICT: 29 CENSUS TRACT: 29 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 1. A variance to allow the creation of private streets to serve the development. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The preliminary plat consists of 302 lots averaging approximately three acres in size. The developer is requesting a variance to allow the development of the subdivision with private streets. The development proposes 57,000 linear feet of private streets with a gated entrance. The street widths proposed within the development will be twenty-four feet with curb and gutter to create a quiet, rural type subdivision. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1422 2 Sanitary sewer will be provided with a low-pressure system and a privately maintained sewage treatment plant located on the south side of the property, outside the Lake Maumelle watershed. The applicant has indicated potable water will be provided to the subdivision by Central Arkansas Water. The applicant has indicated the lots abutting Highway 10 will be left undeveloped for some future use. Large areas within the development have been set-aside for open space. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is heavily wooded with varying degrees of slopes. Cantrell Road abuts the site to the west and currently has a scattering of single-family homes in a rural setting. Lake Maumelle is located to the north of the proposed preliminary plat area. The northern portion of the proposed plat boundary is located within the Lake Maumelle Watershed. Only a portion of this area is located within the City’s Planning Jurisdiction. This area is currently zoned R-2 Single-family. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. All abutting property owners were notified of the public hearing. There is not a neighborhood association located in the area. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. The plat is outside the corporate limits, but a portion is within the Planning Boundary, Grading permits and storm water detention are not required. 2. Nowlin Creek Boulevard and a portion of Street E should be constructed as a collector street with 60-feet of right-of-way and a 31-foot to 36-foot street width. 3. All street names and naming conventions must be approved by the Public Works Department. Contact David Hathcock (501-371-4808) for additional information. 4. Traffic calming devices are required for long collectors to discourage speeding. Traffic circles or round-abouts are suggested at regular intervals and at main intersections. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1422 3 5. Plans generically indicate a reduced standard for stopping sight distance is required on all streets. Identify specific locations where variances are requested. Standard stopping sight distances and grades should be provided along all designated collector portions. 6. Final construction plans should be submitted for approval prior to construction. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Outside the service boundary. No comment. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: Central Arkansas Water requests that Little Rock Planning Commission postpone consideration of this development. Central Arkansas Water places a high priority on prevention of development of property within the Lake Maumelle water shed. The close proximity of this property to the water intake structure increases our concern. Negotiations are in progress and Central Arkansas Water intends to purchase this property or take it by condemnation, if necessary, in order to protect the quality of drinking water from Lake Maumelle. In regard to the remainder of the property, water service may not be available to portions of this property. Water main extensions would be required and all Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. This development may have significant impact on the existing water distribution system. If this area is served, proposed water facilities would be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection and all Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time must be met. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details. Fire Department: The area is outside the Fire Department’s service area. Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional information. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1422 4 Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (April 1, 2004) Mr. Tim Daters and Mr. Joe White were present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed request indicating only a portion of the proposed plat area was located within the City’s Planning Jurisdiction. Staff noted since a portion was located within the Planning Boundary the entire plat would be reviewed. Staff noted there were three variances related to the proposed request. Staff stated the applicant was requesting private streets to serve the development, a variance the Commission could approve, a variance to allow increased street grades and a 150-foot stop sight distance and the creation of four pipe stem lots. Staff stated the applicant was requesting a privately maintained sewage treatment plant located on the south side of the property outside the Lake Maumelle watershed. Staff stated per Section 31-400(b) all residential lots or development tracts not served by a public or community sanitary sewerage system whose disposal is approved by the state department of pollution control and ecology, the subdivider shall submit documentation with submission of the preliminary plat that the state department of health, or its delegated authority, would approve septic tank installations, or other individual wastewater disposal methods for service to the subdivision proposed to be platted. Staff requested the applicant contact the health department and secure an approval letter with regard to the wastewater collection and treatment system. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated grading permits and storm water detention ordinances for the city did not apply since the development was located outside the corporate limits. Staff also stated for long collector streets traffic calming devices were required to slow traffic. Staff requested the applicant indicate the streets where the standard stop sight distance could not be achieved. Central Arkansas Water addressed the concerns with water. CAW staff stated a portion of the development was located within the protected area of the Lake Maumelle Watershed. CAW staff stated the Central Arkansas Water Board voted to uphold the protection area and wanted to acquire approximately 700 acres of the proposed development area for watershed protection. CAW staff stated Central Arkansas’s desire was to purchase this area through what ever means necessary; negotiated acquisition or imminent domain by condemnation. CAW Staff stated Central Arkansas Water would not furnish water to the areas located within this protected area. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1422 5 There was a general discussion concerning the watershed and the protection areas. Staff stated the watershed contained 138 square miles and about one- third was located in the National Forest. Staff stated with limited finances a determination of critical areas had to be made for the areas to purchase first. 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 on April 7, 2004 addressing most of the issues raised at the April 1, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has eliminated the requested variances with the exception of the development of the subdivision with private streets. The applicant has indicted the development will be constructed in four phases with the phase line indicated on the proposed preliminary plat. The proposed phasing is consistent with phasing allowed per the Subdivision Ordinance. The proposed request indicates minimal lot size as per the Subdivision Ordinance. The development indicated an average lot size of three acres, more than adequate to meet the 7,000 square foot minimal lot size. The applicant has indicated a twenty-five foot front building line for all lots. The required front building lines adjacent to a collector street is thirty-feet. Staff recommends front building line platted as required by the Subdivision Ordinance or thirty-feet adjacent to indicated collector streets. The development of the subdivision as a gated community with private streets is a variance the Planning Commission may approve if deemed appropriate. The private streets must be constructed to Master Street Plan standard with regard to sidewalk placement, street widths and street design. The applicant has indicated the street width of Nowlin Creek Boulevard as 31-feet in a 60-foot right-of-way as requested by staff. The applicant has not however included round-abouts as requested by staff to serve as traffic calming devises on this proposed long collector street. The applicant has not indicated the construction of E Street with a 31-foot pavement width in a 60-foot right-of- way as requested by staff. Staff recommends the design of the streets be constructed to Master Street Plan standard including the required paving width and round-abouts at regular intervals and major intersections to serve as traffic calming devices within the subdivision. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1422 6 The plat continues to indicate the source of water as Central Arkansas Water. Central Arkansas Water has stated they will not serve a large potion of the development located within the Lake Maumelle Watershed. Staff recommends the applicant provide an agreement from Central Arkansas Water indicating their intention to serve the proposed lots or indicate an agreement from another water source as to their ability to serve the proposed development. The applicant has not provided staff with the approval letter from the Arkansas Department of Health concerning the proposed wastewater collection and treatment system. Per Section 31-400(b) all residential lots or development tracts not served by a public or community sanitary sewerage system whose disposal is approved by the state department of pollution control and ecology, the subdivider shall submit documentation with submission of the preliminary plat that the state department of health, or its delegated authority, would approve septic tank installations, or other individual wastewater disposal methods for service to the subdivision proposed to be platted. Consistently in the past the Commission has not reviewed proposed subdivision development unless documentation of an approved wastewater collection and treatment system has been furnished. Staff recommends the applicant provide the required approval letter from the Arkansas Department of Health prior to the Commission reviewing the proposed development. Staff feels there are too many outstanding issues associated with the proposed request for the Commission to review the development and make a recommendation. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the proposed request be deferred sixty to ninety days to allow the developer sufficient time to resolve outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 22, 2004) Mr. Jack McCray was present representing the request. There was one registered objectors present. Staff presented the item indicating there were deficiencies related to the proposed application request. Staff stated the applicant had not provided documentation from the Arkansas Department of Health concerning the wastewater treatment facility nor had the applicant provided documentation concerning the proposed source of water. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1422 7 Mr. McCray stated he would accept the deferral request but he was requesting the Commission allow him 20 minutes for a presentation from an expert concerning how development could take place within the watershed and still be environmentally friendly. Staff stated if the applicant were allowed the presentation time then he would only be allowed ten minutes at the June 3, 2004 Public Hearing to provide new information. Mr. McCray stated this was acceptable. Mr. Robert Prager presented the Commission with an overview of how development could take place and not affect water quality. He stated his firm had 25 years experience in environmental design and watershed protection. He stated treatable run-off, preserve and restore design for construction, limiting surface treatments and placing monitoring wells to determine areas not complying. He stated it was important to pick plants to accumulate contaminates the development was trying to collect. A motion was made to defer the item to the June 3, 2004 Public Hearing. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant has not furnished staff with the additional information concerning the proposed water source or the approval letter from the Arkansas Department of Health concerning the wastewater collection and treatment facility. Staff recommends this item be deferred until these issues are resolved. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 3, 2004) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had not furnished staff with the additional information concerning the proposed water source and or the approval letter from the Arkansas Department of Health concerning the wastewater collection and treatment facility. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred until these issues were resolved. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as presented by staff by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant has not resolved issues related to the source of water and the means of wastewater disposal. Staff recommends this item be deferred to these issues can be resolved. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1422 8 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 15, 2004) Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had not resolved the issues related to the source of water and the means of wastewater disposal. Staff recommended the item be deferred until the issues could be resolved. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair placed the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval of the deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had not resolved the issues related to the source of water and the means of wastewater disposal. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred until the issues could be resolved. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: C FILE NO.: S-1430 NAME: Keifer Subdivision Site Plan Review LOCATION: 27024 Kanis Road DEVELOPER: Steve Kiefer 8410 Ferndale Cut-off Little Rock, AR 72223 ENGINEER: Dee Wilson Surveying P.O. Box 604 North Little Rock, AR 72115 AREA: 0.839 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District PLANNING DISTRICT: 21 – Burlingame Valley CENSUS TRACT: 42.02 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 1. A reduced right-of-way dedication for Kanis Road and Ferndale Cut-off. 2. A five-year deferral of street improvements to Kanis Road and Ferndale Cut-off. The applicant has not secured health department approval of the proposed septic system wastewater treatment. Staff is requesting this item be deferred to the July 15, 2004 Public Hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 3, 2004) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had not secured Health Department approval of the proposed septic system wastewater treatment. Staff stated they were requesting the item be deferred to the July 15, 2004, Public Hearing. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as presented by staff by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1430 2 STAFF UPDATE: The applicant has not resolved issues related to the means of wastewater disposal. Staff recommends this item be deferred to the August 26, 2004 Public Hearing to allow additional time to resolve issues related to the proposed septic system and placement. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 15, 2004) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had not resolved issues related to the means of wastewater disposal. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred to the August 26, 2004, Public Hearing to allow additional time to resolve issues related to the proposed septic system and placement. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair placed the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval of the deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had not resolved the issues related to the means of wastewater disposal. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred to the October 7, 2004, Public Hearing to allow additional time to resolve issues related to the proposed septic system and placement. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: D FILE NO.: Z-7634 NAME: Donnie’s Foreign Car Short-form PD-C LOCATION: 1311 South Bowman Road DEVELOPER: Donnie’s Foreign Car 7501 Kanis Road Little Rock, AR 72204 ENGINEER: W. William Graham, Jr. Inc. 100 North Rodney Parham Road Little Rock, AR 72205 AREA: 0.43 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Non-conforming skating facility and single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: Skating facility and Automobile repair garage VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. The applicant submitted a request on May 19, 2004 requesting the item be deferred to the July 15, 2004 Public Hearing. Staff is supportive of this request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 3, 2004) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request dated May 19, 2004, requesting this item be deferred to the July 15, 2004, Public Hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the requested deferral. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as presented by staff by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7634 2 STAFF UPDATE: The applicant has not contacted staff to move forward with the proposed request. Staff recommends this item be deferred to the August 26, 2004 Public Hearing to allow the applicant additional time to resolve outstanding issues. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 15, 2004) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had not contacted them to move forward with the proposed request. Staff recommended the item be deferred to the August 26, 2004, Public Hearing to allow the applicant additional time to resolve indicated outstanding issues. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair placed the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval of the deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant was working with them to resolve outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred to the October 7, 2004, Public Hearing to allow the applicant additional time to resolve the outstanding issues. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: E FILE NO.: Z-7258-A NAME: Rose Street Revised Short-form PD-R LOCATION: 321-325 Rose Street DEVELOPER: Christopher Heller 2000 Regions Center 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 ENGINEER: Donald W. Brooks 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.16 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PD-R ALLOWED USES: Multi-family - Triplex PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD-R PROPOSED USE: Multi-family Triplex and construction of covered parking VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 18,737 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on September 3, 2002 rezoned the site from R-4 to PD-R to allow the redevelopment of the structure located at 321 Rose Street into a triplex. The site was built as a two-story structure in the 1970’s with two units on the main level and two units on the lower level, at walkout level. The lower units were stubbed for wastewater but were never completed. The building functioned as a duplex unit since construction. The applicant proposed no additional footprint expansion and no additional exterior construction. Concrete patios were poured for the lower units and the proposal included a six (6) foot privacy fence to separate the outdoor living spaces. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7258-A 2 The applicant proposed to place two parking spaces to the south of the structure, which would be accessed by the functioning alley, and two spaces adjacent to C Street. The new parking pad adjacent to C Street would require a curb cut. The parking cover over the alley spaces was to remain but would be rehabbed. The applicant proposed a six (6) foot wood privacy fence along the east property line and a four (4) foot wrought iron fence along the right-of-way line and adjacent to the parking pad on the south side of the property. The applicant proposed landscaping along the rear property line and installation of sod in the front yard, adjacent to Rose Street. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant now proposes the construction of a 20-foot by 20-foot carport structure over the existing parking pad adjacent to “C” Street. The applicant has indicated a garage is attached to the south end of the property for the tenant residing at 321 Rose Street. There is also a two-car cement-parking pad on the north end of the property for the tenants residing at 323 and 325 Rose Street. The applicant has indicated these two tenants have both suffered significant damage to their cars from debris falling from a large tree in the neighbor’s yard to the east which overhangs their parking pad. The applicant has indicated his intent is to construct an open-air carport with vinyl siding and a singled roof to match the existing triplex. The applicant has indicated his intent is to construct a structure which will not detract from the architecture of the area. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a functioning triplex with one unit on the main level and two units on the lower level. The area is a mixture of single family and multi-family structures on R-2 and R-4 zoned properties. The alley running east to west beside the structure is a functioning alley and has recently been resurfaced. The street is a typical Hillcrest residential city street with curb and gutter and no sidewalks on the site adjacent to the applicant’s property. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: All residents within 200 feet of the site, the Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood Association and all residents, who could be identified, within 300 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. As of this writing, staff has received several phone calls requesting additional information from the area residents. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7258-A 3 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1. No comment. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: No comment received. 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 of a Planned Development Residential to add covered parking. The proposal does not have a significant impact on the Land Use Plan, which would necessitate a Plan Amendment. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Action Plan. The plan contains an actions statement in the chapter on Zoning and Land use, which calls for allowing no more that eight dwelling units per residential structure. Landscape: The width of the proposed land use buffer east of the proposed parking area must be increased to a minimum of six feet nine inches. This takes into account the reduction allowed within the designated mature area. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7258-A 4 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 eastern perimeter. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (May 13, 2004) The applicant was not present. Staff stated the request was to add a covered structure over an existing parking pad. Staff stated there were few outstanding technical issues related to the request. Staff stated they would meet with the applicant prior to the Commission meeting to resolve any outstanding technical issues. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant did not need to submit a revised site plan to staff following the May 13, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has however provided staff with the required additional information concerning staff’s concerns of landscaping. The applicant has indicated the landscaping is in place and measures a minimum of six feet nine inches. Staff also requested the applicant provide a fence or dense evergreen plantings along the eastern property line to screen the adjoining single-family homes. The applicant has indicated screening is in place in this area. The applicant is requesting the addition of a twenty-foot by twenty-foot structure to cover an existing parking pad. The applicant has indicated the tenants are concerned for the safety of their automobiles with a large oak tree located on the adjoining property and overhanging the parking pad. Staff is sympathetic to the tenants concern but staff does not feel the addition of a covered parking structure appropriate for the indicated location. The applicant has indicated the structure will be located adjacent to “C” Street, at the property line. Even though the structure will be an open structure, staff feels the placement of the structure in this location could cause visibility problems at the intersection of Rose and “C” Streets. In addition staff does not feel the structure is architecturally compatible with the area. If covered parking is located in the area, for the most part, the parking is located off the alley. Staff is not supportive of the proposed request for two primary reasons; architecture and safety concerns. The streets in the area are typical Hillcrest Streets, narrow roadways with an abundance of street parking. The area is plagued with employee parking from UAMS adding to the residential street parking. Staff believes to add this structure to the site will add visual clutter to the site thus distracting sight distance at the intersection. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7258-A 5 Staff also feels the proposed structure is out of character with the neighborhood. There are a few homes located in the area which do have covered parking in the front yard area but for the most part the area exercises street parking and garage parking off the alley. As stated staff is not supportive of the request and does not feel the covered parking structure should be allowed on the site. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 3, 2004) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had failed to notify property owners as required by the Planning Commission By-Laws. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred to the July 15, 2004, Public Hearing. There was no further discussion of the item. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as presented by staff by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 15, 2004) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had not notified property owners as required by the Planning Commission By-Laws. Staff stated a deferral was required to allow time for notification. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair placed the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval of the deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) Mr. John Tull was present representing the applicant. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial of the request. Staff stated they felt the structure was out of character with the neighborhood and should not be allowed on the site. Mr. Tull stated he was representing the owners of the site in the rezoning request. He stated Mr. Christopher Heller purchased the property approximately eight months ago. He stated the previous owner applied for the rezoning and completed the renovation of the development. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7258-A 6 Mr. Tull stated as soon as Mr. Heller purchased the property the tenants of the two units which did not have covered parking approached him requesting a cover be placed over the existing parking pad. Mr. Tull stated there was a large oak tree located on the property to the east, which was causing damage to the resident’s cars. He stated with a cover the cars would then be protected from the elements. Mr. Tull stated it was his understanding the staff was opposed to the structure because of safety and compatibility. He stated there were covered parking structures located throughout Hillcrest. He stated the request to cover the existing parking pad would not cause visibility problems. He stated there was an existing wood fence located on the property line to the north which cause more of a visual impact than the requested structure. Mr. Tull stated the structure would placed away from the street and the walls would be open. He stated the structure would be constructed of material similar to the existing duplex unit and the roof material would also be similar. There was a general discussion concerning the tree and the possibility of removing the branches, which overhung Mr. Heller’s property. Mr. Tull stated he was not aware if Mr. Heller had contacted the owner of the tree to see if trimming the branches was an option. Staff stated Mr. Heller and contacted the property owner and trimming the branches was not an option. Commissioner Lowry stated property law would allow the trimming of the branches if they overhung a neighbor’s property. Mr. Tull stated Mr. Heller was requesting to place a covered structure on the site to not only protect from falling branches but also the elements. A motion was made to approve the proposed PRD to allow the covered parking structure adjacent to “C” Street. The motion carried by a vote of 7 ayes, 2 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: F FILE NO.: S-1292-D NAME: Parkway West Replat Lots 9R – 11R LOCATION: on Westhaven Drive at the Wynnsong Theater DEVELOPER: LLEJ III, LLC P.O. Box 22407 Little Rock, AR 72221 ENGINEER: Roberts and Williams Associates 1501 North University Avenue, Suite 430 Little Rock, AR 72207 AREA: 5.83 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District PLANNING DISTRICT: 18 – Ellis Mountain CENSUS TRACT: 42.10 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: A preliminary plat was approved for the Parkway West Commons Subdivision on March 27, 1990. The proposed preliminary plat included fourteen commercially zoned lots. The lot contained in the current request was previously proposed as three individual lots with lot sizes similar to the current request. A final plat was executed for Lot 9 on July 9, 1997 including the three proposed lots as a single lot. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing a replat of Lot 9 Parkway West addition into three commercially zoned lots. The total area is 5.873 acres with a minimum lot size of 1.25 acres. The applicant has indicated a 25-foot front building line and a zero side yard setback. The proposal also includes a 25-foot rear yard setback. The maximum building height proposed is 35-feet. The proposed subdivision will be August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1292-D 2 developed in two phases with Lot 10R being final platted in the first phase and Lots 9R and 11R being final platted in the second phase. A shared drive will be placed on the lot line of proposed Lots 10R and 11R. A single drive will be placed near the southern boundary of proposed Lot 9R. The development will share a cross access agreement as well as a cross access parking agreement. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a movie theater and a surface parking lot. There are two existing curb-cuts into the parking lot from Westhaven Drive. The site is bordered on each side by non-residential uses including a car rental, fast food, banking facilities, general retail and an Entergy pole storage yard. Westhaven Drive is a commercial street constructed to Master Street Plan standard including sidewalks on each side of the roadway. There is an existing access easement located along the western boundary extending to Chenal Parkway. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area business owner. All abutting property owners, the Birchwood Neighborhood Association, the Parkway Place Property Owners Association and the Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Provide a current survey showing all improvements including the adjacent access easements to the south, and current and proposed driveway locations. 2. The proposed access easements between Lots 10R and 11R does not appear to match the current drive location. Shared driveways will be required for this plat. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: No comment received. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1292-D 3 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. On site fire protection may be required. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional information. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (June 24, 2004) Mr. Barry Williams was present representing the applicant. Staff stated the request was to replat an existing lot into three lots. Staff stated the approved preliminary plat for the site included three lots but at the time of final platting the owner elected to plat this area into a single lot. Staff requested Mr. Williams provide additional information concerning the proposed and existing driveway locations. Staff stated the existing easements were not furnished on the original submission but Mr. Williams had since provided updated surveys. Mr. Williams stated the desire was to maintain the southern drive on the property line. Staff stated this was not desirable since the Sonic located next door also had a drive close to the property line. Mr. Williams stated he would work with staff to locate the driveway in an appropriate location. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed access easements and drive locations. Mr. Williams stated the desire was to maintain access for properties located to the west of the site but to relocate the easements. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1292-D 4 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 June 24, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the existing drive locations as well as the proposed drive locations. The applicant has also indicated existing and proposed easements within the plat boundaries. The applicant has indicated a desire to maintain the southern drive on the property line. Staff is now supportive of this request. The applicant has also indicated the northern drive will be relocated to the proposed property line of Lots 10R and 11R and indicated as an access and utility easement. The applicant has also indicated the proposed plat will include a cross access parking agreement and the drives will share a common access agreement. The applicant has not indicated the southern drive as an access and utility easement. Staff feels this should be put in place since the drive is existing and has been functioning as a common access easement allowing lots located to the south adjacent to Chenal Parkway access to Westhaven Drive for several years. The proposed preliminary plat indicates a minimum lot size of 34,848; more than adequate to meet the minimum lot size for C-3, General Commercial District zoned property or 14,000 square feet. The applicant has also indicated a 25 foot front building line also adequate to meet the minimum requirement of the zoning district. Staff is supportive of the proposed request. The proposed preliminary plat indicates lot sizes adequate to meet the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff recommends the southern drive be labeled as a common access and utility easement extending from Westhaven Drive to the west and connecting with an existing access and utility easement. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1292-D 5 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 15, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a letter requesting the item be deferred to the August 26, 2004 Public Hearing. Staff stated the request would require a waiver of the By-Laws with regard to the timeliness of the request. Staff stated they were supportive of the By-Law waiver and the deferral request. A motion was made to waive the By-Laws with regard to the timeliness of the deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. A motion was made to defer the item to the August 26, 2004 Public Hearing. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a letter dated August 19, 2004 requesting the item be withdrawn from consideration. Staff stated they were supportive of this request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for withdrawal. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: G FILE NO.: S-1438 NAME: Treadway’s Replat LOCATION: 1115 Jefferson Street DEVELOPER: Robert P. Treadway 1115 Jefferson Street Little Rock, AR 72204 ENGINEER: Blaylock-Threet Engineers, Inc. 1501 Market Street Little Rock, AR 72211 AREA: 0.32 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District PLANNING DISTRICT: 9 – I-630 CENSUS TRACT: 18 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 1. A variance to allow a reduced front building line. 2. A variance to allow a reduced rear yard setback. 3. A variance to allow a reduced side yard setback. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is requesting the replat of Lots 1 and 2, Block 30 of the Cunningham’s Addition to the City of Little Rock. The lots currently contain individual buildings, which were constructed over lot lines several years ago. The indicated lots are currently zoned C-3 which typically requires a 100-foot lot width, 14,000 square foot lot area and setbacks of 25-feet front yard, 25-feet rear yard, a 15-feet side yard setback when adjacent to residential zoned property and a zero side yard setback when abutting a like zone. The proposed plat indicates lot widths of 85-feet and 55-feet, a lot area of 8,500 square feet and 5,500 square feet and reduced front, side and rear yard setbacks. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1438 2 The proposed site plan indicates a front building line of 30.7 feet on proposed Lot 1R and a 18.2 feet front yard building line for proposed Lot 2R. The rear yard setback for proposed Lot 1R is 18 feet and for proposed Lot 2R is 6 feet. The side yard setbacks for Lot 1R is 29.5 feet and 26 feet and the side yard setback for proposed Lot 2R is 4.6 feet and 15 feet. The applicant is requesting the required improvements be tied to redevelopment of each individual lot. In addition the applicant is requesting a three year deferral of the required street improvements associated with the redevelopment of proposed Lot 2R. The applicant is also requested an in-lieu contribution based on fifteen percent of the total building addition cost to be paid at the end of the three year deferral. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains two non-residential buildings one accessed from West 12th Street, the second from Jefferson Street. West 12th Street is a recently resurfaced four lane roadway with turn-lanes at intersections. Jefferson Street is a narrow roadway with open ditches for drainage and no sidewalk, curb or gutter in place. To the north of the site are single-family homes and to the southeast and southwest are non-residential retail uses. Across West 12th Street is a multi- family development, (Madison Heights) with the first phase completed and the second phase being considered for construction. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. All abutting property owners, the Oak Forest Neighborhood Association, the Forest Hills Neighborhood Association, the War Memorial Neighborhood Association, the Hope Neighborhood Association and the Movers and Shakers Neighborhood Crime Watch Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. 12th Street is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 35-feet from centerline (reduced standard right-of- way) will be required. 2. The proposed land use would classify Jefferson Street on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way 30-feet from centerline. 3. A 20-foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of the streets. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1438 3 4. With final platting, provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one half of a 36-foot street with curb and gutter on Jefferson Street and reconstruct curb on 12th Street. 5. With construction, remove both aprons near the intersection of 12th and Jefferson Street. A shared driveway between the two lots should be platted on Jefferson Street. 6. Plans for all work in the 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). E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. 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. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional information. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (June 24, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff stated the request was to replat two existing lots redefining the lot lines. Staff noted there were variances being requested as a result of the replat. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1438 4 Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the replat would trigger the requirement for right-of-way dedication and street improvements. Staff stated these improvements would be to Jefferson Street and to West 12th Street. Staff also requested the applicant remove the existing drives along West 12th Street and both take access from a shared drive on Jefferson Street. The applicant did not agree with this request. He stated the drives were functioning well for his business and he would like to maintain the two drives. Staff suggested the applicant contact Public Works staff to discuss alternatives. Staff stated the proposed street improvements could qualify for an in-lieu contribution and possibly a hardship in-lieu contribution. Staff stated if the improvements were not substantial, a fifteen percent fee based on building construction cost could be accepted. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plat to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the June 24, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated a dedication of right-of-way along West 12th Street and Jefferson Street as requested. The applicant has also indicated a desire to retain the driveway locations along West 12th Street and Jefferson Street for proposed Lot 1R and a separate drive on Jefferson Street for proposed Lot 2R. The applicant is requesting a deferral of required street improvements. The applicant is requesting the improvements be tied to redeveloping of each individual lot and the applicant is requesting an in-lieu contribution for the required street improvements at the time of redevelopment. The applicant is requesting the in- lieu be based on a fifteen percent of construction cost at the time of redevelopment. The applicant has contacted the Little Rock Fire Department concerning the placement of a fire hydrant. The Fire Department has determined a fire hydrant will not be required as a result of the proposed platting or redevelopment of the site. The applicant is requesting several variances from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of the proposed lots. The applicant is requesting variances to allow a reduced setback for the front, rear and side yard setback requirements. The applicant is proposing a 4.6 foot side yard setback along the northern property line of proposed Lot 2R. The applicant is requesting a 6 foot rear yard August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1438 5 setback and a 18.2 foot front building line adjacent to Jefferson Street for proposed Lot 2R. The indicated setbacks for proposed Lot 1R are adequate to meet the minimum requirement for C-3, General Commercial District zoned property. The applicant has indicated lot widths of 85 feet for proposed Lot 1R and 55 feet for proposed Lot 2R. The indicated lot widths are not adequate to meet the minimum lot widths for C-3, General Commercial District zoned property or 100 feet. The indicated lot area for proposed Lot 1R is 8,500 square feet and proposed Lot 2R is 5,500 square feet. The typical minimum required lot area for C-3, General Commercial District zoned property is 14,000 square feet. Staff is not supportive of the proposed preliminary plat. Staff feels to allow the creation of the lots as indicated will further exacerbate an existing problem of parking. The applicant is requesting the preliminary plat to allow an expansion of the existing church facility located on proposed Lot 2R. With the expansion of the church there will be fifteen feet located to the south of the building available for on-site parking. This is not adequate for a parking area and allow for backing and turning around of vehicles. The church currently uses a vacant lot located to the north of the site, which is zoned R-3, Single-family and an area located to the west, which is also zoned C-3, General Commercial District. The vacant lot is not paved and not zoned appropriately for parking by the church. Staff feels the redevelopment of the site as proposed would be overbuilding the site and the requested preliminary plat should not be approved as filed. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 15, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. Staff stated if the Commission approved the request the site would not contain parking and more specifically once the expansion was in place there would not be any land area available for parking. Staff stated with the creation of the lot without parking the Commission would be creating a variance in which the applicant would be required to seek relief from the Board of Adjustment. Staff stated the applicant was also requesting a waiver of street improvements to West 12th Street and to Jefferson Street. The applicant stated they were a small church with a large number of low income members. The applicant stated the church was a new church and their resources were limited. He stated with the required street improvements and the building addition this August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1438 6 would create a financial hardship on the church therefore they were seeking a waiver of the required improvements. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed request. Commissioner Rector questioned staff’s objections. Staff stated the development was overbuilding the site and would not allow for on-site parking. Staff stated they felt the applicant should defer their request and revise the application to a planned development application. Staff stated with the planned development process the lack of parking could be addressed. Staff also stated the planned development would not require variances with regard to building setbacks. After a discussion with the applicant by the Commission the applicant agreed to a deferral. A motion was made to defer the item to the August 26, 2004 Public Hearing. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 Recuse (Chairman Mizan Rahman). STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the July 15, 2004 Public Hearing. The applicant has indicated the placement of 21 on-site parking spaces shared between the two lots. The applicant has also requested the application be amended to a Planned Commercial Development. The applicant has indicated the proposed uses of the site will include the development of a church on proposed Lot 2R and a commercial business on proposed Lot 1R. The applicant is requesting C-3 uses as alternative uses for the site. The proposed site plan does not include the placement of landscaping on the site. The applicant has indicated due to the limits of the site landscaping would be an extreme hardship and reduce the number of parking spaces. The applicant has also indicated the rear yard of the existing building does not allow for the placement of the minimum landscaping required and the applicant is proposing to match the exiting eastern building line. Staff is supportive of this request. The applicant has indicated there will not be any doors or windows located on the eastern side of the building which will act as their screening. Staff is supportive of the applicant ‘s request to amend the site plan to a Planned Commercial Development to allow the creation of this two lot plat. The required setbacks are established as approved by the Planning Commission and the Board of Directors therefore variances are no longer required. Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1438 7 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the requested preliminary plat and the requested rezoning of the site to PCD, subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: H FILE NO.: Z-2502-A NAME: Islamic Center Short-form PD-R LOCATION: on the Southeast corner of West 40th Street and Potter Street DEVELOPER: Islamic Center for Human Excellence 1717 Wright Avenue Little Rock, AR 72203 ENGINEER: ETC Engineers 1510 South Broadway Little Rock, AR 72202 AREA: 5.9 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 23 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: MF-12 – Multi-family District ALLOWED USES: Multi-family at 12 units per acre PROPOSED ZONING: PRD PROPOSED USE: Single-family Residential, Education Building and Mosque VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Plat Variances – The applicant failed to furnish staff with the requested information from the June 24, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff recommends this item be deferred to the August 26, 2004, Public Hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 15, 2004) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had failed to furnish them with the requested information from the June 24, 2004, Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred to the August 26, 2004, Public Hearing. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair placed the item for inclusion on August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2502-A 2 the consent agenda for approval of the deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. BACKGROUND: The Little Rock Board of Directors rezoned this site from B-Residential to MF-12 on October 5, 1971 by the adoption of Ordinance No. 12,547. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant has indicated the development will be constructed with 22 single- family homes, a mosque and an education building. The site plan indicates a 25- foot building setback will be provided on the front of all the proposed lots and a 20-foot rear yard setback is being proposed. The applicant has indicated a ten foot side yard setback will be maintained. The average lot size proposed is 6313 with the minimum lot size proposed as 6024. The applicant has indicated the maximum number of students for the education building will be 50 students. The applicant has indicated five teaches and three support personnel will be on site. The hours proposed are from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm five days per week. The applicant has indicated the worship center will have a maximum seating capacity of 100 persons. The applicant has indicated daily activities will take place on the site from 5:00 am to 9:00 pm seven days per week. The applicant has indicated the worship building will be a maximum of 36 feet in height and the mineret (steeple) height is proposed as forty feet. The education building is proposed as a single story building and the residential homes are proposed as a maximum of two story structures. The proposed subdivision has been indicated to be developed in five phases. The first phase will consist of the development of the single-family homes along West 40th Street. The second and third phase will include the construction of 7 and 8 and 9 and 10. The fourth phase will include the construction of the school and mosque. The final phase will be the development of the lots along the proposed cul-de-sac street. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant and grass covered with a scattering of trees. The sidewalk is in place along West 40th Street and is scheduled to be widened by the City as a result of the current Bond Project. Street improvements are not in place along Potter Street. Other uses in the area include a manufacturing facility in the old Borden Plant and non-residential uses are scattered along Colonel Glenn Road. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2502-A 3 The area to the west and north of the site are predominately residential uses. To the east of the site is a vacant tract currently zoned MF-12. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, Staff has received several phone calls from an area resident requesting additional information. The John Barrow Neighborhood Association, the Westwood Neighborhood Association, all property owners within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, within 300 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1. Prior to final platting, provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to the streets including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. 2. For existing improvements, repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 3. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any grading or excavation activities at the site. Site grading, and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 4. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this site. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 5. Increase the driveway width to 26-feet minimum (back of curb to back of curb) to provide adequate width for two-way traffic. 6. 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 addition information regarding street light requirements. 7. Plans of all work in the 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). 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: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2502-A 4 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. On site fire protection will be required. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges for all connection off Potter Street. This fee will apply to all connections including metered connections off the private fire system. Existing waterline easement recorded as Inst. No. 86-66357 should be reflected on the plat. It appears that this will affect the buildable area on Lots 1, 11 and 23. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2434 for additional information. Fire Department: Increase the 18-foot drive to 20-feet. Maintain a 20-foot drive around the educational building. Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Boyle Park Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a PDR for a mosque and a single-family residential development. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan because it is not necessary to recognize every religious institution on the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Potter and 40th Streets are shown as local streets on the Master Street Plan. Those streets previously named may require dedication of right-of-way and half-street improvements. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the John Barrow Neighborhood Action Plan. The Housing & Neighborhood Revitalization Goal states: 1) “The design should be compatible with existing houses in the area and complement the overall appearance of the neighborhood, and 2) Affordable housing through new development and new subdivision development. The Public Improvement and Circulation Goal list an objective of “To provide (no parking signs) on one side of Potter Street.” Landscape: A minimum of eight percent of the interior of the vehicular use areas must be landscaped with interior landscape islands of at least 150 square feet in area and 7 ½ feet in width. The plan submitted does not satisfy this requirement. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2502-A 5 Landscaped areas associated with the proposed parking areas will be required to be irrigated. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (June 24, 2004) A representative of the applicant was present representing the proposed development. Staff stated the request included the development of a single- family neighborhood as well as a worship center and education facility. Staff requested the applicant provide additional information concerning the proposed preliminary plat request. Staff also requested the applicant provide details concerning the seating capacity of the worship center, the total enrollment of the education facility, details concerning proposed fencing and maximum building height. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed street extending from Potter Street would be required to be 26-feet of pavement for two-way traffic. Staff also stated storm water detention would be required on the site. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the parking area would require landscaping at eight percent of the total on-site paved area. Staff also stated irrigation would be required to water landscaped area. 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 June 24, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has provided the proposed details of the worship center, the total enrollment of the education facility and the details concerning proposed fencing. The applicant has also increased the driveway width to 26-feet of pavement for the proposed drive to the worship center. The applicant has indicated the development will be constructed with 22 single- family homes, a mosque and an education building. The site plan indicates a 25- foot building setback will be provided on the front of all the proposed lots and a 20-foot rear yard setback is being proposed. The applicant has indicated a ten foot side yard setback will be maintained. The average lot size proposed is 6313 with the minimum lot size proposed as 6024. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. Lots in the John Barrow Addition, which have been plated in this area average fifty feet by one hundred August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2502-A 6 thirty eight feet or 6900 square feet. The applicant has indicated front lot widths of sixty feet and a lot depth of 100 feet on the average. Although, the proposed lots do not meet the current city requirement for R-2, zoned property (7,000 square feet) staff feels the lots are adequate to allow the construction of new homes. In addition, with the reduced rear yard setback will allow for additional buildable area on the site. The applicant has indicated the maximum number of students for the education building will be 50 students. The applicant has indicated five teaches and three support personnel will be on site. The hours proposed are from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm five days per week. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The indicated students and staff appear to be consistent with other private schools located within the City and should have minimal impact on the adjoining properties. The applicant has indicated the worship center will have a maximum seating capacity of 100 persons. The applicant has indicated daily activities will take place on the site from 5:00 am to 9:00 pm seven days per week. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The worship center appears to be seminar to other neighborhood churches located throughout the city and should have minimal impact on the adjoining properties. The applicant has indicated the worship building will be a maximum of 36 feet in height and the mineret (steeple) height is proposed as forty feet. The education building is proposed as a single story building and the residential homes are proposed as a maximum of two story structures. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s indicated building heights for each of the indicated activities. The applicant has indicated interior landscaping within the proposed parking area. The applicant has not indicated screening to the property to the east of the Mosque. Staff recommends a screening fence be placed along the eastern property line of proposed Lot 23 to allow for the required screening. The proposed subdivision is scheduled to be developed in five phases. The first phase will consist of the development of the single-family homes along West 40th Street. The second and third phase will include the construction of 7 and 8, 9 and 10. The fourth phase will include the construction of the school and mosque. The final phase will be the development of the lots along the proposed cul-de-sac street. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s indicated phasing plan. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The applicant has indicated the development of a single-family subdivision with a school and worship center anchoring the subdivision. Staff feels the placement of the indicated activities on August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2502-A 7 the site should have minimal impact on the adjoining properties. In various locations through out the city neighborhood schools and churches coexist with single-family homes with little to no impact. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff recommends a screening fence be placed along the eastern property line of proposed Lot 23 to allow for the required screening. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The applicant was present. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request. The applicant stated he had worked with the various neighborhood associations in developing plans for the site. He stated he felt the development was quality in fill for the neighborhood. He stated the Islamic Center had been working with the neighborhood since 1998 and the intent was always to construct a mosque, education facility and single-family homes. He stated a Bill of Assurance would be developed for the single-family homes and all Muslim’s would be required to sign the Bill of Assurance to indicate their devotion to following the guidelines of the Koran. The applicant stated non-Muslim’s would not be required to participate in that particular aspect of the Bill of Assurance. Questions were raised as to the ownership of the property and if the development was to be a gated community. The applicant stated the Islamic Center for Human Excellence owned the property. He stated the development was not to be a gated community. The applicant stated any one regardless of race, creed or religion would be able to purchase a lot within the proposed subdivision. Questions were also raised concerning the “call to prayer”. The applicant stated the volume level of the “call to prayer” was only intended to reach those standing immediately outside the building. Mr. Tim Lawson addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated he had lived in the area 40 plus years. He stated the Little Rock School District had spent several years trying to resolve the issues of desegregation through the courts. He stated to allow a development which only allowed Muslims was taking a step backward. Ms. Carolyn Hitman addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated as Secretary of the John Barrow Neighborhood Association she want to put on record the Neighborhood Association had not taken a formal vote on the proposed issue. She stated the vote would be taken at the next board meeting. She stated as a August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2502-A 8 resident she was concerned with a development of the indicated intensity being developed on the site. She stated the applicant was indicating the development of twenty-two single-family homes and a Mosque and educational facility. She stated she felt the development was too intense for the site. She stated the proposed development did not fit with the character of the neighborhood. She stated the neighborhood had spent fourteen years trying to rid itself of gangs, crime and violence. She stated the neighborhood was tired of the City allowing the John Barrow Community to be a dumping ground for things the City did not know what to do with. She stated the applicant had indicated the developer had indicated he wanted to be inclusive of the neighborhood. She questioned if the developer had twenty-five commitments how this was being inclusive. She stated the proposal only included the placement of twenty-two homes. She stated the area residents were not given a chance to purchase one of the proposed homes since all lots were already committed to other potential Muslim buyers. Ms. Kathy Wells addressed the Commission in support of the proposed request. She stated she was representing the Episcopal Bishop of Arkansas. She stated the church was supportive of the proposed development and the diversity of populations around the world. She stated the fears of residents from existing actions of extremist organizations do not represent the views or the wills of most citizens. Mr. Don Darnell addressed the Commission in support of the proposed request. He stated he was an advocate for Civil Rights and Fair Housing Laws. He stated the proposed development would allow for diversity of residents and housing in the area. He stated according to Fair Housing Laws a person can not be denied a home based on race, creed or religion. He stated this did not apply to religious organizations. He stated the charge of the Commission was not to establish all equalities but to determine if the land use was appropriate for the proposed location. There was a general discussion concerning the Fair Housing Laws. A question was raised as to if any one would be able to purchase a home in the subdivision. The applicant stated no one would be discriminated against because of race or religion. He stated the lots would be available for anyone to purchase. A motion was made to approve the request. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 Recuse (Mizan Rahman). August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: I FILE NO.: LU04-01-04 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - River Mountain Planning District Location: Cantrell Road and Pleasant Ridge Request: Suburban Office to Commercial and Public Institutional Source: Joe White, White Daters PROPOSAL / REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the River Mountain Planning District from Suburban Office to Commercial and Public Institutional. The Commercial category includes a broad range of retail and wholesale sales of products, personal and professional services, and general business activities. Commercial activities vary in type and scale, depending on the trade area that they serve. Public Institutional includes public and quasi-public facilities which provide a variety of services to the community such as schools, libraries, fire stations, churches, utility substations, and hospitals. Prompted by this Land Use Amendment request, the Planning Staff expanded the area of review to include all of the area to the south and east to Woodland Heights Road and Fairview Road. One residential structure on the southwest corner of Summit and Woodland Heights Road is proposed to be changed to Commercial while the rest of the expanded area is proposed to be changed to Public Institutional. The Public Institutional area would recognize an existing ownership. With these changes, the majority of the Suburban Office would be eliminated. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: Land in the amendment area is zoned as such: land fronting Summit Road is zoned R- 2 while property fronting Woodland Heights Road is zoned O-3, General Office District. North of the site is zoned PCD, Planned Commercial District, for a shopping center that is undeveloped; to the east is zoned O-3 and is the site of medical offices; to the south is zoned R-2 CUP, Single Family Conditional Use Permit, for a Christ the King Church and school; O-3 for general offices and MF6, Multi-Family district, for apartments; and to the west is zoned R3, Single Family District, for a single family development, R-2 CUP for a religious institution and R-2 for a large lot single family house. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: October 7, 2003, a change from Transition to Mixed Office Commercial at the southwest corner of Sam Peck Road and Cantrell Road three-quarters of a mile to the west of the site to accommodate future development. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-01-04 2 On February 18, 2003, multiple changes occurred: Single Family to Public Institutional and Office at Sam Peck on the north side of Cantrell three-quarters of a mile to the west, Transition to Public Institutional, Office and Single Family east of Sam Peck on the south side of Cantrell a half of a mile to the west, Transition to Office on the north side of Cantrell across the street on both sides of the Southridge intersection (not including the fire station) to acknowledge existing uses. July 17, 2001, a change from Single Family to Park/Open Space to recognize Panky Park located one and one-quarter miles to the west. The Future Land Use Plans shows Suburban office for the site. To the south, southeast and easterly to I-430, the plan shows office. To the southeast is Christ the King Church and school shown as Public Institutional. To the west of the site, is area shown as Multi Family along Pleasant Ridge Road. On the northern most portion of Pleasant Ridge Road, there is an area of Office on the south side of the road and on the north is a shopping center shown as Commercial. To the north of the site is shown as Commercial. Further north across Cantrell Road at the intersection of Southridge Road, are areas of Office and Public Institutional for offices. MASTER STREET PLAN: Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial on the Master Street Plan and Pleasant Ridge and portions of Fairview Road and Woodland Heights Road are shown as Collectors. Fairview Road, Woodland Heights and Summit Road will require dedication of right-of-way and street improvements to bring them to Collector or Commercial Street standards. PARKS: There are not any proposed parks in this area. The closest park, River Mountain, is located in Walton Heights to the north. It is an undeveloped park of 378 acres. This application is not in a service deficit area as described in the Master Parks Plan. HISTORIC DISTRICTS: There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this amendment. CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The Traffic and Transportation goal listed an action statement of “Amend the Master Street Plan to realign Pleasant Ridge Road with Southridge Drive - High Priority”. In the Sustainable Natural Environment Goal listed action statements of 1) Preserve the Highway 10 Overlay District, 2) vigorously enforce the ordinance for hillside protection, and 3) Vigorously enforce the ordinance for the preservation of trees. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-01-04 3 These goals and objectives would not have a significant impact on the proposed land use plan amendment. ANALYSIS: West of I-430, Cantrell Road has developed more as an Office corridor with residential developments of single family subdivisions and scattered multi-family developments. Cantrell Road has established nodes of Commercial areas. This subject area is the expansion to the south of the easternmost nodes. The proposal to change to PI, Public Institutional, is to recognize existing ownership of property by Christ The King Church and school. The proposal to change to Commercial could be appropriate since it is a single large-scale development for the entire area. This commercial center proposed within the planned unit development process utilizes some of the “village concepts” with more traditional design concepts, as opposed to strip commercial development. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Walton Heights- Candlewood Neighborhood Association, Pleasant Valley Property Owners Association, Pankey Community Improvement Association, Pleasant Forest Neighborhood Association, Westbury Neighborhood Association, Westchester/Heatherbrae Property Owners Association, Secluded Hills Property Owners Association, Piedmont Neighborhood Association, River Valley Property Owners Association, Walnut Valley Neighborhood Association, Echo Valley Property Owners Association. Staff has not received any comments from area residents. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Approval. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 15, 2004) The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the August 26, 2004 Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-01-04 4 STAFF UPDATE: Several issues have been raised about the intensity and design of the proposed commercial center, which initiated this Plan change. These concerns and issues are important and critical to the successful functioning of the transportation system in the area and the establishment of this new development in a basically developed section of Little Rock. The surrounding arterial system is already at, near or above the desired design traffic volumes; thus any change in use that increases the traffic even a little is an issue. The Land Use Plan amendment is for the Summit Road area, expanding commercial into an area currently developed as residential-single family. This is a change from Suburban Office, which had been implemented to allow for possible conversion of this small single-family area to a more intense use due to the impact of surrounding development. Suburban Office would require careful design to minimize any impacts of the remaining homes. A large change, from single-family to commercial, such as is now being considered must be done at one time in one development. This is to minimize any negative impacts the change might have to the existing neighborhoods if done in a piece-meal method. The City is not opposed to the concept of a small single-family neighborhood changing, but it must be done as a unit if at all. The new development must be done to be sensitive to the existing developments, whether homes or businesses. It must fit into the fabric of the area. This does not mean that the new development cannot become the new center of activity for the general area, however. The original concepts brought to the City proposed to use “Village” and “Neo-traditional” design. This is and was seen as a positive change from the previously approved strip- commercial center along Cantrell Road from Pleasant Ridge to Woodland Heights. The City wishes to encourage creative and innovative design concepts. The inclusion of “Neo-traditional” elements is believed to be positive to the surrounding area and for the future customers of the uses. A “Town Center” or “Village” neo-traditional type of development, which does not turn its back on the immediate neighbors and attempts to address the scale and massing of the surrounding developments could be a positive impact on the general area. Staff would encourage inclusion of well-landscaped areas with native lower maintenance vegetation as suggested by the Neighborhood Plan for the area. And consideration of realigning Pleasant Ridge Road to Southridge as suggested by the area Neighborhood Plan might help with traffic impacts on Cantrell Road. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-01-04 5 For all the described reasons, Staff believes a change to Commercial on the Land Use Plan (while if done carefully and well, could be a positive to the area) is not desirable with the various possibilities that brings. However a change to Mixed Use, which might result in a commercial development or office or even a truly mixed development, would be preferable. In any case a change in the use from single-family to non-single-family should only be done using the Planned Zoning District process to assure compatibility with the surrounding area and that the various issues related to redevelopment of the site are addressed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) Brian Minyard, City Staff, made a brief presentation to the commission. In that presentation, he stated that Staff would be supportive of a change to Mixed Use and Public Institutional. Commissioner Pam Adcock asked if a change to Mixed Use was to guarantee a planned zoning development of some sort. The answer was yes. Commissioner Bill Rector questioned if Staff still supported the Public Institutional on the amendment. Mr. Minyard stated that Staff supported it, and that if the amendment passed; it would be changed on the plan. If the amendment did not pass, Staff would not take just it to the Board of Directors. Donna James made a presentation of item I.1 so the discussion could coincide with the discussion for item I. See item I.1 for a complete discussion concerning the Pleasant Ridge Long Form Planned Commercial Development. Dick Downing, representing Walter Smiley, stated that they withdrew their objection to the Future Land Use Plan amendment if it was changed to Mixed Use on the plan, and would work with the staff on buffering issues. Ruth Bell, Pulaski County League of Women Voters, stated that the Commercial on the Plan was an open-ended category. She continued that with infill development, a category with a PZD required works best. She stated that she thought Mixed Use on the Plan was a better option. Craig Williams, Pleasant Forest Neighborhood Association, stated that he was not in support of the Land Use Plan change and that it was not a good fit. He referenced the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan of 2002 and stated that the neighborhood plan did not support this development. Suburban Office, which is now shown on the plan, requires a PZD, as well as Mixed Use. He stated that a requirement of a PZD was a necessity. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-01-04 6 Julie Hancock, a resident of Cedar Branch Subdivision, has views of homes now, but will only see the shopping center later on if built. She stated that she and others bought their homes and made investments based on the zoning and Future Land Use Plan and the change should not be made. Sandy Bowman, a Cedar Branch resident, looked at the zoning and Future Land Use Plan prior to buying her house. She stated that the buffer would not be sufficient. She asked the commissioners to uphold the Future Land Use Plan. She stated that the center would have activity for 20 hours a day, seven days a week. Commissioner Adcock asked how many neighborhood associations were present. Five associations were represented at the meeting. A motion to defer item I to the October 7, 2004 meeting and was approved with a vote of 8 ayes, 1 no, and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: I.1 FILE NO.: Z-4411-D NAME: Pleasant Ridge Revised Long-form PCD LOCATION: South of Cantrell Road, East of Pleasant Ridge Road DEVELOPER: Pleasant Ridge Development Company, Inc 11601 Pleasant Ridge Road Little Rock, AR 72212 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 25.71 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PCD and R-2, Single-family District ALLOWED USES: Shopping Center and Single-family Residential PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD PROPOSED USE: Shopping Center VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 1. A variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow an increased cut along the western property line (Fair View Road). 2. A deferral of Master Street Plan requirements for Fairview Road. BACKGROUND: On December 20, 1994, through Ordinance No. 16,808, the City Board of Directors approved a PCD that would allow the development of a mixed use “Neighborhood Commercial” shopping center and an accompanying office development. The site was a 12.83 acre-tract and of the area, 11.48 acres was proposed to be developed as the shopping center. The proposed structure was 97,680 square feet, and 463 parking spaces were provided. The remaining 1.35-acre tract was to have 10,000 square feet of office building space with an additional 50 parking spaces. The uses proposed for the shopping center were all by-right C-2 and C-3 zoning district uses, except that there August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-D 2 was to be no service stations, auto glass or muffler shops, convenience stores, or car washes within the scope of the PCD. The uses proposed for the office building were all uses by-right in the O-2 and O-3 zoning district. On January 9, 1997, the Commission reviewed a request for a change in the right-of- way dedication and street improvement requirement to Fairview Road. The developer requested all right-of-way dedication and street improvements be taken from the property located to the east of Fairview Road. The Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,331 on December 3, 1996, which allowed the five year deferral of street improvements (or until development on the Pleasant Ridge Square PCD) to Fairview Road. The Little Rock Planning Commission granted a three year time extension for the proposed submission of the final development plan at their December 22, 1997, Public Hearing. The applicant began the development of a Final Development Plan for the site. The applicant submitted the Final Development Plan for the Pleasant Ridge Square Long-form PCD, which was approved on February 1, 2002. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The site now contains 25.7 acres and is located south of Cantrell Road and east of Pleasant Ridge Road. The proposed site plan includes the development of 270,000 square feet of retail and restaurant space. The request includes C-3, General Commercial District uses as allowable uses for the proposed development. The applicant has indicated parking of 1,258 parking spaces. Access to the site will be accomplished from six driveway locations. The center will have main driveways from Cantrell Road and Woodland Heights Road. Secondary access points will be from Fairview Road and Woodland Heights Road. A portion of the site is currently zoned PCD. The portion along Summit Road is zoned R-2, Single-family. The developer is requesting two out-lots fronting on Cantrell Road for possible restaurant locations. A deferral is being requested for a portion of the Master Street Plan improvements to Fairview Road. The request is due to the uncertainty of the property west of Fairview Road and the potential for redevelopment of a non- residential use. Land alteration variances for height of the cut along Fairview Road (60 foot) and to grade the entire site with Phase I are also being requested. The applicant is also requesting the closure of Summit Street as a part of the application and a request to change the City’s Future Land Use Plan (Item No. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-D 3 12 – File No. LU04-01-04 a change from Suburban Office to Commercial and Public Institutional). B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant adjacent to Cantrell Road and was previously cleared and graded. Along Summit Street there are single-family homes with tree covered lots. There is also a single-family home located along Fairview Road to the south of the site. There is a mixture of uses in the immediate area including single- family residential, multi-family residential, a private school, a church, office and retail. The area to the south and east are predominately office uses with a church and school located to the southwest and west. There is a single-family home located on a large tract to the west of the site abutting Fairview Road at Summit Street. There are single-family homes located to the southwest of the site on R-3, zoned property. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, Staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents and business owners. The Walton Heights/Candlewood Property Owners Association, the Peidmont Neighborhood Association, the Pleasant Forest Neighborhood Association, all property owners within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, within 300 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1. Cantrell Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial. A minimum dedication of right-of-way 55-feet from centerline will be required, with additional right –of-way at intersections. 2. Right-of-way dedications and improvements on Commercial Streets indicated are acceptable. 3. This portion of Cantrell Road is heavily congested and functions at an extremely low level of service during peak hours. A traffic study of impacts from this large scale development is required. 4. With future development, provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to the street including 5- foot sidewalk with the planned development. Additional lanes and turn lanes would be required by the Master Street Plan for Cantrell Road. Additional lanes would also be required at the main entrance at South Ridge. 5. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading and August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-D 4 drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. It should be noted that this project proposes a large scale haul-off of excavated materials. 6. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location of the storm water detention facilities on the plan. 7. On site striping and signage plans should be forwarded to Public Works, Traffic Engineering for approval with the site development package. Signal improvements may also be required. 8. Hauling of fill materials on or off the site over municipal streets and roads requires approval prior to a grading permit being issued. Contact Public Works Traffic Engineering at 621 South Broadway, (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield) for more information. 9. Summit Road right-of-way must also be dedicated and street improvements made to the standard for a commercial street. 10. Truck access should not be taken from Fairview Road, since deferral of improvements to this sub standard street is requested. While it is certainly acknowledge that the road has major grade problems, deferring improvements adjacent to such a major development may not be appropriate. 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. Cutting and plugging of existing water mains (8-inch and 3-inch water mains) and any other facilities that need to be adjusted and/or relocated, 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. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional information. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-D 5 Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: Provide bus stop and layover locations on the proposed site plan, which will safely and efficiently allow buses to drop-off and layover for a few minutes until the time of scheduled return trips. In addition CATA would like to enter and exit the site from Cantrell Road at signalized intersections. Contact CATA at 375-6717 for additional information. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Commercial and Suburban Office for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision to the PCD for an expansion of the project. A land use plan amendment for a change to Commercial is a separate item on this agenda (Item No. 12 – File No. LU04-01-04). Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial on the Master Street Plan and Pleasant Ridge and portions of Fairview Road and Woodland Heights Road are shown as Collectors. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and street improvements. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The traffic and Transportation goal listed an action statement of “Amend the Master Street Plan to realign Pleasant Ridge Road with Southridge Drive - High Priority”. This would affect the zoning application by the dedication of a Collector street in the northwest corner of the site. In the Sustainable Natural Environment Goal listed action statements of 1) Preserve the Highway 10 Overlay District, 2) vigorously enforce the ordinance for hillside protection, and 3) Vigorously enforce the ordinance for the preservation of trees. These action statements will affect landscaping and signage along Cantrell Road, any proposed cuts to the hillsides and preservation of trees. Landscape: A portion of the proposed on-site landscaping strip width along Pleasant Ridge Road appears to be less than the 7-feet required by the Highway 10 Overlay Ordinance and the 9-feet required by the Landscape Ordinance. Interior landscape islands need to be more evenly distributed to help break up the proposed large areas of asphalt. The Landscape Ordinance requires at least eight percent of the interior of vehicular use areas be landscaped with interior islands of at least 300 square feet in area and 7 ½ feet in width. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-D 6 The proposed landscape strip width west of the valet parking lot appears to be less than the minimum 6 feet and 9 inches required by the Landscape Ordinance and the 25-foot average of the Highway 10 Overlay Ordinance. The proposed service area should be screened from the residential properties across Fairview Road. Because of the elevation difference this screen should consist of evergreen trees (such as Leyland cypress) spaced 15-feet on center, planted on the higher elevated side of the street landscape buffer. A 6-foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen plantings, is required where adjacent to residential properties to the south and west. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. Prior to a building permit being issued, it will be necessary to provide landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (June 24, 2004) Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates and Mr. Ernie Peters of Peters and Associates were present representing the request. Staff stated the request was to place a shopping center on the site currently zoned PCD, R-2 and O-3. Staff also stated there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff requested Mr. White provide information concerning the treatment of the rear of the proposed building, a cross section of the site showing sight lines and details concerning proposed signage. Staff also requested information concerning the proposed screening mechanism for the service bay of Building A. Staff stated there were concerns since the service bay would be oriented to Cantrell Road. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a grading permit as well as a hauling permit would be required. Staff stated there were concerns with the drive at Fairview Road being located at the crest of the hill and the applicant’s request for a deferral of street improvements to the roadway. Mr. White suggested the applicant construct street improvements to each end of the road saving the area with the largest elevation change until the redevelopment of the property located to the west. Staff stated they would like to discuss this in detail and suggested Mr. White meet with staff individually concerning the required street improvements. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-D 7 Staff stated a large part of the decision of addition lanes and street improvements would be related to the findings of the traffic study. Mr. Peters stated the traffic study would be submitted in a few days at which time staff and the owner would sit down to discuss necessary improvements. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the site plan appeared to falls short of the required landscaping in a few locations. Staff stated an area along Pleasant Ridge Road appeared to be less than the seven feet required by the Highway 10 Overlay and the nine feet required by the Landscape Ordinance. Staff also stated additional interior islands were necessary to break up the expansion of asphalt. Staff stated screening would be required along Fairview Road to block view of the service drive. 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 staff with only a portion of the requested information from the June 24, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has acquired additional land area indicated on the proposed site plan as future acquisition area but has not included development plans for these areas. In addition staff has some questions and concerns with the traffic study submitted by the applicant. Due to the size of the proposed development and the potential impacts of the proposed development, staff is requesting this item be deferred to the August 26, 2004 Public Hearing to allow additional time for review and analysis. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends deferral of the request to the August 26, 2004 Public Hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 15, 2004) Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated due to the large number of issues remaining unresolved with the proposed development they were recommending the item be deferral to the August 26, 2004, Public Hearing to allow staff and the applicant additional time to resolve these issues. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair placed the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval of the deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-D 8 STAFF UPDATE: Staff is not prepared to provide a recommendation at this time. Staff has review the site plan and is providing below the facts related to the proposed site development. Staff is continuing to work with the applicant to resolve outstanding issues related to traffic and sight design and proposed building elevations. A recommendation will be provided to the Commission at their public hearing. The development sign located on Highway 10 has been indicated as a maximum of fifteen feet wide 10 feet in height and one hundred fifty square feet in area. The applicant has also indicated signage for each of the out-parcels proposed along Highway 10. Each of these signs are proposed as a maximum of ten feet in width and eight feet in height with a maximum sign area of eighty square feet. There are shopping center development signage located on retaining walls on the western and eastern driveway entrances from Highway 10. The applicant has indicated the proposed signage will be a part of the hardscape of the development. A monument style sign is also proposed at the rear entrance to the shopping center along Woodland Heights/Fairview Road. The site is proposed as a twelve foot wide, eight foot tall sign with a sign area of one hundred square feet. The proposed site plan indicates the 40-foot landscape strip along Highway 10 measured from the “original property line”. The site plan indicates a dedication of right- of-way 55-feet from centerline. The current right-of-way adjacent to the site is 40-feet. Per the Highway 10 Design Overlay District Ordinance the 40-foot landscape strip is to be measured from the new property line, after right-of-way dedication. The proposed site plan does include the placement of several dumpster locations and two locations for trash compactors. The applicant has indicated the dumpsters will be screened according to ordinance standards or at least two feet above the finished container height. There are dumpster locations adjacent to Fairview Road. Per the zoning ordinance dumpsters are to be oriented away from the street side of the property and adequately screened from residential property. The indicated site plan appears to delineate areas for interior landscaping but based on the scale of the drawing it is difficult to determine if the areas are sufficient to meet ordinance requirements. The applicant has indicated all landscaping requirements will be met. At the time of building permit a landscape plan stamped with the seal of a registered landscape architect will be required to be submitted and approved. The proposed site plan includes the proposed screening material for the area to the south adjacent to residentially zoned property. The applicant has indicated evergreen plantings at the higher elevations will be added such as Leyland Cypress at 15-foot on center will be added to aid in the screening of adjoining properties. The site plan includes the placement of the plantings along Fairview Road and to the south adjacent August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-D 9 to the Church site and the office complex. The indicated land use buffers appear to meet the minimum ordinance requirements. The applicant has indicated pedestrian tables on the proposed site plan to provide access to the various activities on the site. The site plan includes the placement of parking along the western portion of the site in a horseshoe pattern but on the eastern portion of the property the applicant has indicated the more traditional big box asphalt parking lot. The applicant has indicated based on different style users the proposed parking layout may vary. The applicant has indicated for example a grocery store prefers a more traditional type parking with the straight rows of parking in front of the business. Cross sections and view corridor sections have been provided to staff to allow the view corridors from Highway 10, from Fair View Road, from Woodland Heights Road and the area near Cedar Branch Drive. The cross sections indicate the existing elevation of Highway 10 is at 480 feet and the out parcel building adjacent to Highway 10 will be set at 500-feet. The cross section indicates the sight line will extend over the buildings of the site and the development to the south of the site will not be visible from Highway 10. The applicant has indicated at Fairview Road the building will be set at 520-feet. The height of the crest of Fairview Road is 570-feet after the roadway has been reconstructed to improve the sight distance. The sight line will be over the proposed buildings. At Fairview Road and Cedar Branch Drive and Woodland Heights Drive the elevation of the street is set at 540-feet and the proposed building pad will be set at 520-feet. The proposed site plan indicates a bus stop near the entrance at Woodland Heights Road. CATA has indicated their desire is to enter the site at a traffic signal and to exit the site at a traffic signal with an area set aside for layover. The applicant has meet with CATA and CATA has indicated the provided location is acceptable. The applicant has provided a detailed description of the materials and elements intended to incorporate into the design of the Pleasant Ridge Center. The applicant has indicated the primary material for the front elevation will be various shades of brick with cast stone bases and horizontal accents. The only other material proposed would be stucco in some areas. The applicant has stated individual tenants in the shop area will be responsible for their own designs within the front openings. There will be a tenant manual, which limits their use of materials and design. The past experience with this is that it provides a varied and interesting front façade. Additionally, the applicant will be incorporating design feature such as a tower and simulated two story elements as appropriate. The applicant has stated the sidewalks in front of the center will use a variety of pavements and incorporate both grade and raised landscape areas will be brick and pre-cast stone caps. The owner also indicated plans for incorporating items of interest such as sculptures. The rear and side elevations will have a combination of brick August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-D 10 painted concrete block or half high colored block. The buildings will be broken up so that no elevation will be long and monotonous. The applicant has indicated a total of 1200 on-site parking spaces. The total square footage of the proposed shopping center 300,000 square feet. The typical minimum parking required for a shopping center of this size would be 1333 parking spaces. The applicant has requested a deferral of street improvements to Fairview Road. The applicant has indicated a dedication of 30-feet from centerline will be given to the City but the developer request a deferral of the ½ street improvement of the commercial street until development adjacent to the site is completed. The applicant has indicated a hill must be removed to allow for proper sight distance and is requesting a deferral to allow all the street construction to take place at one time. The applicant is requesting a 60-foot cut along Fairview Road. The applicant has indicated once the street is reconstructed the cut would then be a 50-foot cut. The ordinance typically allows for a maximum of a 30-foot cut with 15-foot terraces. Any cut above the 30-foot cut requires prior approval from the Planning Commission. TRAFFIC ENGINEERING: Traffic Engineering has completed its review of the traffic study prepared by Peters and Associates. Although the consultants indicated that the Center would have no significant impacts on traffic flow or negative impacts on the adjacent neighborhood, staff feels that there will be significant impacts and that sufficient mitigations to address traffic issues have not been identified or planned by the developer. Staff has modeled Cantrell Road during the PM rush hour traffic utilizing the Synchro Model developed by the consultant. When completing the analysis utilizing SimTraffic, simulation software, staff found that the traffic stacks up in the westbound direction on Cantrell clear through the Rodney Parham signal and that Drive B and Woodland Heights Road at Cantrell are in complete gridlock due to unavailable gaps in westbound traffic for left turning vehicles. Further study of the Cantrell corridor adjacent to the development indicates that there are solutions that can be implemented to address the increased congestion caused by the proposed development. The solutions will require driveway and signal modifications to address these issues. The increased traffic load in conjunction with reduced green time for the westbound movement on Cantrell at Southridge causes traffic to stack to the east clear through the Rodney Parham intersection. When analyzing the existing traffic system with the traffic from the proposed development not included in the flows, traffic moves unimpeded. Presently, the PM peak hour traffic on Pleasant Forest is about 300. Additional analysis done by the consultants indicates an increase of about 70 vehicles or 23% in this traffic as a result of the proposed development. This is based on the assumption that there August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-D 11 will be no congestion on Cantrell Rd. and vehicles leaving the shopping center will have no problems accessing Cantrell. However, as the simulation model shows, there will be a lot of congestion on Cantrell and as a result of this, there could be an increase in the amount of traffic using the southern access to the shopping center. It should also be noted that there is a speeding problem on Pleasant Forest Rd. Residents have long been complaining about this. Since Pleasant Forest has no traffic signals and links Hinson and Rodney Parham, any congestion on Cantrell Rd. is likely to force more traffic onto Pleasant Forest thus worsening the speeding problem. In order to address this and preserve the character of the neighborhood, traffic calming devices such as traffic circles, chicanes, partial diverters, etc. are recommended to be constructed on Pleasant Forest. As far as the rear entrance, staff believes if the entrance is not built, the traffic will find their way through the residential area regardless. There are rear entrances on Fairview and Woodland Heights Road, where vehicles can enter and exit the proposed development. Traffic will find the route with the shortest drive time, and if that is through Pleasant Forest, then they will go that way. If the roundabout is constructed, then the median shown just north of the roundabout must be constructed without median cuts throughout the section to the end of the median as shown. The cut that is shown is too close to the roundabout, thus causing an unsafe condition. Staff is continuing to work with the applicant to resolve outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff will provide a recommendation at the Commission meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There was a number registered objectors present. Staff presented an overview of the proposed request indicating there had been a number of changes made to the proposed development in the past few days. Staff stated Driveway B was now the main entrance to the shopping center. Staff stated the applicant had indicated they were willing to install a traffic signal at Driveway B to help resolve traffic conflicts on Cantrell Road. Staff stated the proposed traffic signal would allow for exits onto Cantrell Road while turning was taking place on Southridge Road. Staff stated this would facilitate traffic flow in the area. Staff stated the applicant had also indicating the driveway at Southridge would be a right-in-right-out only driveway. The applicant addressed the Commission on the merits of the proposed request. The applicant stated the Commission had received a copy of a petition that contained 500+ signatures in support of the proposed development. The applicant also stated there had been neighborhood meetings to inform the residents of the proposed request. The developer’s architect addressed the Commission stating the proposed development August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-D 12 would incorporate several features including landscaping and hardscaping materials. He stated the site would be pedestrian friendly with cross walks at the level of sidewalks. He stated pedestrian tables would be added to parking fields to allow pedestrian’s ease of access to the center. He stated visual barriers would be added to the site to protect nearby residents. The applicant stated there were a number of concessions made prior to the public hearing. He stated the applicant was no longer requesting the southern entrance into the proposed development. He stated the developer was no longer requesting a deferral of street improvements to Fair View Road. He stated a stop light would be added to Driveway B to help resolve traffic concerns. Mr. Mike Colson addressed the Commission in support of the proposed request. He stated the development would have a beneficial impact on properties in the area. Mr. Mike Montgomery addressed the Commission in support of the proposed request. He stated there were two point of consideration the Commission should take into account. He stated he was a resident of Pleasant Valley and he was not notified by the Property Owners Association of a vote on the proposed request even though they had submitted a letter of opposition of the proposed request. He stated the membership was not poled to find a general consensus of the proposed development. He stated the second point was the developer was responsive to residents and business owners within his existing developments. Mr. Bill Austin addressed the Commission in support of the proposed request. He stated he was a resident of the Pleasant Forest Property Owners Association. He stated he was not opposed to the proposed request and felt the proposed development would only enhance property values in the area. Mr. John Burnett addressed the Commission indicating he was representing Easter Seals of Arkansas. He stated Easter Seals of Arkansas was no longer opposed to the proposed development since the rear entrance had been removed. Mr. Dick Downing addressed the Commission on behalf of Mr. Walter Smiley. He stated his client was not going to speak in opposition at this public hearing but did want to reserve the right to speak at a future date. He stated his client wanted to review the site plan once the changes were made (removing the rear entrance) and only at that time would his client make a determination as to support or opposition. Ms. Ruth Bell of the League of Women Voters of Pulaski County addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated she would like to see in writing all the issues that had been agreed upon. She stated in light of the changes the Commission might wish to defer the item to allow all the agreements to be put in writing. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-D 13 Mr. Lloyd Freedman addressed the Commission on behalf of the Jewish Center. He stated the Jewish Center was concerned with their congregation accessing the site on the Sabbath. He stated his congregation did not drive on the Sabbath and walking to the site was the only option. He stated with the proposed development and the increased traffic on Fairview the congregation could be danger. He requested the item be deferred to allow the two parties additional time to resolve any outstanding issues. Mr. Craig Williams addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated the development had changed several times since the original submission. He stated the development had grown from 270,000 square feet to 300,000 square feet and the total site area had increased from 25 acres to 27 acres. He stated the neighborhood was primarily concerned with the increased traffic the shopping center would generate. He stated Pleasant Forest was designed as a collector street and currently exceeded the design capacity of 5,000 cars per day. He stated most of the cars traveled in excess of the posted speed limit. Mr. Williams stated the City had committed to helping to resolve the problem but presently the problem existed. He stated eliminating the rear entrance would not reduce the number of cars on Pleasant Forest. He stated the proposed development was four acres larger than Park Plaza Mall. He questioned why if there was a market for retail the development the approved site from 1994 had not been developed. He stated there were a number of residents in the area that had bought homes and refinanced homes based on City’s ordinances and plans. He stated there were also concerns related to the proposed elevations and cross sections provided by the applicant. He stated the neighborhood did not agree with the proposed change to the land use plan. Ms. Julie Hancock addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated the applicant was requesting to expand the approved planned development to the south which would directly affect the area. She stated with the removal of the existing vegetation, trees and the hill at Summit Street the neighborhood would be exposed to traffic and noise that was now shielded. She stated at the time she purchased her home she called the City to verify the zoning and land use of the properties around her home. She was told the Future Land Use Plan indicated Suburban Office for the area, which she felt was a comfortable transition between the intense commercial development along Highway 10. She stated office development would allow for compatibility between the homes and the office users. She stated office uses would not operate until late hours. She stated the commercial development was intended to operate from 5:00 am to 2:00 am leaving only a short period of time there would not be activity on the site. Ms. Hancock questioned the traffic study and the validity of the traffic study. She stated it was her understanding the traffic numbers were generated from summer traffic August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4411-D 14 counts. She also stated when the traffic counts were conducted the new Wal-Mart store was not open. Ms. Hancock stated if she would have known that a commercial development could have been constructed on the proposed site she would have not purchased her home. Ms. Sandi Boen addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated she also verified the zoning of the property prior to the purchase of her home. She stated when she purchased her home there were five to six houses on the street and now the subdivision contained 25 homes. She stated she felt with the zoning of the site and the designation of the land use plan as Suburban Office a commercial development would not be allowed on the site. She stated she felt the most likely redevelopment would be office or condo development. Ms. Boen stated Fairview Road was a narrow roadway and did not lend itself to commercial development. She stated she felt as staff the placement of a big box shopping center on the site was not neighborhood friendly. She requested the Commission not rezone the site to allow the shopping center. Mr. Jim Lake addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated he was a member of the Pleasant Valley Property Owners Association Board which did vote to oppose the proposed development. He stated traffic was a concern with the area residents. He stated with the increased traffic of a shopping center Rodney Parham Road would need to be widened. He stated the City had upheld the resident’s wishes to not four lane Rodney Parham Road in the past. He stated with the development would come increased crime. He stated the increased traffic would also increase the time for emergency response to area residents. He stated the developer should not be allowed to remove Summit Street as proposed. Mr. Lake stated a big center should be not placed on the site. He stated the residential should be protected by the long established plans of the City. Mr. Jim Veach addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated the density of the proposed development was a concern of the area residents. He stated the proposed development was located in the wrong place and at the wrong time. He stated the proposed development would compromise the existing homes and property values. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed request. The Commission stated there were significant changes being proposed and they felt the item should be deferred to allow additional time to revise the plans and combine all the information into one narrative and site plan. A motion was made to defer the item to the October 7, 2004 Public Hearing. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: J FILE NO.: MSP04-04 Name: Master Street Plan Amendment - Chenal Planning District Location: Dorado Beach Road Request: Remove Collector Extension Source: Frank Riggins, Mehlburger Engineering PROPOSAL / REQUEST: Master Street Plan amendment in the Chenal Planning District for the Removal of a Collector Extension named Dorado Beach Road. CURRENT MASTER STREET PLAN: The Extension of a Collector street (Dorado Beach) is shown as an east - west Collector that connects Hinson Road to the east with Beckenham to the west. Beckenham is proposed to connect with Rahling Road to the west. A portion of Beckenham currently connects with Hinson Road to the east. Hinson Road and Rahling Road are shown as a Minor Arterials on the Master Street Plan. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN: The Plan shows all of the land on both sides of Pebble Beach Drive and the built part of Dorado Beach Drive to be Single Family. The portion of the street in this application is shown as Low Density Residential. To the southeast, an area is shown as Multi-family on both sides of Hinson south of Hinson Road. HISTORIC DISTRICTS: There are no historic districts that would be affected by this amendment. CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN: This area is covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action plan. The plan does not state anything relevant to this application. ANALYSIS: Dorado Beach is the Collector through 120 ± acres that was at one time to be a religious based campus with a church, school, retirement village, etc. That development had all of the vehicular traffic access from Hinson Road with no traffic August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: J (Cont.) FILE NO.: MSP04-04 2 whatsoever utilizing Pebble Beach. That plan was not realized and the acreage has since developed in 40 ± acre increments from west to east. This amendment to the Master Street Plan concerns the eastern most 40 ± acres, the last area to be developed. The Commission first considered an east-west Collector in 1995 when Pebble Beach Estates was preliminary platted. This is the westernmost 40 ± acre tract. This development has 116 lots, in which all of the lots have been built. At that time, the Planning Commission requested that Dorado Beach Drive be constructed to Collector standards. This request was fulfilled by the developer by constructing it to Collector standards from Beckenham (in the southwest corner of the development) to the east property line. In June of 1997, the commission reviewed the Woods At Hinson, now known as Pebble Beach Woods, for the 40 ± acres adjacent to Pebble Beach Estates. This is the center forty ± acre tract. This development has 118 lots, in which all but two of the lots have been built. Again, the Commission requested Dorado Beach Drive to be constructed to Collector Standards. This request was fulfilled by the developer by constructing it to Collector standards from the existing Dorado Beach Drive to the east property line. The current proposal is named Hickory Grove has 85 lots for Single Family homes. This is the easternmost forty-acre ± tract abutting Hinson Road. The proposal is to build a gated community with a cul-de-sac on the eastern end of Dorado Beach Drive. The new development would be accessed from one point on Hinson Road. According to the GIS database, there are 343 homes that access either Hinson Road or Rhaling Road via Pebble Beach. These are homes in the following subdivisions; Longlea Estates, Hickory Hills, Pebble Beach Park, Hickory Ridge and Chenal Ridge. The lots in Pebble Beach Estates (116) and the 118 in Pebble Beech Woods, and the proposed 85 in Hickory Grove add up to 319 lots. These added lots almost double the traffic on Pebble Beach Road unless Dorado Beach has access to Hinson Road. The spacing of Collectors is to evenly distribute the traffic volumes over the network of streets, not to concentrate the traffic on one Collector in favor of another. The Master Street Plan states in Section 2: Road Classifications: “A Collector street is the traffic connection from residential streets to arterials or to activity centers, with the secondary function of providing access to adjoining property. The Collector system should not be continuous but should direct traffic to arterials. This class of road is generally at a spacing of quarter to half mile. The spacing of Collectors may be decreased and/or the right of way and paving surface increased due to density of residential development and locations of commercial areas or other large traffic generators. At the time of the subdivision, the exact location and additional need for Collectors will be determined by the Little Rock Planning Commission upon advice of the City staff.” The spacing of collectors in this area meets these criteria. The spacing along Rhaling Road from Pebble Beach to Beckenham and from Beckenham to the August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: J (Cont.) FILE NO.: MSP04-04 3 unnamed Collector to the south are both slightly less than one-quarter mile. From that Collector to Champlin (a Minor Arterial) is just under one half mile. On Hinson Road, the distance from Pleasant Forrest to Pebble Beach, and from Pebble Beach to Dorado Beach, and from Dorado Beach to Beckenham are all just under one-half of a mile spacing. Each of the Collectors mentioned previously, meet the textbook spacing of Collectors. The spacing of Collectors in not to overwhelm one Collector in favor of another, but to more evenly distribute the traffic volumes. All of the above Collectors, both existing and proposed, function as the definition of collectors state in the Master Street Plan as “the traffic connection from residential streets to arterials or to activity centers, with the secondary function of providing access to adjoining property.” They also all fit the spacing requirements set forth in the Plan. For Functional Classifications, the traffic volume on any existing or proposed collector does not determine the need for a collector, only the manner in which it is built. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Hillsborough Property Owners Association, Marlowe Manor Property Owners Association, DuQuesne Place Property Owners Association, Chenal Ridge Property, St. Charles Property Owners Association, Johnson Ranch Neighborhood Association, Maywood manor Neighborhood Association, Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association, hunters Cove Property Owners Association, Carriage Creek Property Owners Association, Bayonne Place Property Owners Association, Eagle Point Property Owners Association, Glen Eagles Property Owners Association, Hunters Green Property Owners Association, Charleston Heights/North Rahling Road Neighborhood Association, Margeaux Place Property Owners Association, Pleasant Valley Property Owners Association. Staff has received one comment from area residents, which was opposed to the change. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is not appropriate. The spacing of Collectors in the area is per the Master Street Plan and the spacing of Collectors in not to overwhelm one Collector in favor of another, but to more evenly distribute the traffic volumes. The current alignment meets all criteria for a collector, for spacing and for function. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: J (Cont.) FILE NO.: MSP04-04 4 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 15, 2004) The applicant asked for the item to be deferred. Staff stated that it would be deferred to the August 26, 2004 agenda. A motion was made to waive the by-laws for a five-day notice to defer prior to the Planning Commission meeting. That motion was made and approved with a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent. A motion was made to defer and was approved with a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. STAFF UPDATE: Traffic counts and a traffic study was provided by Peters & Associates at the last Planning Commission meeting. The traffic counts were made on Pebble Beach Drive just west of Hinson Road and another just east of Rhaling Road. The following are the findings in the report followed by Staff’s analysis of each. The report states: “5,685 vehicles per day on Pebble Beach Drive, just west of Hinson Road is the highest traffic volume on Pebble Beach Drive in the area that was counted. This volume is approximately equal to the normal service volume for a collector street.” Staff reports that the Master Street Plan states in the Design Specifications as amended by Ordinance #18,055 that the Designed Service Volume on a Collector Street is 5,000 vehicles per day. The Collector is designed to function at 5,000 cars per day, but can function at a higher or lower traffic count. The report states: ‘As proposed, the subdivision consisting of approximately 83 lots would generate approximately 830 trips per day. Staff notes that the study uses the average of ten trips per day per single-family residence. The report states: “As proposed, the subdivision will have its own and only point for access on Hinson Road and no connections to Dorado Beach Drive.” Staff notes that this is shown on the revised PD-R, which is another item on this agenda. The report states: “If a roadway connection is made from Dorado Beach Drive to Hinson Road, it would be possible for existing traffic to cut through the existing neighborhood from Pebble Beach Drive to Hinson Road. This cut -through could have a negative impact on existing residential streets.” Staff contends that if the above mentioned cut-through could happen, then the opposite traffic pattern could also happen. In fact, without the proposed connection of Dorado Beach to Hinson Road, the traffic generated by the homes in Pebble Beach Estates (116) and the homes in Pebble Beach Woods (116) have be accessing Hinson and Rhaling Roads through the neighborhood to the north. Using an average of 10 trips per day (as used by the study), the homes in Pebble Beach Estates and Pebble Beach Woods generate 2320 trips onto Pebble Beach each day since there is no other outlet onto Hinson or Rahling Roads. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: J (Cont.) FILE NO.: MSP04-04 5 When the proposed Collector is finished, the amount of traffic on Pebble Beach generated by those homes will be decreased. The report states: “No intersection on Pebble Beach Drive from Hinson Road to Rahling Road has constrained operation due to intersection traffic volumes.” Staff contends that if the volumes decrease slightly on Pebble Beach Drive with the addition of Dorado Beach connection as proposed, the traffic flow might improve at the existing intersections. The final paragraph in the report states that “We have the opinion the subdivision proposed and the adjoining neighborhoods are better served with exclusive access for the subdivision to Hinson Road and with no connection to adjacent neighborhood streets. This would assure that the satisfactory traffic operation on Pebble Beach Drive will continue to exist.” Staff does not believe that the neighborhoods would be better served with the removal of the Proposed Collector, and reaffirms the statement from the recommendation that the spacing of Collectors in not to overwhelm one Collector in favor of another, but to more evenly distribute the traffic volumes throughout the area. Even if Pebble Beach will work at the higher volume, why should it have to when a Collector had been proposed which was originally added to the Master Street Plan in order to take the traffic from this area and not force it on to Pebble Beach. Public Works has also reviewed the study and has stated the Proposed Collector should be built as planned. Staff believes the change is not appropriate. The spacing of Collectors in the area is per the Master Street Plan and the spacing of Collectors in not to overwhelm one Collector in favor of another, but to more evenly distribute the traffic volumes. The current alignment meets all criteria for a collector, for spacing and for function. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) Brian Minyard, City Staff, made the presentation to the commission that included the history of the previous developments in the area. He also covered the traffic study as provided by the applicant. Randy Frazier, representing the applicant, covered the history of the area. He asked that the City analyze Dorado Beach Drive as to whether or not it needed to be a Collector street. He covered decisions before that required Dorado Beach Drive to be a Collector. He continued his presentation to dispel rumors that there was no financial gain with the different classification of the street and no financial gain for the additional smaller lots. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: J (Cont.) FILE NO.: MSP04-04 6 Mr. Frazier stated the Dorado Beach Drive was built to a 31’ wide section instead of a 36” wide section. He maintained that traffic on Montvale Drive and Valley Park Drive would increase if Dorado Beach Drive connected with Hinson Road. Greg Simmons, of Peters & Associates Traffic Engineers, gave the commission a presentation on their opinion of what would happen to the traffic if the connection was made or was not made. If the connection were not made, the traffic on Valley Park Drive and Montvale Drive would increase slightly. It is the opinion of Peters and Associates that if the Dorado Beach Drive were connected with Hinson Road, that Valley Park Drive would have a twenty-five percent increase and Montvale Drive would have a thirty-six percent increase in traffic. Some relief would be given to Pebble Beach Drive, but at the expense of Valley Park Drive and Montvale Drive. Commissioner Norm Floyd asked if there was stacking at Pebble Beach Drive and Hinson Road. Mr. Simmons responded that there was, but it was acceptable. Commissioner Bill Rector added all of the segments in the study without the connection of Dorado Beach Drive and Hinson and it totaled 1034 segments. If the connection was made, the segments totaled 2,013. He asked Mr. Simmons where the extra trips were generated. Ernie Peters stated the trip numbers were different for the diversion of traffic from Pebble Beach to the other streets. Commissioner Rector continued to ask how the trip numbers were generated. Mr. Simmons responded that the existing counts were added to the projected to get the final projected numbers. Chairman Mizan Rahman added that traffic engineering is more of an art than a science. Frank Riggins, representing the applicant, had nothing to add to the presentation. Commissioner Floyd asked Mr. Frazier a question about the rumored profit from the lots being no different. Mr. Frazier stated that each project is different and that they try for continuity of development with similar size lots within the subdivision. Mr. Riggins added that the number of lost changed because of street changes and alignment of roadway changes. Commissioner Bob Lowery asked if the roadway were abandoned, would it be a gated community? Mr. Frazier responded that the proposed subdivision would be a gated community. Commissioner Lowery stated that he was against gated communities and would vote against the amendment. Mr. Melvin Mayfield, a resident of the last house to the east on Dorado Beach Drive, wants the proposed collector removed. He spoke for the gated community and of the cut through traffic that would occur. He continued that traffic would cut through both ways, and suggested closing Valley Park Drive. Mr. Danny Broaddrick, a resident of Valley Park Drive, spoke in opposition to the application. He read the text of the petition that was given to staff. He stated that he August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: J (Cont.) FILE NO.: MSP04-04 7 and other neighbors had been waiting for relief from traffic. Mr. Broaddrick stated that he was here last year on this same property. The traffic has increased on Valley Park Drive since that time. He continued that Valley Park was not built to handle that amount of traffic. A promise had been made earlier to make the connection, and other developers had built the collector. If the latest developer does not build the collector, is it fair? Marily Cash, a resident who lives on the corner of Valley Park Drive and Dorado Beach Drive, has lived there for five years and knew at the time of purchase that the connection would be made. She asked for road to be opened. Nancy Kirsch, a resident of Valley Park Drive, stated that the only way to relive traffic on Valley Park is to open Dorado Beach Drive. She commented that this was a diverse neighborhood. She continued that the Master Street Plan looks at logical ways to distribute traffic. Ruth Bell, of the Pulaski County League of Women Voters, supports long range planning. Two developers have already built the collector and asked why stop now when we are so short of the connection? Mr. Simmons asked for clarification of the Master Street Plan. A motion was made to approve the item as presented. The item was denied with a vote of 0 ayes, 9 noes, and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: J.1 FILE NO.: Z-4562-D NAME: Hickory Grove Revised Long-form PD-R LOCATION: On the West side of Hinson Road, just South of Pebble Beach Drive DEVELOPER: Markus – Evans Construction, LLC 1801 Champlin Drive Little Rock, AR 72223 ENGINEER: The Mehlburger Firm 201 South Izard Street P.O. Box 3837 Little Rock, AR 72203 AREA: 40 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 85 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PD-R ALLOWED USES: Single-family Residential PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD-R PROPOSED USE: Single-family Residential VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Plat Variances - 1. A variance to allow a reduced front building line along the interior streets. 2. A variance to allow a reduced side yard setback for all proposed lots. 3. A variance to allow a reduced rear yard setback for all proposed lots. 4. A variance to allow the development of the subdivision with private streets. BACKGROUND: The property is the remaining 40+ acres of a 120-acre parcel or the eastern 1/3 of the property owned by the First Baptist Church. The site was originally proposed as a multipurpose facility with residential, school and church facility. The western 80 acres have since developed as a single-family neighborhood. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: J.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4562-D 2 This property was zoned MF-6, Multi-family District (six (6) units per gross acre allowed) in mid-1981. A “Declaration of Covenants” was filed and recorded in 1981, which runs with the property. The private covenants regulate the property’s use and portion of the property’s development. The private covenants state that the property will be developed for condominium units developed pursuant to the Horizontal Property Act being Act 60 of 1961 (units for sale only, no rental units). The covenants designate certain areas of the property as OS (Open Space) and require a six (6) foot high privacy fence be constructed at one location prior to any construction. The covenants also state that structures built in one area of the property not exceed one and one-half stories in height; both located on the northern boundary of the site. A preliminary plat and a multiple building site plan review were filed on the site in May 1997, to allow the construction of 234 apartment units in 10 three-story buildings. Prior to the Public Hearing; the applicant requested the application be withdrawn from consideration. A proposal was filed in March 2000, to develop a portion of the site (18.47 acres) with 22 buildings of owner occupied condominium housing. The application was later withdrawn from consideration without prejudice prior to the Public Hearing. Ordinance No. 18,884 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on June 3, 2003, rezoned this 39-acre site from MF-6 to a Planned Residential Development with 83 units. The Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed the request and provided a recommendation of approval at their March 20, 2003 Public Hearing. The applicant proposed to develop the site in three (3) phases with zero-lot line townhouses, each of which would have its own lot of record. A common wall would be shared by each structure, which would be dissected by the common property line. This would allow some measure of property on each end of the structure for maintenance of the building. The structures would have enclosed garages facing a private street with a private courtyard on the rear of each townhouse unit. The applicant proposed the construction of a bridge across the creek that separates this property from Hinson Road. The bridge would be constructed in the first phase. The applicant proposed a public roadway to connect with Hinson Road and Dorado Beach Drive. The road would be constructed when one of the abutting lots was final platted. There were two other streets proposed as a part of the development, which the applicant intended to maintain as private streets. There were three areas designated by covenants in the deed that were not to be encroached upon by building construction. The applicant indicated the areas of non- encroachment on the proposed development plan and indicated the covenants to be in force. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: J.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4562-D 3 At the May 6, 2003 Public Hearing of the Little Rock Board of Directors, Director Michael Keck requested the item be returned to the Planning Commission to reconsider the need for the connection of Dorado Beach Drive between Rahling Road and Hinson Road. There had been many conversations between the neighborhood, the developer and the Board concerning the connection of the street. In these conversations, the neighborhood did not want the street connection and the developer indicated he did not desire to build the street. Director Keck was not convinced the Commission considered all the issues related to the street and if the development should be developed without the through connection. Director Keck stated he was not stating the street should not be built, only that the Commission reconsider the need for the street connection when making their decision concerning the approval of the project. Mr. Jim Lawson, Director of Planning, gave a presentation to the Board of Directors concerning traffic in the area. The Commission was not given this presentation. The presentation contained background material concerning when the street was proposed as a collector street to the City’s Master Street Plan, the development pattern in the area and traffic counts on Pebble Beach Drive. Director Keck indicated he did not feel the Commission had all the relevant information and therefore did not consider the street connection issue or if the subdivision should be developed without the connection. On May 29, 2003 the Little Rock Planning Commission took a second look and the proposed street design and the need for the proposed Collector street extending from Dorado Beach Drive and ending at Hinson Road. The Commission first considered the connection in 1995 when Pebble Beach Estates was preliminary platted. At the time two (2) streets were proposed to extend eastward into undeveloped areas; one of which was Pebble Beach Woods, the other area is the site being considered by the requested application. At the time the applicant proposed to subdivide 39.87 acres into 116 single-family lots. There were two (2) connections proposed one (1) Beckenham Road and the other Dorado Beach Drive. Beckenham Road has been shown on the Master Street Plan as a collector street since 1988. Staff and the Commission at the time of the proposal for Pebble Beach Estates requested Dorado Beach Drive be constructed to Collector Standards. [Per the Master Street Plan the Commission has the authority to request additional streets at the time of subdivision. “The exact location and additional need for Collectors will be determined by the Little Rock Planning Commission upon advise of Staff.”] When the Commission reviewed the Woods at Hinson, now known as Pebble Beach Woods in June of 1997, the Commission once again requested Dorado Beach Drive be constructed to Collector Standards. This request extended the street to the west property line of the current proposed development. The Master Street Plan was never officially amended to include this connection but the minute record indicated the Commission’s desire for Dorado Beach Drive to extend from Hinson Road to the west. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: J.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4562-D 4 Staff informed the Commission there was one east/west connection in the area, Pebble Beach Drive. The traffic counts on Pebble Beach Drive indicate approximately 1,500 automobiles per day of through traffic. The Commission was informed the service volume of a collector street was 5,000 cars per day. Other average daily traffic counts in the area indicated Pebble Beach Drive carried approximately 550 automobiles northbound and 575 automobiles southbound on Montvale Drive. On Valley Park Drive the average daily traffic counts indicated 775 northbound automobiles and 1,080 southbound automobiles. The final area analyzed was Pebble Beach Drive just east of Valley Park Drive. Estimates indicated there were approximately 2,950 automobiles per day eastbound in this area and 2,790 automobiles per day westbound. In 2003 Pebble Beach Estates and Pebble Beach Woods were 85 percent “built-out”. Of the homes constructed there were a number of the homes vacant. In addition there were 50 plus lots, which had been approved with a preliminary plat but have not yet began construction in the Chenal Ridge Subdivision. The proposal involved the completion of the connection of Dorado Beach Drive to Hinson Road. The applicant stated he was willing to make the connection and move forward with the project. Staff felt the connection desirable and felt the connection should be completed. With construction of Dorado Beach Drive extending from Hinson Road to the west and connecting to the current terminus, the traffic pressure on Pebble Beach Drive would be relieved. Although Beckenham Road had been identified on the Master Street Plan as a collector street staff did not feel Beckenham Road would be constructed in the near future. Staff felt once the connection was made it would aid in relief of traffic pressure on Pebble Beach Drive and Dorado Beach Drive should traffic volume become an issue. The Planning Commission reaffirmed their recommendation for the proposed collector street to remain on the Master Street Plan by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. The item was then considered by the Board of Directors and approved with the proposed collector street as was reviewed and approved by the Commission at their March 20, 2003 Public Hearing. Ordinance No. 18,883, also adopted June 3, 2003, allowed the requested variances for lots without public street frontage, an increased lot depth to width ratio and a variance to allow double frontage lots. The lots were sized to accommodate the building plans as required in the Subdivision Ordinance for zero-lot line developments. On October 16, 2003 the applicant proposed to amend the PD-R to allow the creation of 65 detached single-family lots on this 38.62 acre site. The developer indicated the retention of the green spaces as was previously proposed in the areas to the north and south of the site. The applicant also indicated Dorado Beach Drive would be extended as was previously approved (as one of the lots abutting the roadway is final platted). August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: J.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4562-D 5 The applicant requested variances from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow an increased depth to width ratio, a reduced front lot width, a reduced platted building line and reduced side and rear yard setbacks for specific lots within the development. The developer indicated the internal streets would be maintained as private streets and be gated. The applicant also indicated the development would be constructed in three phases. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now requesting a revision to a previously approved PD-R to remove the connection between Dorado Beach Drive and Hinson Road therefore, allowing for a more efficient subdivision layout. It is the position of the applicant that this connection is unnecessary and will not provide any traffic relief for Pebble Beach Drive. It is also the position of the applicant that the amount of traffic on Pebble Beach is such that the level of service is still well within acceptable limits. The revised plat allows for the extension of the cul-de-sacs to the north and a total lot count of 85 units. The applicant is willing to construct a cul-de-sac at the end of Dorado Beach and allow for emergency back entrance to the subdivision should the bridge on Hinson Road be impassable. A turnaround will be constructed on the west side of the bridge and a single gated access will be constructed. The streets will remain private but constructed to city standard. All deed-restricted areas will remain in tact. The applicant is requesting similar variances as were previously approved. The applicant is requesting variances to allow the development of the subdivision with private streets, a variance to allow an increased lot depth to width ratio, a variance to allow a reduced front building line and a variance to allow reduced side and rear yard setbacks. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is currently undeveloped and heavily wooded. Construction has begun on the bridge crossing extending from Hinson Road into the proposed subdivision. The Windsor Court Condominium development and single-family residences are located to the south, with single-family residences to the north. There is undeveloped R-2, Single-family property to the west, with single-family residences further west. Single-family residences and undeveloped R-2 property are also located across Hinson Road to the east. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: J.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4562-D 6 C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, Staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents indicating both support and opposition to the proposed request. The Pleasant Valley Property Owners Association, the Hillsborough Property Owners Association, the Chenal Ridge Property Owners Association, all property owners within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, within 300 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1. This is the third revision to this plat. All previous comments apply, except as may be modified under this plat. 2. Dorado Beach is shown on the Master Street Plan as a collector and should be construct as planned. 3. The plat as submitted shows some fairly major drainage-way relocations. Additional hillside drainage easements should be provided. Relocation of existing drainage ways should be minimized. 4. In accordance with Section 31-207, private streets shall be constructed to the same standards as public streets. Loria and LaScalia do not meet the criteria for minor residential street and should be constructed to a 26-foot width with sidewalks on one side. Remove the island from Bella View or demonstrate that a single unit truck can make the turn. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements if service is required for the project. No construction within Tract “A” without approval of the plans by Little Rock Wastewater Utility. An existing sewer main outfall is located within Tract “A”. 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. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. A water main extension will be required in order to provide August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: J.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4562-D 7 service to this property. Modification of the plans for water facilities now under contract will be required with this change. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional information. Fire Department: Maintain a 20-foot gate opening. Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3700 for additional information. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Low Density Residential for this property. The applicant has applied for a PRD for a single-family residential development The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: A Proposed Extension of a Collector street (Dorado Beach) is shown on this site that crosses the site in an east – west direction. A Master Street Plan Amendment for the removal of that Collector Street is a separate item on this agenda (Item No. 13 – File No. MSP04-04). Hinson Road is shown as a Minor Arterial on the Master Street Plan Dorado Beach Road is shown as a Collector. These streets previously named may require dedication of right-of-way and improvements. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The Residential Development Goal listed an objective of “Develop Neo-traditional neighborhoods (pedestrian and bicycle friendly neighborhoods, which are less dependant on automobiles) in areas that have not yet developed. It also listed action statements of 1) “Enforce the construction of sidewalks with all types of development”, 2) “Insure that physical continuity of sidewalks so that sidewalks built on the same side of the street connect without gaps and that sidewalks built on opposite sides of the street are connected with ADA accessible crosswalks”, 3) “Require developers to install underground utilities in all new subdivisions, and 4) “Require street lighting to be in place in new subdivisions at the time streets are opened. Landscape: No comment. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: J.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4562-D 8 G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (June 24, 2004) Mr. Frank Riggins was present representing the request. Staff stated the request involved two issues, one to remove a proposed collector street from the Master Street Plan and two, if this issue were successful the revision of the previously approved preliminary plat. Commissioner Rector questioned if this issue was discussed as a part of the original planned development. Staff stated in their opinion the issue had been discussed. Mr. Riggins stated a traffic study was currently underway that would prove the street was not warranted in this location and the removal of the proposed collector street would not have a negative impact on the area. Staff requested the applicant provide additional information on the proposed preliminary plat. Staff requested the applicant provide the linear feet of internal street along with the source of water and the means of wastewater disposal in the general notes section of the proposed preliminary plat. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated there were concerns with the indicated drainage-way relocations. Staff stated relocation of existing drainage ways should be minimized and requested additional hillside drainage easements to be indicated on the proposed plat. Staff also stated streets, public or private, were to be constructed to Master Street Plan standard. Staff noted the comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies and suggested Mr. Riggins contact them individually for additional information. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the June 24, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the linear feet of internal street, the source of water and the means of wastewater disposal. The applicant has also indicated drainage easement and additional easement as requested by staff. The proposed request is to subdivide this 40 acre site into 85 single-family lots. The proposed subdivision will be developed in two phases. The average lot size for Phase I is 75 feet by 150 feet and the average lot size for Phase II is 70 feet by 135 feet. The applicant has indicated Lots 74 – 85 will be developed in Phase I and Lots 1 – 73 will be developed in Phase II. The proposed development will add 3,818 linear feet of new private street along with sidewalks where required per the Master Street Plan. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: J.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4562-D 9 The proposed subdivision will require variances from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the development of lots with reduced front, side and rear yard setbacks. The applicant has indicated a five foot typical side yard setback. The applicant has indicated a ten foot rear yard setback and a five foot front building line. Staff is not supportive of the proposed request due to staff’s non-support of the applicant’s request to remove a proposed collector street from the Master Street Plan (Item #13 – File No. MSP 04-04). As indicated staff feels the proposed collector street indicated on the Master Street Plan is critical to future development of the area as did the Commission in 1995, 1997 and 2003. Without the removal of the proposed collector street from the Master Street Plan, the indicated design will not work. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 15, 2004) Mr. Randy Fraizer was present representing the applicant. There were registered objectors present. Mr. Fraizer stated his client had received a traffic study which was given to staff at the agenda meeting. He requested the item be deferred to the August 26, 2004 Public Hearing to allow staff time to review the provided information. A motion was made to waive the By-Laws with regard to the late deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. A motion was made to defer the item to the August 26, 2004 Public Hearing. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. The applicant requested the item be deferred to the December 2, 2004, Public Hearing to allow time for an appeal to the Little Rock Board of Directors of the denial vote received on the previous item (Item J – File No. MSP 04-04). There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to approve the deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: S-878-B NAME: Sach’s Suburban Tract’s Replat Block 17 LOCATION: Located near the Kanis Road and Cooper Orbit Road intersection DEVELOPER: Pat Malstrome 11610 Kanis Road Little Rock, AR 72212 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 319 President Clinton Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 9.15 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT: 18 – Ellis Mountain CENSUS TRACT: 42.07 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes the subdivision of this 9.15 acre tract into two lots. One lot will remain zoned R-2, Single-family and held for future residential development. The second lot is proposed as a rezoning to PD-C (a separate item on this agenda Item No. 28.1 File No. Z-7701). The lots are proposed as 1.11 acres and 8.04 acres. The applicant has indicated annexation will be sought to provide wastewater service from the Little Rock Wastewater Utility. The proposed site plan indicates a 30-foot building line adjacent to Kanis Road for each of the proposed lots. A 25-foot platted building line has been indicated along the 40-foot undeveloped street right-of-way along the southern boundary. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-878-B 2 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is located outside the City limits but within the City’s Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction. The site contains an existing vacant industrial building, the former FMC manufacturing company. South of the site is an area currently zoned MF-6 which once housed several manufactured homes; this site is now vacant with the exception of one unit. North of the site are single-family homes along with a non-conforming retail shop. North and west of the site are vacant R-2, Single-family zoned properties. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has received two informational phone calls from area residents. The Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Association and the Parkway Place Property Owners Association along with all property owners located within 200-feet of the site and all residents located within 300-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Kanis Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A dedication of 45-feet from centerline will be required. 2. An additional radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of Kanis Road and the un-developed, platted street. 3. The proposed land use would classify the undeveloped road to the south on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30-feet from centerline. 4. Provide deign of the street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to the street including a 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development. Master Street Plan requirements would also apply to the undeveloped road. Construction would be required prior to final platting, or a Board deferral must be obtained. 5. Property fronting on an arterial with 300-feet of frontage would allow for one driveway and 600-feet would allow for two driveways. The plat should show shared driveway access centered on the property line. The width of driveway pavement must not exceed 36-feet. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Outside the service boundary. Provide an approval letter from the Pulaski County Sanitarian concerning the proposed septic system. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-878-B 3 Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: Waterline Easement recorded as instrument number 2003-014478 should be shown on the plat. 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). On site fire protection may be required for Lot 1. 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: The proposed preliminary plat does not indicted land corners, state plane coordinates, contours, adjoining property owners and the minimum right-of-way indicated does not meet the County required right-of-way of 80-feet, 40-feet from centerline. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the applicant. Staff presented an overview of the proposed request indicating there were additional item necessary to complete the review. Staff requested the applicant provide the name and address of the landowner along with the source of title on the proposed preliminary plat. Staff also requested the applicant provide a front building line on each of the proposed lots. Staff requested the applicant provide the names of owners of all abutting lands on the proposed preliminary plat and provide a note concerning the proposed phasing of the development. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-878-B 4 Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the plat indicated an existing right-of-way, which would need to be dealt with. Staff stated the street either needed to be constructed or a waiver approved by the Board of Directors or be abandoned. Mr. McGetrick stated the developer was willing to construct the street but was interested in the construction at the best location for the City. Mr. McGetrick stated the Master Street Plan indicated a connection in this area but he understood the connection was nearer Cooper Orbit Road than the proposed site. Staff also questioned the indicated driveways. Staff stated the property frontage did not allow for two drives and a shared drive should be placed on the property line. Mr. McGetrick stated he did not feel a shared drive between the two properties would create a conflict. He stated both developments would take access from the 40-foot street, which was to be constructed. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated a front building line for each of the lots. The applicant has also indicated the source of title of the landowner and the names of owners of all abutting lands on the proposed preliminary plat. The applicant has indicated the development will be developed in two phases. The applicant has indicated the road will be constructed per the Master Street Plan standard. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s indicated street construction. The applicant proposes the subdivision of this 9.15 acre tract into two lots. One lot will remain zoned R-2, Single-family and held for future residential development. The second lot is proposed as a rezoning to PD-C (a separate item on this agenda Item No. 28.1 File No. Z-7701). The lots are proposed as 1.11 acres and 8.04 acres. The applicant has indicated annexation will be sought to provide wastewater service from the Little Rock Wastewater Utility for the development of proposed Lot 2. Proposed Lot 1 is served by an existing septic system approved by the Pulaski County Sanitarian. The proposed site plan indicates a 30-foot building line adjacent to Kanis Road for each of the proposed lots. A 25-foot platted building line has been indicated along the 40-foot undeveloped street right-of-way along the southern boundary. Staff is supportive of the indicated building line. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-878-B 5 Staff is supportive of the proposed preliminary plat. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff feels the proposed plat should have minimal impact on adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) 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 conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: S-1042-HH NAME: The Villages of Wellington Phase XII Revised Preliminary Plat LOCATION: Located on the South West corner of Wellington Village Road and Bristol Court 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 CENSUS TRACT: 42.10 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 1. A variance to allow a reduced front building line (20-feet) Lots 1 – 35 Block 21. 2. A variance to allow Durham Court to exceed the maximum length of a minor residential street. 3. A variance to not require sidewalk placement along Yorkshire Lane. 4. A variance to allow a five foot side yard setback on Lots 1 – 35 Block 21. 5. A variance to allow a reduced rear yard setback (20-feet) Lots 1 – 35 Block 21. 6. A variance to allow a 25-foot building along Wellington Village Road for Lots 1, 8 and 9 Block 24, Lot 1 Block 22 and Lot 64 Block 23. 7. A variance to allow a 15-foot front building line adjacent to the proposed cul-de-sac streets. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-HH 2 A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The property contains 53.7 acres and is located south of Wellington Village Road and west of Wellington Woods Drive. The property will be subdivided into 158 Single-family lots. Phase I and III are proposed as patio style lots. The average lot size proposed in these phases will be 60-feet by 120-feet. The applicant is also requesting a variance to allow a reduced side yard setback and a reduced rear yard setback for these lots. The setback is proposed as five feet to allow for additional buildable area on each of these lots. Phase II, IV and V are proposed as medium size lots similar to those previously developed to the east. Average lot sizes in these phases will be 80-feet by 130- feet. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a reduced front building line along a collector street. The applicant has 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. The applicant is requesting variances from the Master Street Plan related to the proposed plat area. The applicant is requesting a variance 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. Storm water detention is provided in the existing lake to the south. This lake was constructed several years ago by Winrock Development as an amenity for the development, but also as a regional storm water detention facility for this drainage basin. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant and tree covered with slightly rolling hills to steep grades. The area to the west is vacant and was formerly the pasture for the Shackleford Dairy. The area was recently rezoned to R-2, Single-family and MF-6. The area to the east of the site is developing with single-family homes similar in lot size to the applicant’s request. The area directly north has been preliminary platted as Wellington Village Phase XI and infrastructure improvements are currently underway. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-HH 3 C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from the area residents. The St. Charles Neighborhood Association, the Parkway Place Property Owners Association and all abutting property owners were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. A sidewalk would be required on Durham Loop since it exceeds the maximum length of 1500-feet for a minor residential street. The minimum curve radius should be 150-feet. Likewise for the Yorkshire Drive and Waterford Lane loop streets. 2. Sidewalk should also be provided for Yorkshire Lane. 3. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. 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 Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. 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 fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered connections off the private fire system. Water main extensions will be required in order to provide service to this property. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional information. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-HH 4 County Planning: No comment. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) Mr. Joe White and Mr. Doug McNeil were present representing the request. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a revised plan to staff on August 4, 2004 so some of the indicated comments were no longer valid. Staff stated there were comments still outstanding which would need to be addressed. Staff requested the applicant provide a 30-foot building line adjacent to Wellington Village Road per the Subdivision Ordinance for single-family residences abutting a collector street. Staff stated a variance would be required to allow the indicated 25-foot building line. Staff stated a portion of the property was currently zoned MF-6 and R-3. Staff stated the applicant would need to seek a rezoning of the non-R-2 zoned site prior to final platting. Commissioner Rector questioned the street naming configuration. He stated the street names were confusing when the same name was used multiple times. Mr. White stated 911 would allow two variations of the same street name. Mr. Rector stated more than one caused confusion. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a sidewalk along Durham Loop would be required since the street exceeded the maximum length for a minor residential street. Staff also noted sidewalks would be required on Yorkshire Lane, Yorkshire Drive and Waterford Lane. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has requested a variance to allow a 25-foot platted building line adjacent to a August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-HH 5 collector street for five of the proposed lots. Lots 1, 8 and 9 Block 24, Lot 1 Block 22 and Lot 64 Block 23 have a 25-foot front building line indicated on the proposed preliminary plat. The Subdivision Ordinance typically requires a front building line adjacent to a collector street to be 30-feet. The applicant has indicated justification for a reduced building line which states the lots to the east were also approved with a 25-foot building line adjacent to Wellington Village Road and the developer wishes to continue the established building setback. Staff is supportive of this request. The applicant has also indicated a rezoning request will be filed if and when the proposed preliminary plat is approved. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request to postpone the rezoning request until after plat approval but prior to final platting. The applicant has not changed the names of streets and has indicated three street names beginning with the same primary name; Yorkshire Lane, Drive and Loop. Staff recommends the applicant work with staff to resolve this issue prior to final platting. The applicant has requested sidewalks not be required along Yorkshire Lane. Staff is not supportive of this request. Staff recommends the sidewalk be put in place per the Master Street Plan to allow pedestrian connectivity through the neighborhood. The applicant has requested Durham Court be allowed to exceed the maximum length for a cul-de-sac. The applicant has indicated the street at approximately 960 feet. The ordinance typically requires cul-de-sac streets not exceed a maximum length of 750 feet. Staff is supportive of allow the increased street length. The applicant has indicated a cul-de-sac with a proper radius to allow service vehicles to turn-around and exit. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a reduced front building line (20-feet), a variance to allow a five foot side yard setback and a variance to allow a reduced rear yard setback (20-feet) for Lots 1 – 35 Block 21. The applicant has indicated these lots will be developed as garden style homes. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. Staff feels the development of the mixture of housing types in the area should enhance the neighborhood. The applicant is also requesting a variance to allow a 15-foot front building line adjacent to the proposed cul-de-sac streets. The applicant has indicated in these locations grades are steep and the allowance of a reduced building line would allow for more buildable area. Staff is supportive of this request. The applicant has indicated the development will be constructed in three phases. Lots 1 – 9 Block 24, Lots 46 – 64 Block 23 and Lots 1 – 18 Block 21 will be developed in the first phase. Lots 1 – 15 Block 23, Lots 1 – 19 Block 22, Lots 1 – 35 Block 21 and Lot 1 Block 25 will be developed in the second phase and Lots August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-HH 6 16 – 45 Block 23 and Lots 2 – 17 Block 25 will be developed in the final phase. The applicant has indicated Tracts A – E as a part of the proposed preliminary plat. According to the applicant the property owners association will maintain ownership and maintenance of the indicated tracts. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s proposed phasing plan. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request and the applicant requested variances. Staff feels the proposed preliminary plat will have minimal adverse impact on the adjoining properties. The development of the proposed subdivision with various lot sizes and proposed housing types should add to diversity in the area. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff recommends the applicant rezone the properties contained within the proposed preliminary plat currently zoned R-3 and MF-6 prior to final platting of the proposed subdivision. Staff recommends approval of the following requesting variances: 1. A variance to allow a reduced front building line (20-feet) Lots 1 – 35 Block 21. 2. A variance to allow Durham Court to exceed the maximum length of a minor residential street. 3. A variance to allow a five foot side yard setback on Lots 1 – 35 Block 21. 4. A variance to allow a reduced rear yard setback (20-feet) Lots 1 – 35 Block 21. 5. A variance to allow a 25-foot front building along Wellington Village Road for Lots 1, 8 and 9 Block 24, Lot 1 Block 22 and Lot 64 Block 23. 6. A variance to allow a 15-foot front building adjacent to the proposed cul-de- sac streets. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) 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 conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1042-HH 7 Staff also presented a recommendation the applicant rezone the properties contained within the proposed preliminary plat currently zoned R-3 and MF-6 prior to final platting of the proposed subdivision. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the following requested variances: 1. A variance to allow a reduced front building line (20-feet) Lots 1 – 35 Block 21. 2. A variance to allow Durham Court to exceed the maximum length of a minor residential street. 3. A variance to allow a five foot side yard setback on Lots 1 – 35 Block 21. 4. A variance to allow a reduced rear yard setback (20-feet) Lots 1 – 35 Block 21. 5. A variance to allow a 25-foot front building along Wellington Village Road for Lots 1, 8 and 9 Block 24, Lot 1 Block 22 and Lot 64 Block 23. 6. A variance to allow a 15-foot front building adjacent to the proposed cul-de-sac streets. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 3 FILE NO.: S-1440-A NAME: Bella Rosa Estates Revised Preliminary Plat LOCATION: Located on the West side of Bella Rosa Drive, South of Snyder Creek DEVELOPER: Clint Wilson 11101 Rodney Parham Road Little Rock, AR 72212 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 9.39 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 21 FT. NEW STREET: 750 LF CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT: 19 - Chenal CENSUS TRACT: 42.11 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 1. A variance to allow the development of lots with private streets. 2. A variance to allow the placement of an eight-foot fence within the required building setback. 3. A variance to allow double frontage lots (Lots 12 and 13). 4. A variance from the Strom Water Detention Ordinance requirement. BACKGROUND: A request was reviewed by the Commission at their July 15, 2004 Public Hearing to allow the subdivision of this site containing 9.4 acres into 19 single-family lots which were to be developed with private streets. The proposed preliminary plat indicated street improvements to Bella Rosa Drive per the Master Street Plan. The applicant indicated three of the proposed lots would front on Bella Rosa Drive, but take access from a private drive in the rear of the lots. Two of the lots were to take access from Woodall Lane, an existing private drive. The house on proposed Lot 11 was to remain. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1440-A 2 The applicant indicated an average lot size of 85-feet by 140-feet or 11,900 square feet. The proposed development would add 750 linear feet of new private street. The applicant indicated the development would be a private subdivision with a gated entrance. The proposed preliminary plat indicated a divided entrance with a minimum gate opening of twenty-feet. The proposed preliminary plat indicated a gate along with a turn-around at the keypad to allow for persons not entering the subdivision exit from the development. The developer was approved an eight-foot privacy fence around the entire development similar to that approved for other subdivision in this area. The developer was approved a waiver of the storm water detention requirements for the site. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now proposing to revise the previously approved preliminary plat to allow the subdivision of 7.9 acres into 19 single-family lots. The developer has purchased additional property to the west and is requesting to increase the size of the lots within the development. The lots will average 120-feet by 150-feet. The subdivision will remain as a gated community and private streets. All lots will be accessed from within the development. The applicant is requesting a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow two of the proposed lots to be developed as double frontage lots. The applicant has indicated sewer and water will be extended to the site. Bella Rosa Drive will be constructed to Master Street Plan standard adjoining the site. The applicant is requesting the previous variances be approved. The applicant is requesting a variance from the Storm Water Detention Ordinance and to be allowed the placement of an eight foot fence around the site. The applicant has indicated the fencing will now be constructed or brick or wrought iron material. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant and tree covered with a large creek located along the northern boundary. There are single-family homes located to the east and south of the site along Bella Rosa Drive. To the north of the site is a vacant tract zoned PCD recently approved for an office-warehouse development. To the west of the site are single-family homes located along Forest Lane, Woodall Lane and Lucky Lane all private drive. Bella Rosa is a narrow roadway with open ditches for drainage. As stated Forest Lane is a private drive and is unimproved with large potholes and chipped asphalt. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1440-A 3 C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. All abutting property owners, the Westchester/Heatherbrae Property Owners Association and the Johnson Ranch 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 in accordance with Section 8-283 prior to construction. 2. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 3. Easements are required for all storm water entering and leaving the property. Show drainage easement of Lots 9 and 10 for flow from the adjacent subdivision to the west and the flow across Lot 10. Easements will also be needed for the flow from the south at Lots 4 and 5. 4. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the location of the storm water detention basin. 5. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock Code of Ordinances. Contact Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1813 (Steve Philphott) for more information regarding streetlights. 6. The wrought iron subdivision fence should be located at the top of the bank of Taylor Loop Creek (Snyder Creek). E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements if service is required for the project. Any relocation of existing sewer mains will be accomplished at the Developer’s expense. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1440-A 4 the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the 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. Existing water lines appear to encroach into this property from the west. These lines will need to be abandoned or an easement will need to be provided. If there are facilities that need to be adjusted and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. That work would be done at the expense of the developer. A water main extension will be required in order to provide service to this property. Proposed Fire Hydrants will be private. 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. Gates must maintain a 20-foot opening. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff briefly described the proposed request indicating the request was reviewed and approved by the Commission at their July 15, 2004 Public Hearing on a smaller scale. Staff stated the developer had acquired additional land to the northwest and the lots had increased in size. Staff noted two additional lots were also proposed. Staff requested the applicant provide additional information on the proposed preliminary plat including the names of recorded subdivisions abutting the plat area and the names of owners of all unplatted tracts abutting the plat area. Staff also questioned the driveway located on the western property line extending from Lucky Lane near proposed Lots 6 and 7. Staff requested the applicant describe how the lots would be accessed after the development of the site. Mr. White stated he would address this with the owner and possible a cross access agreement could be reached and the proposed fence located easterly to not intrude into the drive. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1440-A 5 Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the fence adjacent to the floodway would be required to be placed on the creek bank and not interfere with the water flow. Staff also stated storm water detention would be required. Mr. White stated the previous plat was not required storm water detention. Staff stated if this was the case then this request would not be required storm water detention either. Staff did however request drainage easement on Lots 4, 5, 9 and 10. Staff stated the easements were needed to handle the flows from the south and from an adjoining proposed subdivision. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the names of recorded subdivisions abutting the plat area and the names of owners of all unplatted tracts abutting the plat area. The applicant has also indicated the driveway located on the western property line extending from Lucky Lane near proposed Lots 6 and 7 would be addressed a cross access agreement to not interfere with their existing drive. The applicant is requesting the development of the subdivision with private streets. This would require a variance from the subdivision ordinance to allow the development of private streets, which the Planning Commission may approve if deemed appropriate. Staff is supportive of this request. The applicant is also requesting a variance to allow the placement of an eight- foot fence within the required building setback. The applicant has indicated the fence will be constructed of a solid wall or a wrought iron fence. Staff is supportive of this request. All proposed fencing must be placed outside the limits of the floodway as indicated on the proposed preliminary plat. Staff does not feel the placement of a fence around the perimeter of the subdivision will cause any negative impacts on adjoining properties. The applicant is also requesting a variance from the Strom Water Detention Ordinance requirement. Staff is supportive of this request if easements are in place to transfer storm water to the adjoining creek. The applicant has indicated easements will be provided as requested by staff on Lots 4, 5, 9 and 10 to August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1440-A 6 facilitate water movement through the site. This will also aid the drainage of the adjoining subdivision which was approved at the Commissions July 15, 2004 public hearing. The applicant is also requesting a variance to allow double frontage lots for Lots 12 and 13. The applicant has indicated a 10-foot no vehicular access easement along Bella Rosa Drive as required by the subdivision ordinance. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request for double frontage lots. The applicant has indicated the average lot size to be 120-feet by 150-feet or 18,000 square feet. The applicant has indicated 1660 linear feet of new private- street will be constructed as a part of the development. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s requested preliminary plat. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff feels the development of the private subdivision will have minimal to no adverse impact on adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow the development of lots with private streets. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow the placement of an eight-foot fence or wall within the required building setback. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow double frontage lots (Lots 12 and 13). Staff recommends approval of the requested variance from the Storm Water Detention Ordinance requirement. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) 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 conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the requested variance to allow the development of lots with private streets, the requested variance to allow the August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1440-A 7 placement of an eight-foot fence or wall within the required building setback and around the perimeter of the site, the requested variance to allow double frontage lots (Lots 12 and 13) and the requested variance from the Strom Water Detention Ordinance requirement. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: S-1441-A NAME: Ranch Highlands West Revised Preliminary Plat LOCATION: located on Valley Ranch Drive, North of Cantrell Road DEVELOPER: FCC Grass Farms Partnership Suite 300, Financial Center III Little Rock, AR 72211 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 5.68 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 13 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: O-3, General Office District and R-2, Single-family Residential PLANNING DISTRICT: 20 - Pinnacle CENSUS TRACT: 42.05 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. The applicant submitted a request dated August 9, 2004 requesting this item be deferred to the October 7, 2004 Public Hearing. The applicant has indicated the deferral will allow for sufficient time to resolve the outstanding issues related to the proposed zoning of the site, which the Commission will review at their September 9, 2004 Public Hearing. Staff is supportive of this request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request dated August 9, 2004 requesting the item be deferred to the October 7, 2004 Public Hearing. Staff stated the applicant had indicated the deferral would allow for sufficient time to resolve the outstanding issues related to the proposed zoning of the site, which the Commission August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: (S-1441-A) 2 would review at their September 9, 2004, Public Hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: S-1444 NAME: McMurry Subdivision Preliminary Plat LOCATION: Located on the Northwest corner of Vinson Road and Arch Street Pike DEVELOPER: McMurry 11200 Arch Street Pike Little Rock, AR 72206 ENGINEER: James S. Aunspaugh 510 ½ South Claremont Avenue Sherwood, AR 72120 AREA: 2.03 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: Not zoned PLANNING DISTRICT: 14 – Geyer Springs West CENSUS TRACT: 40.01 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A five year deferral of street improvements to Arch Street Pike and Vinson Road. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes the subdivision of 1.58 acres into two non-residential lots. The site is located outside the City Limits but within the City’s Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction. The site is located within the planning area the City exercises subdivision control only including the mater street plan requirements. Proposed Lot 1 contains Arch Street Pharmacy and proposed Lot 2 will contain a Dollar General Store. The applicant has meet with the Pulaski County Planning Board and was approved at their August 3, 2004 Public Hearing. The applicant has indicated Lot 1 will contain 0.92 acres and Lot 2 will contain 0.66 acres. The applicant has submitted an approval of the proposed wastewater treatment system from the Pulaski County Sanitarian. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1444 2 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant and cleared. There is a pharmacy located on proposed Lot 2 of the McMurry Subdivision. The Pharmacy has a continuous curb cut along Arch Street Pike and Vinson Road. There are non-residential uses located along Arch Street Pike in this area including the City of Little Rock Fire Training Center and a Pulaski County Sheriff’s sub-station. Arch Street Pike is a two lane roadway with open ditches for drainage and no sidewalk. Vinson Road is a narrow roadway also with open ditches for drainage and no sidewalk. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has not received any comment from area residents. The abutting property owners and Southwest Little Rock United for Progress were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Arch Street Pike is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial. Dedication of right-of-way 55-feet from centerline will be required (as shown on the plat). 2. Vinson 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 (not shown on the plat). 3. With the final platting, provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvements including a 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development. This would apply to all property frontage shown on the plat. 4. Plans for all work in the right-of-way shall be submitted to Public Works for approval prior to the start of construction. Obtain permits for work in the right- of-way from AHTD, District 6. 5. For the Dollar Store Site Plan; Ordinance criteria requires commercial driveways be spaced 150-feet from the property boundary and have a maximum width of 36-feet. A cross access easement between the properties with a shared driveway between the properties is suggested. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Outside the service boundary. No comment. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1444 3 Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: Approved as submitted. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Approval of the City of Little Rock is also required prior to service. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered connections off the private fire system. Additional fire hydrant(s) may be required. Contact the Fire Department having jurisdiction to obtain information regarding fire hydrant requirements and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional information. County Planning: The front building line should be set at 40-feet not the 25-feet indicated. An engineering certification is required along with the stamp and signature. Pulaski County supports the applicant’s request for a deferral of street improvements to Arch Street Pike and Vinson Road. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) Mr. James Aunspaugh was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed request indicating the request was located outside the City Limits but within the City’s Planning Jurisdiction. Staff requested the applicant provide the entire plat area on the preliminary plat. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated right-of-way dedication and street construction to Arch Street Pike and Vinson Road would be required per the Master Street Plan standard. Mr. Aunspaugh questioned if a waiver or deferral could be sought. Staff stated typically on commercial site the Board would not approve a waiver but would typically support a deferral. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1444 4 Staff stated they would recommend a shared driveway adjacent to the site. Staff stated this would reduce the number of conflicting traffic movements to the site. Mr. Aunspaugh stated the site had been designed to separate the truck traffic accessing the Dollar General Store site and the customer traffic accessing the Pharmacy site. Mr. Aunspaugh stated the pharmacy did not have a dedicated drives just one continuous curb cut. Staff suggested the applicant meet with this to discuss alternatives for driveway design and location. Mr. Aunspaugh stated this was acceptable. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the entire plat area on the proposed preliminary plat as requested by staff. The applicant has also indicated a dedication of right-of-way along Arch Street Pike and Vinson Road per the Master Street Plan requirements. The applicant is requesting a five year deferral of street construction to each of the streets. Staff is supportive of this request. The applicant has indicated Lot 1 will contain 0.92 acres and Lot 2 will contain 0.66 acres. Staff is supportive of the indicated lots sizes. The applicant has submitted an approval of the proposed wastewater treatment system from the Pulaski County Sanitarian. The applicant has indicated the shared drive and cross access easement is not conducive to the development of the site for the Dollar General Store. The applicant has stated the existing pharmacy preferred the deliveries be taken on the north side of the building to avoid noise and congestion. The dumpster was also located on the northern side for the same reason. The perk test and septic system were designed and approved based on the site plan as submitted. The septic system is located on the south side of the building and the only area the septic system could be located. In addition the existing pharmacy patrons presently park in front of the pharmacy. They pull directly off Arch Street Pike. Due to the location of the pharmacy and distance off of Arch Street Pike the Dollar General Store is located there is potential for bottleneck and congestion on the site. Staff supports the proposed driveway location. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1444 5 I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff recommends approval of the applicant’s request for a five year deferral of street improvements to Vinson Road and Arch Street Pike. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) 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 conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the applicant’s request for a five year deferral of street improvements to Vinson Road and Arch Street Pike. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: S-1445 NAME: Thomas Park Estates Preliminary Plat LOCATION: Located on the Northwest corner of Thomas Park Road and Sorrell Road DEVELOPER: Jerry and Evelyn Thomas 10 Thomas Circle Little Rock, AR 72212 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72221 AREA: 10.0 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 5 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT: 1 – River Mountain CENSUS TRACT: 42.05 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 1. A variance to allow the development of lots with private streets. 2. A variance from the Storm Water Detention Ordinance requirement. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The property contains approximately 10 acres and is located east of Terra Bella Addition and north of Thomas Park Addition. The property currently contains two existing homes which are occupied by the subdividers, Jerry and Evelyn Thomas on proposed Lot 1 and their son on proposed Lot 2. The Thomas’ have an agreement with Terra Bella Addition to allow three curb cuts off Tulley Cove. The developer is requesting the creation of a five lot plat, with three lots accessing Tulley Cove. The proposed lots will be 140-feet in width and 240-feet in depth or 0.77 acres, keeping with the estate type lots within Terra Bella. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1445 2 An existing sewer line is located at the southwest corner of the property. This sewer line will be extended to the north to serve Lots 3 through 5. The existing homes on Lots 1 and 2 are served by existing septic systems. An existing water main runs along the east side of Tulley Cove and is adequate to serve the three new lots. The property fronts on the Little Maumelle River. Currently flood maps indicated the 100 year flood elevation at 264.0 feet. The northern portion of the property is within the floodplain and will be maintained in a Tract and remain as part of the Thomas ownership. The developer would like to request a variance from the storm water detention requirement. Flooding is controlled by the backwater from the Arkansas River. This is similar to the situation that exists at the Ranch development, located to the west of the site. The developer is also requesting a variance to allow the development of lots on private streets. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains two single-family homes on the eastern portion of the property while the western portion of the property is currently pastureland. There are single-family homes located to the south and west of this site all accessed by private streets. The area to the north is currently vacant and zoned R-2, Single- family. A portion of the area to the north is located within the floodplain and/or floodway. Tully Cove is a concrete street with curb and gutter. There is not a sidewalk on Tully Cove. The drive serving the eastern lots is a narrow drive extending from Thomas Park Circle. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has not received any comment from area residents. The Westchester/Heatherbrae Neighborhood Association and all abutting property owners were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. The proposed subdivision takes access from existing private streets and driveways. No boundary street construction is required. 2. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. The project would qualify for a contribution in-lieu of construction at the time of the building permit. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1445 3 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: 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: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. 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. Water facilities to serve these lots are existing. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed request indicating the request was the creation of a five lot plat to be developed with private streets. Staff requested Mr. White provide additional information on the proposed preliminary plat. Staff requested a cross access easement be provided between Lots 1 and 2 and a front yard building setback line be indicated on the proposed preliminary plat. Staff also requested a phasing plan if applicable. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1445 4 Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted no boundary street improvements would be required. Staff stated the storm water detention ordinance applied to the proposed subdivision but an in-lieu contribution would be acceptable. There was a general discussion concerning ownership of the proposed Tract. Mr. White stated the Thomas’ would continue to own the Tract. Mr. White stated the Tract was being indicated since a large portion was located in the floodway. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plat to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated a cross access easement for Lots 1 and 2 as requested by staff. The applicant has also indicated a 25-foot front building line for all the indicated lots. The proposed lots will be developed in one phase. The applicant has indicated a request for a waiver of the required storm water detention facilities on the site. Staff is not supportive of this request. Staff feels an in-lieu contribution for the proposed storm water detention facility is more appropriate. The proposed preliminary plat indicates five lots to be developed with private streets. Tulley Court is an existing private street with curb and gutter in place. The indicated lots average in size from 0.77 acres to 2.0 plus acres. Lots 1 and 2 are served by existing septic systems while Lots 3 – 5 will be developed with an extension of an existing sanitary sewer line. Staff feels the proposed lots are comparable to existing lots in the area and if developed as proposed should have minimal impact on 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 conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow the development of lots with private streets. Staff recommends the applicant provide an in-lieu contribution for the proposed storm water detention facilities. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1445 5 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had requested this item be deferred to the October 7, 2004 Public Hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: S-1446 NAME: Davis Addition Preliminary Plat LOCATION: located on the North side of West 36th Street between I-430 and Bowman Road DEVELOPER: Kenneth Davis 11524 West 36th Street Little Rock, AR 72211 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 319 President Clinton Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 2.425 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT: 11 – I-430 CENSUS TRACT: 24.04 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. The applicant submitted a letter dated August 3, 2004 requesting this item be withdrawn from consideration without prejudice. Staff is supportive of this request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant submitted a letter dated August 3, 2004 requesting the item be withdrawn from consideration without prejudice. Staff stated they were supportive of this request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for withdrawal. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: S-1447 NAME: Matthews Subdivision Site Plan Review LOCATION: Located at 3008 and 3012 Vinson Road DEVELOPER: Clarance Matthews 6814 Gibson Road Jacksonville, AR 72076 ENGINEER: Donald W. Brooks, Inc. 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 5.02 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: Not zoned PLANNING DISTRICT: 14 – Geyer Springs East CENSUS TRACT: 40.01 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The site is located outside the City limits but within the City’s Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction. The City does not exercise zoning jurisdiction in this area but does exercises subdivision control. The request is to place a second manufacture home on this 5.02 acre site. This request would necessitate a multiple building site plan review to allow the placement of the second structure. The applicant is proposing the placement of an 18-foot by 72-foot manufactured home. The home is a 1984 model with vinyl siding and a metal roof. An existing drive will be extended from Vinson Road to the new home. The applicant has indicated all transport elements will be removed from the home and under pinning and a permanent foundation will be placed around the home. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: (S-1447) 2 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is located outside the city limits but within the city’s extraterritorial planning jurisdiction. The site contains an existing manufactured home with a single drive extending from Vinson Road. The area along Vinson Road is primarily single-family with a mixture of site built and manufactured homes. Vinson Road is a narrow road with open ditches for drainage. There are not sidewalks in place in this area. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has not received any comment from area residents. The Southwest Little Rock United for Progress and all abutting property owners were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Vinson 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. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Outside the service boundary. Provide an approval letter from the Pulaski County Sanitarian concerning the proposed septic system. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: Approved as submitted. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered connections off the private fire system. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: (S-1447) 3 CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) The applicant was not present. Staff stated the request was located outside the City Limits but in the City’s Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction. Staff stated the request was to place a second residential structure on the site containing 5 plus acres. Staff stated there were few outstanding issues associated with the proposed request and they would meet with the owner individually to resolve the few questions, which still remained. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant has provided staff with the additional information requested at the Subdivision Committee meeting held August 5, 2004. The applicant has indicated the home will be permanently situated on the site and all transport elements will be removed. The applicant has also indicated the setback dimensions from property lines which are more than adequate to meet the typical minimum setback requirements for the City. The applicant has indicated a dedication of right-of-way will be provided to the City should the application be approved. The site is located outside the City limits but within the City’s Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction. The City does not exercise zoning jurisdiction in this area but does exercises subdivision control. The request is to place a second manufacture home on this 5.02 acre site, which necessitate a multiple building site plan review. The applicant is proposing the placement of a 1984 model 18-foot by 72-foot manufactured home. The home has vinyl siding and a metal roof for exterior finishes. An existing drive will be extended from Vinson Road to the new home and a septic system will be added to serve the home. The applicant has submitted an approval from the Pulaski County Sanitarian concerning the proposed wastewater treatment system. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: (S-1447) 4 I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) 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 conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 9 FILE NO.: Z-4029-B NAME: Mangan Dental Clinic Zoning Site Plan Review LOCATION: Located on the Southeast corner of Evergreen Street and University Avenue DEVELOPER: Steve Mangan Mangan Properties, LLC 123 Normandy Road Little Rock, AR 72207 ENGINEER/ARCHITECT: Cromwell Architects and Engineers 101 South Spring Street Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 1.34 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: O-2, Office and Institutional District PLANNING DISTRICT: 4 – Heights Hillcrest CENSUS TRACT: 15 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: A proposal to subdivide a 24.06 acres tract into 2 lots was approved by the Little Rock Planning Commission at their June 14, 1983 Public Hearing. The large tract was to house the Forest Heights Middle School with the newly create lot to be sold. The indicated lot was proposed as 290 feet by 450 feet. A final plat was never filed for the lots. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The land on the southeast corner of University Avenue and Evergreen Street was previously part of the Forrest Heights Middle School property. Mangan Properties, LLC purchased the property with the intent of developing the north August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4029-B 2 half as a dental office for Steve Mangan, DDS, PA. The south half is to be sold to Bell Corley Construction for the development of an office building that they will partially occupy, and offer the remainder for lease. The division of the property is as follows. Mangan Property: % use of the property Building pad 5,440 17% Parking and roadways 11,639 37% Sidewalks and terraces 1,432 5% Landscaped areas 13,032 41% Overall site area 31,543 100% Bell Property: Building pad 6,032 22% Parking and roadways 7,889 29% Sidewalks and terraces 1,073 4% Landscaped areas 12,242 45% Overall site area 27,236 100% Combined Site Totals: Building pad 11,472 20% Parking and roadways 19,528 33% Sidewalks and terraces 2,505 4% Landscaped areas 25,274 43% Overall site area 58,779 100% The dental office is to be located on the north one-half of the property and intended for the use of two full-time dentists. The gross square footage of the building is 5,240. The building will be constructed of a wood frame, single story, brick exterior on a concrete slab with an architectural shingled roof. The office will employ 12 – 15 employees. The southern office building will be a one-story wood framed building on a concrete slab with an 80% brick exterior 20% stucco, and an architectural shingle roof. Gross square footage for the building is 6032. The users are expected to be quiet office uses with no construction yard or on-site equipment. The north lot has 24 parking spaces including one handicap parking space. The southern lot has 17 parking spaces including one handicap space. The site plan indicated a dumpster location for each of the proposed lots. The dumpster pad on the northern pad is actually cut into the hillside, making it virtually hidden from passing traffic. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4029-B 3 The site plan indicates two curb cuts for ingress and egress. One is a shared access from University Avenue that will be used by both the north and south lots. The second cut is to allow access to the north lot from Evergreen Street. This access will require a variance due to the proximity of the curb cut to the intersection. The drive has been designed as right-in and right-out only. The applicant has indicated the driveway location is desirable since most of the patients will be traveling south on University Avenue and being allow access from Evergreen Street will reduced the number of U-turn at University Avenue and H Street to access the site. The applicant has also indicated fire department access to the site would be greatly improved from the nearby fire station. The applicant also states all likely alternate routs to the building for clients traveling south on University Avenue either require circling the school, with increased traffic danger to school children or increasing traffic through residential streets like North Cleveland. The applicant has indicated a desire to have a well landscaped office site that will be visually pleasing to the community and increase the value of surrounding properties. Landscaping encompasses 25,274 square feet of the site or 43 percent. A landscape architect will be employed to create the final design. The dental office hours of operation will be between 7:00 am and 6:00 pm, Monday through Friday, with the possibility of expanding to Saturday hours in the future. The southern building will operate during similar hours. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is wooded with a slight elevation change sloping from east to west. The Forest Heights School is located to the east of the site and there are office uses located to the south. Across University Avenue are office uses and there are also office uses located to the north across Evergreen. The area contains a mix of residential uses including single-family homes, duplex housing, multi-family at a density of 12 units per acre and condo units. There is a traffic signal at University Avenue and Evergreen Street. University Avenue is a four lane roadway with turn lanes at major intersections. There is a sidewalk in place on the property to the south of this site. The road narrows in front of the site with a turn lane at Evergreen Street. Evergreen Street is a four- lane roadway adjacent to the site with sidewalks in place on the property adjacent to the site. 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 Hillcrest August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4029-B 4 Residents Neighborhood Association, the Evergreen Neighborhood Association and the South Normandy Property Owners Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. University Avenue is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial. A minimum dedication of right-of-way 55-feet from centerline is required. 2. Provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one- half street improvement to the street including 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development. 3. At other locations, repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 4. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and Section 31-210. Specifically, the driveway on Evergreen Street is to close to the signalized intersection. Contact Bill Henry, Traffic Engineering, at 370-1816 for additional information. 5. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 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. Plans for all work in the 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) 379-1818 (Derrick Bergfield). E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements if service is required for the project. Sewer manhole shown on the plan is a private line and cannot be used for sewer service to this development. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. 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 August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4029-B 5 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 placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). The existing water main is on the west side of South University Avenue. The raw water main appears to be south of the south curb of Evergreen. No reduction in grade will be allowed in the area of the raw water main. Extreme care must be taken in that area. The fire hydrant at the corner of Evergreen and University is a blow off hydrant on the raw water main and is not available for fire protection. 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: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the request indicating the site was currently zoned O-2, Office and Institutional District which required a site plan review. Staff noted the applicant has also requesting to reinstate a previously approved preliminary plat for the site and revise the preliminary plat to allow the further subdivision of the lot. Staff requested the applicant provide a rear elevation of the site to indicate how the slope would be treated. Staff also noted the applicant should provide on the site plan a note concerning the proposed screening of the dumpster. Staff requested the applicant provide all building setback dimensions and to indicate a cross access drive on the proposed site plan. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated dedication of right-of-way for both streets would be required. Staff also noted street improvements would be required along University Avenue. Staff stated the proposed drives did not August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4029-B 6 meet the minimum spacing requirements of the ordinance. Staff suggested the applicant meet with Traffic Engineering to discuss alternatives. The applicant noted they would make this effort but in previous conversations Traffic Engineering was not in favor of the drive location on Evergreen Street. Staff also stated storm water detention would be required on the site. The applicant questioned what water they would be required to detain. Staff stated no net increase in run off would be allowed. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated a minimum of six feet nine inches of landscaping would be required along the perimeters. Staff noted the site plan appeared to meet the minimum ordinance requirements. 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. There was a general discussion concerning the location of the sanitary sewer line. Staff suggested the applicant contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for additional information. 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 August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has provided copies of the proposed preliminary plat, a note concerning the proposed dumpster screening and the building setback dimensions for all property lines. The revised site plan also indicates a cross access easement for the proposed drives. The applicant has not revised the plan to eliminate the proposed driveway along Evergreen Street. The applicant has indicated the drive is necessary to allow south bound traffic on University Avenue more ease in accessing the site. Staff is not supportive of the driveway placement on Evergreen Street. Staff feels the proposed location is to close to the intersection and cases traffic safety concerns. Staff would recommend the applicant remove the driveway location on Evergreen Street and allow access to the site from a single drive on University Avenue. The applicant has indicated the eastern property line will be sloped at a 3:1 or less slope were this slope can not be maintained riprap or a retaining wall will be put in place. Staff is supportive of the proposed treatment of the slope area. The applicant has indicated a 21.39 foot building setback for the proposed dental office. The ordinance typically requires a 25 foot building setback from the rear property line. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request for a reduced building setback in the indicated area. The applicant has the required setbacks in all August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4029-B 7 other locations and staff does not feel the reduced setback in this area will have any adverse impact on adjoining properties. The applicant has indicated signage on each of the proposed lots. The applicant has indicated the signage will be consistent with signage allowed in office zoned or a maximum of six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has indicated proposed landscape areas on the proposed site plan. The areas set aside for landscaping appear to meet the minimum landscaping requirements for both the zoning and landscaping ordinance requirements. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s proposed landscaping plan. The applicant is proposing a preliminary plat as a part of the proposed request. The lots are proposed as 0.72 and 0.62 acres. The proposed lots are not adequate to meet the minimum requirements of O-2 zoned property but based on the proposed development plan staff does not feel the proposed lots will have any adverse impact on adjoining properties. Although staff is not supportive of the request because of the proposed driveway location staff is supportive of the proposed concept of the proposed development. Staff feels access to Evergreen Street should not be allowed as close to the intersection as proposed. Staff feels a single access point into the development would better facilitate traffic through the site and reduce possible conflicts at the intersection of University Avenue and Evergreen Street. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial of the request. Staff stated they were supportive of the proposed preliminary plat and the proposed office uses on the site but were opposed to the proposed driveway location on Evergreen Street. Staff stated the driveway did not meet minimum driveway spacing criteria and should not be allowed. Staff stated State Farm Insurance prepared a study of the ten worst intersections in the stated and several were located in the City. Staff stated State Farm gave the City $10,000 per intersection and part of their recommendation was to close driveways at intersections. The applicant addressed the Commission concerning the proposed driveway on Evergreen Street. He stated the drive on Evergreen was much safer than his clients August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4029-B 8 making u-turns on North University Avenue. He stated most of his clients were from Hillcrest and the Heights area and would be traveling south on University Avenue and if the drive was not allowed they would be forced to travel through the neighborhood or make a u-turn at H Street. He stated with the speed of traffic on University Avenue this was very dangerous. He provided four scenarios of proposed traffic into the site all indicating safe entrances into the driveway if allowed on Evergreen Street. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed driveway request and the potential for traffic conflicts. Staff stated the areas which had driveways closer to the intersection than currently allowed were installed prior to the existing ordinances. A motion was made to approve the variance to allow the driveway on Evergreen Street. The motion failed by a vote of 3 ayes, 6 noes and 2 absent. The applicant requested to amend his application to remove the request for a driveway along Evergreen Street. A motion was made to approve the request as amended to remove the proposed driveway on Evergreen Street. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 10 FILE NO.: Z-7337-A NAME: Gilbert Zoning Site Plan Review LOCATION: located on the Northeast corner of West 18th Street and Aldersgate Road DEVELOPER: A. J. Gilbert P.O. Box 95212 Little Rock, AR 72295 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 319 President Clinton Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 1.95 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: O-2, Office and Institutional District PLANNING DISTRICT: 11 – I-430 CENSUS TRACT: 24.04 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 18,840 adopted March 18, 2003 rezone this site from R-2, Single-family to O-2 Office and Institutional District with conditions; the maximum building height shall not exceed two (2) stories. The property contained Lots 1 – 6 and 19 – 24 Block 16, Hicks Interurban Addition. The property is currently undeveloped and tree covered, and designated as Suburban Office on the City’s Future Land Use Plan. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The site is zoned O-2, Office and Institutional District, which requires a site plan review prior to development. The applicant proposes the construction of a August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7337-A 2 single-story 16,692 square foot medical complex on this 1.95 acre site. The site plan includes the placement of 64-parking spaces. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is wooded and bounded by streets on three sides. Aldersage Road is located to the west and is a narrow road with open ditches and the crest of a hill near the site. West 18th Street is a narrow roadway with open ditches for drainage. Perry Street is also a narrow roadway with open ditches for drainage. There are no sidewalks adjacent to the site on these streets. The site located immediately north of this site also zoned O-2, Office and Institutional District is also under review as a separate item on this agenda (item No. 11 File No. Z-7418-A). C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has not received any comment from area residents. The John Barrow Neighborhood Association and all property owners located within 200-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. The proposed land use would classify West 18th Street and Perry Street on the Master Street Plan as commercial streets. Dedicate right-of-way to 30- feet from centerline on West 18th Street and 25-feet from centerline on Perry Street (minor commercial street). 2. Aldersgate Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a collector. A dedication of right-of-way 30-feet from centerline will be required. 3. Provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one- half street improvements to the street including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. 4. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 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. Plans for all work in the 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) 379-1818 (Derrick Bergfield). 7. Driveway location on Perry Street provides a straight-line cut through and should be relocated to the center of the property. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7337-A 3 E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Existing sewer main located on property. Possible relocation or abandonment required. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. 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. 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 918-3752 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: The proposed width of a portion of the on site street buffer along Perry Street is less than the 9-feet minimum allowed by both the zoning and landscape ordinances. The full average width required by the Zoning Ordinance is 17 feet. A 6-foot high opaque screen is required along that portion of the northern perimeter adjacent to residential property. This screen may be a wooden fence with its face side directed toward the adjacent property, a wall or dense evergreen plantings. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7337-A 4 G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) Mr. Pat McGetrick 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 details concerning proposed signage, the number of doctors and the days and hours of operation. Staff also requested information concerning the face of the building and the proposed building materials. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated street improvements would be required for all boundary streets. Mr. McGetrick stated his client was aware that streets on all sides would require construction. Staff also stated the storm water detention ordinance did apply to the site. Staff requested the applicant indicate the location of the proposed storm water detention facilities. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the interior landscaping appeared to be adequate. Staff stated a portion of the street buffer along Perry Street appeared to be less than the nine foot minimum required by the zoning and landscape ordinances. Staff also noted screening would be required along a portion of the northern perimeter where adjacent to 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 August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated a single ground mounted sign will be located near the entrance drive on Aldersgate Road consistent with signage allowed in office zones, or a maximum of six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area. The applicant has also indicated a single story building will be constructed with a brick veneer and a metal roof. The applicant has indicated the development will contain sixty four parking spaces. The proposed use of the site includes four doctors. The typical minimum parking required for a medical clinic with four doctors is twenty-four parking spaces. The indicated parking is more than adequate to meet the typical minimum parking demand. The applicant has realigned the driveway to not allow cut-through traffic. The drive located on Perry Street has been relocated to the south to not allow a direct August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7337-A 5 connection through the parking lot. Staff is supportive of the proposed driveway configuration. The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation form 8:00 am to 5:00 pm Monday through Friday. The indicate hours are consistent with hours of operation in the area. Staff is supportive of the proposed hours of operation. The applicant has indicated landscaped areas as typically required per the zoning and landscape ordinance. The applicant has also indicated a dumpster location on the proposed site plan along with a note concerning the required screening. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The site is zoned O-2, Office and Institutional District, which requires a site plan review prior to development. The applicant proposes the construction of a single-story 16,692 square foot medical complex on this 1.95 acre site. The site plan includes the placement of 64- parking spaces. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff feels if the site is developed as proposed the office development should have minimal to no adverse impact on adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) 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 conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff also recommended approval of the requested variance to allow a reduced side yard setback and a reduced rear yard setback. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z-7418-A NAME: Muradian Zoning Site Plan Review LOCATION: located at 1617 Aldersgate Road DEVELOPER: Kris Muradian 2024 Arkansas Valley Drive Suite 406 Little Rock, AR 72212 ARCHITECT: Terry Burruss Architects 1202 Main Street Little Rock, AR 72202 AREA: 0.32 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: O-2, Office and Institutional District PLANNING DISTRICT: 11 – I-430 CENSUS TRACT: 24.04 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A reduced side yard and a reduced rear yard setback. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 18,911 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on August 4, 2003 rezoned the site from R-2 to O-2. The site contained 2 lots (Lots 7 and 8 Block 16 of the Hicks Interubarn Addition to the City of little Rock). The site contains an old vacant single-family residential use and accessory building located on the property, which is mostly overgrown with vines and vegetation. Otherwise, the property is mostly tree covered. There are existing single-family residential uses (including manufactured homes) located to the north and east along Perry Street. The Future Land Use Plan designates the site as Suburban Office. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7418-A 2 A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The site is currently zoned O-2, Office and Institutional District, which requires a site plan review prior to development. The applicant is requesting a site plan review for the placement of a two story (height 33-feet) on the site. The building is proposed with 4,800 square feet or 40-feet by 60-feet. Fourteen parking spaces are to be provided. The current owner desire to maintain the permitted uses under O-2 Zoning, however day cares, nursing homes, and school facilities are not being requested. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is wooded and abuts Aldersage Road to the west. Aldersgate Road is a narrow road with open ditches and the crest of a hill near the site. Other uses in the area include office uses to the west and single-family to the east. The site located immediately south of this site also zoned O-2, Office and Institutional District is also under review as a separate item on this agenda (item No. 10 File No. Z-7337-A). C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has not received any comment from area residents. The John Barrow Neighborhood Association and all property owners located within 200-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Aldersgate Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a collector. A dedication of right-of-way 30-feet from centerline will be required. 2. Provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one- half street improvements to the street including a 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development. 3. Verify adequate stopping sight distance for the proposed commercial driveway location. 4. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 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. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7418-A 3 6. Plans for all work in the 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) 379-1818 (Derrick Bergfield). E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. 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. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: The proposed width of the southern perimeter landscaping strip is less than the 6-foot 9-inch minimum allowed by the Landscape Ordinance. Additionally, the plan submitted does not provide for the eight-percent (387 square feet) interior landscaping within the parking lot required by the Landscape Ordinance. A variance of these requirements would require City Beautiful Commission approval. A 6-foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed to the adjacent property, a wall or dense evergreen plantings is required along the northern and eastern perimeters of the site. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7418-A 4 G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) Mr. Terry Burruss was present representing the request. Staff stated the site was zoned O-2 which required a site plan review prior to development. Staff requested the applicant provide additional information concerning the proposed development to allow the review to be completed. Staff requested information concerning any proposed dumpster locations. Mr. Burruss stated a dumpster would not be located on the site. Staff also requested information concerning the days and hours of operation. Mr. Burruss stated the development would operate during normal business hours. Staff also requested details of any proposed signage. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted the drive was located near the crest of a hill. Staff suggested Mr. Burruss meet with Mr. McGetrick and consider the two sites sharing a driveway location. Both parties agreed. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated screening would be required to the north and east of the site and at least eight percent of the interior parking lot would require landscaping. Staff also stated the minimum southern perimeter landscape strip appeared to drop below the six foot nine inches. Staff stated irrigation would not 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 to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated there will not be a dumpster located on the site. The applicant has also indicated the days and hours of operation will be from 7:30 am to 5:30 pm Monday through Friday. The applicant has indicated the development will contain a single ground mounted sign consistent with signage allowed in office zones or a maximum of six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area. The applicant has met with the property owner to the south and a share driveway is not being proposed. The applicant has redesigned the site to allow for the driveway placement along the northern property line, which will allow for an increased sight distance from the crest of the hill. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s proposed driveway placement. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7418-A 5 The applicant has indicated the proposed uses of the site as O-2 uses excluding day cares, nursing homes, and school facilities. The applicant has also indicated a medical office (maximum of two doctors) is being proposed. The site plan includes the placement of fourteen parking spaces on the site, which would allow only 800 square feet available for general and professional office use. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s proposed request. The proposed uses would be required to match the existing parking on the site. The applicant is requesting reduced side and rear yard setbacks. The O-2 zoning classification requires a minimum 25-foot setback from the side and rear property lines. The site plan indicates an 11-foot setback from the southern and the rear property line. The site is a relative small site and meeting the minimum ordinance requirements would reduce the buildability of the proposed lot. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request for reduced setbacks along the southern and eastern property lines. The applicant has indicated a minimum landscaping strip along the northern property line. The applicant has also indicated screening will be added to the areas abutting single-family zoned property. Staff is supportive of the landscaping as indicated on the revised site plan. Staff is supportive of the proposed zoning site plan review. Although the site plan does not meet the minimum requirements of O-2 zoned property the site is a relatively small site and does not meet the minimum two acre requirement for O- 2 zoned property. The site was rezoned in the current configuration, which would limit the development of the site with the current setback requirements. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff feels if the site is developed as proposed there should be minimal to no adverse impact on adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow a reduced side yard and a reduced rear yard setback. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) 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 conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7418-A 6 Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the requested variance to allow a reduced side yard setback and a reduced rear yard setback. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 12 FILE NO.: Z-2638-C NAME: Hillcrest Camshaft Revised Short-form PD-I LOCATION: Located at 5502 West 65th Street DEVELOPER: Hillcrest Camshaft 5502 West 65th Street Little Rock, AR 72209 ENGINEER: Summerlin Associates 1609 South Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 AREA: 3.82 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PD-I ALLOWED USES: C-3, General Commercial District uses and a machine shop PROPOSED ZONING: PD-I PROPOSED USE: C-3, General Commercial District uses and a machine shop VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. After further review staff has determined the requested to revise the previously approved PD-I not necessary and recommends the item be withdrawn from consideration. Ordinance No. 16,956 rezoned the site from C-3, General Commercial District to PD-I to allow Hillcrest Camshaft to relocate from Asher Avenue to this site. The adopted ordinance also allowed the business to expand by fifty percent of the gross floor area existing on the September 5, 1995 without further review by the Planning Commission or Board of Directors. The site was to retain C-3, General Commercial District uses along with the addition of a machine shop as a permitted uses for the site. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2638-C 2 The site contained 25,149 square feet of floor area on September 5, 1995. The fifty percent expansion would allow 12,575 square feet of area to be added, without review. The applicant has constructed one expansion to the site since 1995 totaling 4,800 square feet. The applicant is now proposing the addition of a warehouse space totaling 6,000 square feet. This would leave 2,075 square feet of area the applicant may expand without further view by the Commission or the Board of Directors. Any further expansion would require prior approval. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated after further review they had determined the request to revise the previously approved PD-I was not necessary and recommended the item be withdrawn from consideration. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for withdrawal. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 13 FILE NO.: Z-4249-E NAME: Freeway Business Park Revised Long-form POD LOCATION: Located at 18 Freeway Drive DEVELOPER: U-Storit, Inc. 6100 Patterson Road Little Rock, AR 72209 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72221 AREA: 12.69 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 5 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: POD ALLOWED USES: Office and Mini-warehouse PROPOSED ZONING: Revised POD PROPOSED USE: Office and mini-warehouse VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None Requested. BACKGROUND: On May 3, 1994, the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No. 16,644 approving the Freeway Business Park – Long-form POD. The project included Lots 4 – 9 of the Freeway Business Park Subdivision. A mini-warehouse development was approved for Lots 8 and 9, with office/commercial buildings being approved for each of the other four lots. Certain development criteria and uses for the development were negotiated between the developer and the University Park Neighborhood Association. These criteria were included in a letter dated May 3, 1994 and were accepted by the Board of Directors as components of the development and outlined terms and uses for the site. On July 18, 2000 the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No. 18,312 approving a revision to the previously approved POD to allow the mini-warehouse development to August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4249-E 2 expand onto Lots 6 and 7 and the construction of a commercial/office building on Lot 5. As approved (May 3, 1994) a mini-warehouse development had been constructed on Lots 8 and 9 of the site and an office building had been constructed on Lot 4. The July 18, 2000 proposal included the construction of five (5) new warehouse buildings on Lots 6 and 7 for a total of 41,075 square feet and the construction of a 13,941 square foot commercial/office building on Lot 5. Lots 6 and 7 contains three warehouse buildings for a total of 43,125 square feet and the proposed commercial/office building (with 47 parking spaces) has been constructed on Lot 5. A revision to the POD was approved by the Little Rock Board of Directors on September 17, 2002 by the adoption of Ordinance No. 18,744. The Planning Commission reviewed the request at their August 8, 2002 Public Hearing and the City Beautiful Commission reviewed the request at their September 5, 2002 Public Hearing. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the requested revision to the POD and the City Beautiful Commission recommended approval of the requested variance from the Landscape Ordinance for a reduced buffer adjacent to I-630. The applicant’s proposal included removing the proposed commercial/office use, to allow the construction of three (3) mini-warehouse buildings on Lot 5 (totaling 22,860 square feet). Access to the property would remain from a single cul-de-sac extending from Rodney Parham Road, (Freeway Drive). The original proposal included a mix of selected uses in the O-3, General Office District, and certain specified uses in the I-1, Industrial Park District. The following indicated the existing and proposed lot uses: Lot Existing Use Sq. Ft. Proposed Use Sq. Ft. 4 Medical Office/Clinic 14,000 Medical Office/Clinic 14,000 5 Unimproved 0 Mini-warehouse 22,860 6 & 7 Mini-warehouse 43,125 Mini-warehouse 43,125 8 Mini-Warehouse 72,537 Mini-Warehouse 72,537 A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The property is currently platted as Lots 8 and 9 Freeway Business Park. The developer would like to add one additional building containing 13,252 square feet. The area is currently paved and being used for outdoor storage. The existing facility is totally leased with additional tenants on a waiting list. The owner feels the additional space would help facilitate current demand. The proposed building would not be visible from I-630, Hughes Street or Freeway Drive. The building would sit well below the abutting streets to the north and east. Storm water detention requirements have been met as the area is currently paved. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4249-E 3 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: There is an existing mini-warehouse complex on a portion of the property and an office building at the southwest corner of the development. Interstate 630 is located along the property’s north boundary, with a cemetery to the south. There is a mixture of commercial and industrial uses further south across West 12th Street. There is undeveloped C-3 zoned property immediately west of this site, with a mixture of commercial and industrial uses further west across Rodney Parham Road. Hughes Street is located along the property’s east boundary, with single-family residences across Hughes Street to the east. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: The University Park and the Briarwood Neighborhood Associations and the Apache Crime Watch along with all residents within 300 feet of the site and all property owners within 200 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. As of this writing staff has not received any comment from the neighborhood. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: No comment. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. 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. 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 918-3752 for additional information. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4249-E 4 County Planning: No comment. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Boyle Park Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision to a Planned Office District for an additional mini- warehouse building. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Freeway Drive is shown as a Local Commercial Street on the Master Street Plan and may require dedication of right-of-way and street improvements. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Boyle Park Neighborhood Action Plan. The Zoning and Land Use goal shows the neighborhood’s goal is to continue current growth trends while maintaining adequate separation of residential and non-residential uses. The proposed building is located near the freeway and no closer to adjacent single-family residences than previously approved buildings. Landscape: The proposed width of the perimeter street buffer and landscape stripe along Interstate 630 is less than the 30-feet required by both the zoning buffer and landscape ordinances. A reduction of this requirement would require variances from the Planning Commission and the City Beautiful Commission. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff stated the applicant was requesting to revise a previously approved POD to allow the addition of a mini-warehouse building to the site. Staff stated the proposed building was located within the required street buffer for I-630 and would require a variance from the City Beautiful Commission if approved by the Commission. Staff stated the site located to the west was approved for a reduced buffer similar to the reduction begin requested. Staff requested the applicant provide details concerning the treatment of the slope area and the buffer, which would remain on the site. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4249-E 5 H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated details of the proposed treatment of the slope area and the buffer. The applicant has indicated terraces and benches will be added to allow a thirty-foot cut. The applicant has also indicated the terraces and benches will be installed to meet the current land alteration ordinance requirement. Storm water detention requirements have been met as the area is currently paved. The property is currently platted as Lots 8 and 9 Freeway Business Park. The developer would like to add one additional building containing 13,252 square feet. The area is currently paved and being used for outdoor storage. The proposed building will not be visible from I-630, Hughes Street or Freeway Drive. The building will sit well below the abutting streets to the north and east. The applicant has indicated a reduced buffer area along I-630. The ordinance typically requires a minimum buffer of 30-feet adjacent to a freeway. This is a requirement of the zoning ordinance so the Planning Commission may recommend a reduced buffer if they feel it is appropriate. The applicant has also indicated a variance from the City Beautiful Commission will be sought for the reduced buffer along I-630. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The applicant has indicated treatment of the slope area consistent with ordinance requirements. The applicant will be required to replant the bench area with a tree every 20-feet. Staff feels with the placement of plantings and the grade change from the Interstate to the site the placement of the additional building should have minimal impact on adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) 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 conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 14 FILE NO.: Z-5718-B NAME: West Tree Service Revised Long-form PD-I LOCATION: Located at 6300 Forbing Road DEVELOPER: Hearnsburger Construction Company 26901 Highway 10 Roland, AR 72135 ENGINEER: Carter Burgess 10809 Executive Center, Suite 204 Little Rock, AR 72211 AREA: 8.86 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PD-I ALLOWED USES: Tree Service Business PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD-I PROPOSED USE: Tree Service Business VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On August 24, 1993, the Planning Commission approved the West Tree Service – Long-form PD-I for the property at 6300 Forbing Road. On September 21, 1993, the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No. 16,494 approving the Planned Development. Ordinance No. 18,074 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on August 3, 1999 established the West Tree Service Revised Long-form PD-I. The approved revision to the site plan included a 2720 square foot office building, a 4000 square foot shop with a 5200 square foot canopy and a small portable building. The approved site plan included areas of asphalt parking. The applicant proposed to revise the site plan by adding a small amount of asphalt parking area on the west side of the shop building and a larger area of gravel parking on the north side of the shop building. The gravel area August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5718-B 2 would be used for equipment storage. The applicant also proposed to extend the existing six foot screening fence along the east property line northward to the exiting tree line. This would aid in screening the gravel equipment storage area from the residences to the east. The proposed improvements (asphalt and gravel parking and fence extension) were in place on the property at the time of the request. The previous approved site plan showed an area for on-site storm water detention along the east property line, near the end of Myerson Drive. The applicant proposed to move the on-site storm water detention area to along the west property line and Public Works was in support of the request. The applicant also requested a 15 percent in-lieu payment for all required street improvements and a variance from the ordinance required minimum driveway setbacks and spacing for the three existing drives on the site. This request was approved by the Commission at their July 8, 1999 Public Hearing. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to modify the previous approved site plan by adding one 30 foot by 40 foot metal/wood storage building that will be used for equipment storage, to the north side of the existing Supervisors Building. In addition, the applicant is proposing to add two metal buildings that will attach to the existing Maintenance Shop. One of which will be a 40 foot by 40 foot building, attaching to the west side, and used for parts storage. The other will be a 30 foot by 30 foot building that will attach to the north side of the existing maintenance shop, and located toward the west end. This building will be used to store miscellaneous items. The applicant is also proposing to enclose the area on the east side of the Maintenance Shop that is currently covered by a 70 foot by 75 foot canopy. The enclosure will be accomplished by constructing two 30 foot by 40 foot metal buildings that would serve as large bays for truck maintenance. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains three separate buildings all used by West Tree Service. There is a large area located to the north of the site that is currently undeveloped. The area to the east of the site contains a large industrial user. The area to the north is also large scale industrial users. To the east of the site is a mix of residential and non-residential uses with a single-family neighborhood located near the rear building currently being considered for truck storage and repair. Across Forbing Road there is a school and a mix of commercial and industrial uses. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5718-B 3 C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: The Upper Baseline Neighborhood Association, Southwest Little Rock United for Progress, the Wakefield Neighborhood Association, the Geyer Springs Neighborhood Association, all property owners located within 200-feet of the site and all residents located within 300-feet of the site who could be identified were notified of the public hearing. As of this writing staff has received two informational phone calls from area residents. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: No comment. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: Approved as submitted. Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the 65th Street East Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Industrial for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision to a Planned Development Industrial for additional storage area and truck bays. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5718-B 4 Master Street Plan: Forbing Road is shown as a Minor Arterial on the Master Street Plan and may require dedication of right-of-way and street improvements. A Minor Arterial provides connections to and though an urban area and their primary function are to provide short distance travel within the urbanized area. 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: A landscaping upgrade equal to the percentage of building expansion proposed will be required. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) The applicant was not present. Staff stated there were few outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff stated they had contacted the applicant and the indicated right-of-way was dedicated with the original zoning request. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant is proposing to modify the previous approved site plan by adding one 30 foot by 40 foot metal/wood storage building that will be used for equipment storage, to the north side of the existing Supervisors Building. In addition, the applicant is proposing to add two metal buildings that will attach to the existing Maintenance Shop. One of which will be a 40 foot by 40 foot building, attaching to the west side, and used for parts storage. The other will be a 30 foot by 30 foot building that will attach to the north side of the existing maintenance shop, and located toward the west end. This building will be used to store miscellaneous items. The applicant is also proposing to enclose the area on the east side of the Maintenance Shop that is currently covered by a 70 foot by 75 foot canopy. The enclosure will be accomplished by constructing two 30 foot by 40 foot metal buildings that would serve as large bays for truck maintenance. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. Staff does not feel the placement of the improvements to the site will adversely affect the area. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5718-B 5 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) 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 conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 15 FILE NO.: Z-6323-J NAME: The Village at Rahling Road Revised Long-form PCD – Lot 11 LOCATION: Located on the Southeast corner of Rahling Road and Chenal Parkway DEVELOPER: Carla Spainhour 400 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 1.3 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PCD ALLOWED USES: C-2 Permitted uses PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD PROPOSED USE: C-2 Permitted uses VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On August 5, 1997, the Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,542 which established The Village at Rahling Road Long-form PCD. The PCD established a 14-lot development with C-2 uses being permitted. The initial action approved a site plan for Lots 1 and 2 of the development with the intent being that each of the remaining lots would be brought to the Commission on an individual basis as a particular development was proposed. Subsequent actions have been approved to allow seven small buildings on the properties within the development. There are currently six buildings of the seven approved buildings completed on the rear lots. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6323-J 2 A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to revise a previously approved PCD to allow the construction of a single-story 16,221 square foot office building. The project has been revised to orient the building towards the new Public Library. The proposed uses are C-2 uses as set forth in the original PCD development. Parking has been indicated at 54 parking spaces. Te applicant is proposing the use of public parking in the common area of the development, which should allow the development to function adequately. The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation will be from 7:00 am to 9:00 pm six days per week. The applicant has also indicated a maximum building height of 35-feet. The site plan indicates signage will comply with signage allowed in commercial zones. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a cleared flat site with street improvements in place. The property was cleared and graded with initial development of the PCD. Access to the lot is via Rahling Circle, off of Rahling Road. The O-2 zoned properties immediately south and east of the site are undeveloped. Smaller office buildings are located adjacent to the proposed site to the southwest. The larger buildings of the original multiuse PCD is located northwest of the site. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. The St. Charles Community Association, the Chenal Ridge Property Owners Association, the Margeaux Property Owners Association, all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. There is not an active neighborhood association located in the area. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: No comment. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Developer will be responsible for security of existing sewer main during construction. Any damage done to the existing sewer main will be repaired at the Developer’s expense. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6323-J 3 Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. 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. Developer must extend water service to back of sidewalk. If building has a fire sprinkler system, an additional fire hydrant may be required. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Community Shopping for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision to a Planned Commercial Development for a one-story office building. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Rahling Circle is shown as a Local Commercial Street on the Master Street Plan and may require dedication of right-of-way and street improvements. 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: The proposed interior landscaping areas are less than the eight- percent (1,913 square feet) required by the Landscape Ordinance. To receive credit toward fulfilling landscape interior requirements, interior islands must be at least 7 ½ feet in width and 150 square feet in area. Required building landscaping cannot count toward fulfilling interior requirements. Irrigation of landscaped areas will be required. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6323-J 4 G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff stated the applicant was requesting to revise a previously approved PCD to allow the development of an office building. Staff stated the previous approval for the lot was a two story building with parking located in the rear. Staff noted the current design was to take advantage of the view of the new library. Staff requested the applicant provide additional information concerning the proposed uses. Staff noted a restaurant was an allowable use in C-2 zoning. Staff stated a restaurant would not allow for sufficient parking. Staff also questioned the dumpster location. Mr. White stated the dumpster was shown but not labeled. He stated a label would be included on the revised plan. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated in interior landscaping was not adequate to meet the eight percent required by the Landscape Ordinance. Staff also noted interior islands must be at least 7 ½ feet in width and 150 square feet in area to receive credit. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the dumpster location on the proposed site plan along with a note concerning the required screening. The applicant has also indicated signage will be consistent with signage allowed in office zones or a maximum of six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area. The applicant has indicated the use mix of the site as 50% office and 50% service uses. The site plan includes the placement of 50 on-site parking spaces. The typical minimum parking required for a building with the proposed use mix would be 47 parking spaces. The proposed parking is adequate to meet the typical minimum ordinance requirement for a development of this type. The site plan indicates all site lighting will be low level and directional, directed inward away from residentially zoned properties. The site plan also indicated the maximum building height will be 35-feet, more than adequate to develop a single- story building. The site plan includes the placement of a twelve foot building line along Rahling Circle. The indicated building line is consistent with other buildings in the area. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6323-J 5 The desire of the developer of the center was to create a town center with the store fronts at the curb line and the parking located in a central area or in the rear. Staff feels the placement of the parking as indicated will have the town center feel even though the proposed parking is located in the front of the building. The applicant has indicated landscaping as requested by staff. The applicant has increased the interior landscape islands and increased the landscape strip along the northern property line to nine feet. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s proposed landscape plan. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The applicant has indicated the development of the site will be similar in use to the existing development pattern of the center. The applicant has indicated the maximum use of the site as 50% commercial and 50% office uses. The indicated percent mix should have no adverse impact on adjoining properties and should have minimal impact on parking in the area. Staff would however recommend the proposed use mix allow for adequate parking of each intended use based on the current ordinance requirements. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff recommends adequate parking be available for each of the proposed uses based on current ordinance requirements. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) 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 conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff presented a recommendation adequate parking be available for each of the proposed uses based on current parking ordinance requirement. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 16 FILE NO.: Z-6446-B NAME: Gillum Revised Short-form PD-C LOCATION: Located at 14116 Taylor Loop Road DEVELOPER: Corey Gillum Gillum Photography 315 North Bowman Road Little Rock, AR 72205 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 319 President Clinton Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 0.66 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PD-C ALLOWED USES: Single-family and a single chair beauty salon PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD-C PROPOSED USE: Two family residence and photography studio VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: The Little Rock Board of Directors approved Ordinance No. 17,696 on March 17, 1998 establishing Miller Short-form PD-C located at 14116 Taylor Loop Road. The approval allowed the 700 square foot basement to become a beauty shop with a single chair stylist and one manicurist. The applicant proposed to maintain the residential character of the site and to remain living in the home. The applicant proposed a single ground mounted sign to identify the beauty shop business. The sign was to be a maximum of three feet in height and six square feet in area (2’ x 3’). The Planning Commission voted to approved the requested revision to the PD-C by a vote of 7 ayes, 4 noes and 0 absent at its July 24, 2003 Public Hearing to allow the site August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6446-B 2 to convert to a cosmetology school. There were four parking spaces located in the front yard area and the applicant proposed the placement of 23 parking spaces in the rear of the structure. The hours of operation were proposed as Tuesday through Saturday from 8:00 am to 4:30 pm. The Saturday hours of operation were to be bi-weekly only. City Beautiful Commission at their September 4, 2003 denied the reduced landscape strip along the northern property line. The item was withdrawn at the Board of Directors meeting prior to final action. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant now proposes to revise a previously approved planned development zoning classification to allow the development of the site as a two family residence and a photography studio. The owner of the photography studio will be one of the residents of the site with an apartment over the garage area as the second residential structure. The applicant is not proposing any exterior modifications to the site or the any additional parking. The applicant is proposing the placement of a single ground mounted sign in the front yard area not to exceed six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an existing single-family structure in which the current owner operates a one chair beauty salon. The site adjoins a PCD, which was originally approved for the former Harvest Foods Store and is currently being used by David Claiborne Antique Mall. There was a 100-foot land use buffer approved as a part of the development to separate the commercial use from the single-family homes located to the south. There is a PD-O located north of the site and is being used as a veterinarian office and a POD located to the east of the site currently being used as an office use. The uses along Cantrell Road are for the most part non-residential uses in this area but the area to the south, along Taylor Loop Road, are primarily single- family homes. The site adjoins the Westchester Subdivision to the southwest, which is predominately built out. Southeast of the site is the Secluded Hills Subdivision, which is also predominately built out. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several phone calls in support of the proposed change in use from area residents. The Westchester/Heatherbrae, the Secluded Hills Property Owners Association, the Westbury Property Owners Association, along with all owners of property 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. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6446-B 3 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1. Taylor Loop is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45-feet from centerline will be required. A signed easement is required. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Silver Recovery Unit required if film is developed on site. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: 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 992- 2431 if you would like to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this project. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: No comment received. 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 to a Planned Development Commercial for a residence, an apartment and a photography studio. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6446-B 4 The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Taylor Loop Road is shown as a Minor Arterial on the Master Street Plan and may require dedication of right-of-way and street improvements. A Minor Arterial provides connections to and though an urban area and their primary function are to provide short distance travel within the urbanized area. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The Residential Development goal in this area is to promote “a unique, healthy, and safe urban living environment.” This revision would allow for a more diverse mix of uses in the neighborhood while affecting traffic minimally, both consistent with the neighborhood’s Traffic and Transportation goals, and Residential Development goals. Landscape: Since there are no building expansions, extensive remodeling or new paved areas proposed, no landscaping upgrade is required by ordinance. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. Staff stated the request was to revise a previously approved planned commercial development to allow the site to be used as a two family residence and a photography studio. Staff questioned Mr. McGetrick if the owner of the photography studio would be one of the residents. Mr. McGetrick stated he would. Staff also questioned if there were any employees of the business other than the owner. Mr. McGetrick stated there were no other employees. Mr. McGetrick stated the days and hours of operation were from 8:00 am to 6:00 pm six days per week. He stated most of the photo sessions took place off site. Staff stated a dedication of right-of-way was needed if the revision to the PD-C was approved. Mr. McGetrick stated the dedication was indicated on the site plan and the owner did intend to dedication the right-of-way to the City if the application was approved. Staff noted no additional landscaping would be required since there were no exterior modifications proposed as a part of the development. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6446-B 5 H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation from 8:00 am to 6:00 pm six days per week. The applicant has also indicated there will be no employees of the business. The site plan indicates right-of-way dedication per the master Street Plan. The site plan indicates a dedication of right-of-way 45-feet from the centerline along Taylor Loop Road. The applicant is proposing a revision to the existing PD-C to allow the development of the site as a two family residences and a photography studio. The owner of the photography studio will reside on the site and an area over the garage will be converted to a second residential unit. The applicant is not proposing any exterior modifications to the site or any additional parking. The applicant is proposing the placement of a single ground mounted sign in the front yard area not to exceed six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s requested signage. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the request. The use of the site as a photography studio should have minimal impact on the adjoining properties. The applicant is not proposing any modifications to the exterior of the structure, which should mitigate any potential impacts. The use of the site as a two family residences should also have minimal impact. The site plan indicates four parking spaces with a single garage stall for a total of five parking spaces. The residential aspect of the development would typically require three on-site parking spaces and since the owner of the commercial business will be living on-site this should reduce the need for additional parking for the commercial use. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) 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 conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6446-B 6 There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 17 FILE NO.: Z-6532-B NAME: Arkansas Teachers Retirement Revised Long-form PRD LOCATION: Located on the Northeast corner of Rahling Road and Chenal Valley Drive DEVELOPER: Arkansas Teachers Retirements C/o White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 72 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 7 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PRD ALLOWED USES: Retirement Village PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PRD PROPOSED USE: Creation of a seven lot plat with the current review of proposed Lots 1 and 7 as residential uses VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 18,163 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on December 20, 1999 rezone the site from R-2 and MF-18 to PRD to allow the establishment of a Planned Residential Development titled Arkansas Teachers Retirement Village – Long- form PRD. The proposal included the rezoning of 71.9 acres from R-2 and MF-18 to PRD to allow for the development of the Arkansas Teachers Retirement Village, a stepped-care retirement facility. The development would house retired persons with facilities including independent living, assisted living, skilled nursing facilities and Alzheimer facilities. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-B 2 There were 23 independent living cottages located within the western portion of the property, with the main retirement center located within the center and eastern portions of the property. The following was a synopsis of the proposed project: Main Facility Independent living – 300 units, 4 stories Assisted living – 100 units, 4 stories Skilled nursing facility – 100 beds, 2 stories Alzheimer facility – 30 beds, 1 story Village Center and Activities – 44,000 square feet, 1 story 523 parking spaces Independent Living Cottages: 23 cottages Cottage garages – 34 parking spaces On-street visitor parking at cottages 46 spaces A single access point from Chenal Valley Drive was proposed, with a fire lane access at the southwest corner of the property, near the cottages. The proposed site plan indicated a large amount of green space, which was to be undisturbed, along with a proposed lake, walking trails and a lakeside pavilion. In March of 2002 the Arkansas Teachers Retirement System decided to reevaluate the project. ATRS decided to proceed with excavating to the finished grade indicated and approved on the site grading plan, extending sewer lines to the site, drainage construction, seeding and erosion control, power and telephone utility crossing the site were installed underground and no additional trees were to be removed from the site except those necessary to install utilities. A restoration plan was submitted to the City for approval. The applicant adhered to City’s requirements in the restoration of the site and the developer’s obligations were met. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now proposing an amendment to the approved PRD to allow the creation of an eight lot plat and the review of proposed Lots 2 and 8. The applicant has indicated Lot 2 will be developed as an assisted living facility. Proposed Lot 8 has been indicated for garden style patio homes. The applicant has also indicated all uses will remain similar to the multi-unit residential retirement facility as approved on the original PRD. The developer is licensed by the State of Arkansas Department of Long Term Care as an Assisted Living Level II facility, and as such will provide or arrange services according to the individual needs or residents. The facility will boast 32 August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-B 3 one bedroom apartments and 48 studio apartments. The single story structure will be equipment with emergency nurse call system and fire and smoke barrier separation as required by state and local code. The facility will provide dining services, three meals per day, for the residents and guest only. The facility will provide laundry and housekeeping services. The facility will also provide laundry facilities in a personal laundry area. Transportation to scheduled appointments will be provided to the residents. Activity outings will also be planned for the residents. The applicant has indicated the development will be developed with public streets. The original approval included the development of private streets. The applicant has indicated all improvements and right-of-way necessary to meet the current Master Street Plan will be met. All utilities are currently extended to the site. Storm water detention requirements have been provided in a regional facility for the entire development. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a vacant site and most of the interior trees were cleared as a part of the original approval. The applicant did replant several interior trees and reseed the site as a part of the restoration plan. A regional detention facility is located near Chenal Valley Drive. Chenal Valley Drive has been constructed to Master Street Plan standard with curb and gutter. There is not a sidewalk in place along the property frontage. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: The Margeaux Property Owners Association, all property owners located within 200-feet of the site and all residents located within 300-feet of the site who could be identified were notified of the public hearing. As of this writing staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents concerning the proposed request. Most have indicated a development similar to the original approval was not objectionable. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1. The project is located on a collector street that meets standard. 2. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. This would apply to the Chenal Valley Drive and for internal commercial streets. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-B 4 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. An existing pond is provided for storm water detention. 6. The entrance median needs to be moved back from the right-of-way of Chenal Valley Drive (40-feet is suggested). Please contact Traffic Engineering at 379-1818 if you have any questions. 7. For the Garden Home Site, a minimum 45-foot right-of-way or easement width is required with a minimum 24-foot street width as measured from the back of curb to the back of curb. 8. Prepared 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. 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: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. 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. Locations of water mains are different than shown on the plans. Central Arkansas Water waterline and access easements are not shown. Water main extension will be required in order to provide service to this property. Required relocation or adjustment of water facilities would be done at the expense of the developer. A maximum of five (5) feet of cover will be allowed over the existing water mains. If the Central Arkansas Water communication line across this site needs to be relocated that work also will be done at the expense of the developer. Water service and access to facilities must be maintained during this development. 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. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-B 5 Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Gates must maintain a 20-foot opening. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Multi Family and Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a PRD for a retirement village of buildings with mixed densities. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan for those lots that development as specified. At a later date if additional revisions to the PRD are made, a land use plan amendment may be required at that time. Master Street Plan: Chenal Valley Drive is shown as a Collector on the Master Street Plan and may require dedication of right-of-way and street improvements. A Collector street is the traffic connection from residential streets to arterials or to activity centers, with the secondary function of providing access to adjoining 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: The plan submitted does not provide for the eight-percent interior landscaping required by the Landscape Ordinance. Interior landscaping is required to be generally evenly distributed. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. Prior to obtaining a building permit, it will be necessary to provide landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating the request was to create a eight lot plan and the review of two of the proposed lots. Staff stated proposed Lot 2 was to contain an assisted living facility and proposed Lot 8 was to contain August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-B 6 garden style homes. Staff stated the desire of the developers was to maintain the same retirement village design as the previous proposal but to include the development on individual lots to allow for multiple owners of the development. Staff requested Mr. White provide additional information concerning the proposed site plan and the proposed uses of the site. Staff questioned the number of beds proposed within the facility and any ancillary services to be provided. Staff also requested the applicant provide the maximum building height in the general notes section and to dimension all building setbacks from the property lines. Staff requested the applicant provide details of the proposed signage on the site plan. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated if the proposed streets were to be public streets the widths and sidewalks would be required to meet the current Master Street Plan requirement. Staff also stated the existing pond would provide the required storm water detention for the site. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff noted the plan submitted did not provide for the eight percent interior landscaping required by the Landscape Ordinance. Staff stated interior landscaping would be required to be evenly distributed through the site. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the proposed uses of the site as a retirement village concept with various developer developing individual lots. The applicant has indicated the maximum building height as 35-feet and the revised site plan includes dimensions of all building setbacks. The applicant has indicated a single ground mounted sign to be located in the front yard area consistent with signage allowed in multi-family zones or a maximum of six feet in height and thirty-two square feet in area. The applicant has revised the site plan to include the landscaping comments. The site plan includes the required eight percent interior landscaping required by the Landscape Ordinance. The applicant has indicated all internal streets to be public streets. The applicant has stated all streets widths will meet the current Master Street Plan standard. There are no gates proposed as a part of the development. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-B 7 The applicant is proposing to amend the previously approved PRD to allow the creation of an eight lot plat and the review of proposed Lots 2 and 8. The applicant has indicated Lot 2 will be developed as an assisted living facility. Proposed Lot 8 has been indicated for garden style patio homes. The applicant has also indicated all uses will remain similar to the multi-unit residential retirement facility as approved on the original PRD. The site will be developed as a assisted living level II facility, which will provide or arrange services according to the individual needs or residents. The facility will contain 32 one bedroom apartments and 48 studio apartments. The single story structure will be equipment with emergency nurse call system and fire and smoke barrier separation as required by state and local code. The facility will provide dining services, three meals per day, for the residents and their guest only. The facility will provide laundry and housekeeping services. The facility will also provide laundry facilities in a personal laundry area. Transportation to scheduled appointments will be provided to the residents. Activity outings will also be planned for the residents. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The proposed site plan includes the placement of 65 parking spaces on the site. The typical minimum parking required for a facility of this type would be 80 parking spaces or one space per bed. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s proposed parking plan. Staff does not feel the reduced number of parking spaces will have an adverse impact on the area. It is anticipated few if any of the residents will have their own transportation thus freeing up parking for guest and employees. The applicant has indicated a conceptual plan for the development of proposed Lot 8 with garden style homes. The site plan includes the placement of 35 garden style homes on the site. The units are proposed as attached and detached homes. The lot contains 14.28 acres, which would result in a density similar to single-family (2.45 units per acre). Staff is supportive of the applicant’s conceptual plan for the placement of the indicated homes on proposed Lot 8. Proposed Lots 1, 3 – 7 will be reviewed by the Commission and the Board of Directors as final development plans are completed. The indicated lots range in size from 3.53 acres to 15.16 acres which staff feels sufficient for development of the desired housing types. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. The applicant has indicated the desired development to be similar in concept as the previous approval. Staff feels the placement of a retirement village on the site with individual lots as opposed to the development under a single ownership will have minimal impact on the adjoining properties. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-B 8 I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) 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 conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 18 FILE NO.: Z-6881-B NAME: McKinstry-Threet Revised Short-form PCD LOCATION: Located on the Northwest corner of Cantrell Road and Townsend Street DEVELOPER: Pfeifer Family Limited Partnership #2 Three Financial Centre, Suite 409 Little Rock, AR 72211 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 2.3 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PCD ALLOWED USES: Office and Retail PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD PROPOSED USE: Office and Retail VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 18,594 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on November 20, 2001 established the McKinstry-Threet Short-form PCD. The development was to include a mixed use PCD utilizing 2.4 acres of a 41.9 acre tract located on the north side of Cantrell Road, east of Black Road. The applicant proposed a 3-lot development with one building on each lot. Lot 1 was to contain a one-story 7200 square foot building and 37 parking spaces. The use proposed for Lot 1 was an auto service establishment specializing in tire and battery service. Their services would include related services such as front-end alignments, shock absorber replacement, etc. No services related to engine or transmission repair or paint and body work were proposed. The building was oriented such that the garage bay doors would not face Cantrell Road. Lot 2 was proposed to contain a one-story 4800 square foot building and a 25 space August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6881-B 2 parking lot. The applicant proposed a mix for the building of no less than 25 percent office and up to 75 percent C-3, General Commercial District uses. The applicant further defined the use of the building by eliminating the following C-3 uses: Appliance Repair, Butcher Shop, Cabinet and Woodworking Shop, Church, College Dormitory, College fraternity or sorority, College, university or seminary, Convenience store with gas pumps, Convent or monastery, Custom sewing or millinery, Establishment of the care of alcoholics, neurotic or psychiatric patients, Feed store, Fire station, Hotel or motel, Lodge or fraternal organization, Multi-family dwellings, Pawnshop, Recycling facility, automated, Seasonal or temporary sales, outside, Secondhand shop, Service station, Tax office, Theater, Amusement, commercial (outside), Building materials sales (open), Bus station and terminal, Car wash, Crematorium, Eating place with drive-in service, Lawn and garden center open display, Lumberyard, Mini-warehouse, Service station with limited motor vehicle repair, Small engine repair, Tool and equipment rental (with outside display), Upholstery shop, furniture. No more than 1200 square feet of the building would be an eating place without drive-in service (restaurant). Lot 3 was proposed to contain a one-story 3600 square foot building and a 21 space parking lot. The building was proposed to be utilized as 100 percent office uses. Lots 2 and 3 would take access from an improved Townsend Street and Lot 1 would have access from a common access drive shared with the property to the west. Lots 1 and 2 would have a driveway connection. The site lies within the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The proposed development was to conform to Highway 10 standards except for two minor points. One corner of the building on Lot 1 intruded into the 100 foot front yard setback and the landscape strip along the western perimeter of Lot 1 fell 10 feet below the 25-foot requirement. The applicant also proposed to abandon a platted but undeveloped 20-foot wide street right- of-way extended east to west through the site. On Mach 15, 2002, staff presented the Planning Commission at its informal meeting a revised site plan requesting they offer their opinion as to whether the proposed plan would require a full revision to the PCD, ie., return to the full Commission and City Board for approval. The consensus of the Commission was the full revision was not necessary since the proposal resulted in a decrease in intensity of use and buildings and the elements such as curb cuts, building setbacks and landscaping remained unchanged. The Commission did however request the applicant submit a revised site plan to the Subdivision Committee of the Planning Commission when the final development plan was completed. This proposal did not move forward as was presented to the Commission at their March 15, 2002, Informal meeting. An agreement was reached with Twin City Bank, which is currently located on Lot 1 in early 2003. Twin City Banks has developed on Lot 1 with a slightly larger lot than was originally proposed. The applicant is now requesting a August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6881-B 3 revision in the PCD to allow for the development of Lots 2 and 3 with lesser side yard setbacks along the western property line. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is requesting an amendment to the originally approved PCD to modify the rear and side yard setbacks for proposed Lots 2 and 3 of the Candlewood East Subdivision. Lot 2 of the original PCD indicated a west side yard setback of 25-feet and the east side yard setback of 32.6 feet. The revised PCD indicates a 15-foot west side yard setback and a 15.4 foot east side yard setback. The original approved PCD for proposed Lot 3 included a west side yard setback of 24-feet and a east side yard setback of 25.19 feet. The applicant is now requesting a west side yard setback of 15-feet and a east side yard setback of 15.3 feet. The applicant has indicated with the reduced side yard setbacks a more densely planted landscape area will be provided. The site plan also indicates the rear yard setback on proposed Lot 2 is 22-feet as opposed to the original 20-feet and the landscaped area is front of the building has been increased from 4-feet to 6-feet. The original PCD approved a 7,200 square foot commercial use on Lot 1, a 4,800 square foot use on Lot 2 to include 3,600 square feet of commercial and 1,200 square feet of office and a 3,600 square foot office use on Lot 3. The total approved was 15,600 square feet of which 10,800 square feet was designated as commercial and 4,800 square feet as office. In the revised PCD the applicant is requesting approval of 3,600 square feet office on Lot 1, 4,640 square feet of commercial on Lot 2 and 3,148 square feet of office on Lot 3. This totals 11,288 square feet of which 4,640 square feet is commercial and 6,748 square feet is office. In summary the commercial square footage 57% or by 6,160 square feet when compared to the original approved PCD. The site also reduced total square footage 27% or by 4,212 square feet when compared to the original PCD. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: Twin City Bank is located on Lot 1 of the plat area and the grading of the entire site was completed at the time of construction of the Twin City Bank. Townsend Street is a newly constructed street complete with curb-gutter and sidewalk. The area to the east of the site is a tree covered site. The area to the north of the site is also tree covered. As indicated Twin City Bank is located to the west of the site with a commercial shopping node, the Kroger Center, located further west of the site. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6881-B 4 There are a mixture of uses to the south of the site both residential and non- residential in nature. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has not revived any comment from area residents. All property owners located within 200-feet of the site, all residents located within 300-feet of the site who could be identified, the Westbury Property Owners Association, the Secluded Hills Property Owners Association, the Westchester/Heatherbrae Property Owners Association, the Piedmont Neighborhood Association and the Pankey Community Improvement Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1. Townsend Street is a new commercial Street. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required. 2. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. 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 fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered connections off the private fire system. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: No comment received. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6881-B 5 F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Office Commercial for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision to a Planned Commercial Development for reductions of side yard setbacks. 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 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. 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 one objective relative to this case: “to promote vigorous enforcement of Landscaping and Excavation Ordinance.” The Infrastructure goal also listed an objective relevant to this case: “ensuring that roads are supportive of all transportation modes.” This zoning action has minimal effects on transportation. It will require enforcement of the plan’s environmental goals to ensure that reduction of the side yard setback does not negatively influence on site landscaping. Landscape: The proposed width of a portion of the on site perimeter landscape strip of Lot 2, adjacent to Townsend Street, is less than the 15 feet required by the Highway 10 Overlay District Ordinance. Additionally, this same ordinance requires an average 25-foot perimeter landscape width on Lot 2 adjacent to Lot 1. Both Lots 2 and 3 do not provide for the eight-percent interior landscaping required by the Landscape Ordinance. An irrigation system to water landscape areas on Lot 2 is required by the Highway 10 Overlay District Ordinance. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) Mr. Joe White and Mr. Johnny Kincade were present representing the request. Staff stated the applicant was proposing to revise a previously approved site plan to allow for reduced setbacks along the western perimeter of proposed Lots 2 and 3. Staff requested the applicant provide additional information concerning August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6881-B 6 proposed signage for Lot 3. Staff also requested the applicant provide a cross access easement between Lots 1 and 2. Staff also requested the applicant provide specific office and commercial uses proposed for the site. Staff questioned if there would be a dumpster located on the site. The applicant indicated a dumpster would be located on the site and a cross access agreement would allow both dumpsters to be located on Lot 3. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the detention was constructed with existing Lot 1. Staff stated sidewalks would be required along Townsend Street. Mr. White stated sidewalks were in place. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated since the site was located in the Highway 10 Design Overlay District Lot 2 would require irrigation. Staff also stated the interior landscaping appeared to be less than the typical minimum required by the Landscape Ordinance. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated a shared dumpster location on proposed Lot 3. The applicant has also indicated a cross access easement between Lots 1 and 2 as indicated on the final plat for Lot 1. The applicant has indicated O-3 and C-3 uses will be utilized to develop the site. The applicant has indicated the available parking based on current ordinance requirements for specific uses will drive the specific users. The site plan also indicates the rear yard setback on proposed Lot 2 is 22-feet as opposed to the original 20-feet and the landscaped area is front of the building has been increased from 4-feet to 6-feet. The applicant is requesting an amendment to the originally approved PCD to modify the previously approved rear and side yard setbacks for proposed Lots 2 and 3 of the Candlewood East Subdivision. Lot 2 of the original PCD indicated a west side yard setback of 25-feet and the east side yard setback of 32.6 feet. The revised PCD indicates a 15-foot west side yard setback and a 15.4 foot east side yard setback. The original approved PCD for proposed Lot 3 included a west side yard setback of 24-feet and an east side yard setback of 25.19 feet. The applicant is now requesting a west side yard setback of 15-feet and an east side yard setback of 15.3 feet. The applicant has indicated with the reduced side yard setbacks a August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6881-B 7 more densely planted landscape area will be provided. The applicant has also indicated a reduced landscaping strip for the proposed lots. Staff is supportive of this request. In addition the applicant has indicated a reduction of interior landscaping. Staff supports the applicant’s request for the reduction of interior landscaping as well. The propose lots are relatively small and the development of the lots per typical ordinance requirement would be difficult. Staff feels with the additional plantings the reduced width will not have a negative impact on adjoining properties. The original PCD approved a 7,200 square foot commercial use on Lot 1, a 4,800 square foot use on Lot 2 to include 3,600 square feet of commercial and 1,200 square feet of office and a 3,600 square foot office use on Lot 3. The total approved was 15,600 square feet of which 10,800 square feet was designated as commercial and 4,800 square feet as office. In the revised PCD the applicant is requesting approval of 3,600 square feet office on Lot 1 (Twin City Bank recently constructed), 4,640 square feet of commercial on Lot 2 and 3,148 square feet of office on Lot 3. This totals 11,288 square feet of which 4,640 square feet is commercial and 6,748 square feet is office. In summary the commercial square footage 57% or by 6,160 square feet when compared to the original approved PCD. The site also reduced total square footage 27% or by 4,212 square feet when compared to the original PCD. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) 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 conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 19 FILE NO.: MSP04-05 Name: Master Street Plan Amendment - Ellis Mountain Planning District Location: NWC of Bowman and 36th Street Request: Remove Proposed Collector Source: Todd Jacobs, CEI Engineering Staff requests that this application be withdrawn. The applicant has submitted a revised site plan that shows the collector to be built and therefore no amendment is necessary at this time. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The item was placed on the consent agenda for withdrawal. A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 19.1 FILE NO.: Z-6886-A NAME: Church at Rock Creek Revised Long-form POD LOCATION: Located on the North side of West 36th Street between I-430 and Bowman Road DEVELOPER: The Church at Rock Creek 4217 South Shackleford Road Little Rock, AR 72204 ENGINEER: CEI Engineers 3317 SW “I” Street Bentonville, AR 72712 AREA: 40 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: POD ALLOWED USES: Church facility and ancillary uses PROPOSED ZONING: Revised POD PROPOSED USE: Church facility and ancillary uses VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 18,351 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on September 19, 2002 established the Church at Rock Creek – Long-form POD allowing for the development of this 40-acre tract at the northwest corner of Interstate 430 and West 36th Street from R-2 to POD. The applicant proposed a conceptual site plan for a church facility and related ancillary uses. The development plan included construction of a collector street from West 36th Street, at the southwest corner of the church property, to Bowman Road. Access to the church development would be gained by utilizing a private boulevard street, which would run August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6886-A 2 from near the southwest corner of the church property to the proposed collector street near the center of the site at the west property line. Amendments to the proposed site plan were made at the Commission meeting. The applicant agreed the buildings would be sound-proofed, the buildings façade would not be constructed of metal, concrete blocks, etc., there would not be a steeple, the building elevation would not be determined until after the finished grades were in place, the maximum building heights were to range from 65 to 80 feet, depending on the finished grade, the child care center would have a maximum of 12 children in the center, the church could not guarantee that the children would not be referred from the judicial system, but the center would not be a half-way house, children under the care of the church would not be allowed to drive and temporary stay would be twelve months or less. The car ministry the maximum building area would be 2500 square feet and the facility would not grow any large. Only minor car repairs would be done, oil change, wash, wax etc. No salvaged cars would be accepted. The building would also be for storage of equipment for the entire campus. The facility would accommodate two cars at a time inside the building. After repair and cleaning, the cars would be parked on the parking lot. There would be no salvaged auto parts stored on the property. There would be no test-driving of vehicles in the surrounding neighborhoods. The maximum number of cars for car ministry uses would be twelve. The Medical Care Center the church established the hours of operation from 9:00 am to 9:00 pm three days per week. There was to be no clear cutting of the site. The church would remove the trees along the I-430 Frontage for visibility at the time of Phase I development. There would be no A/C cooling tower on the site. Smaller package units would be used. The church could not agree to having no construction take place on weekends. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now requesting an amendment to the previously approved POD for the site located at West 36th Street and Interstate 440. This request more accurately reflects the new master plan for the Church, which includes a new sanctuary totaling 85,000 square feet and a seating capacity of 2,500. The development will be constructed in two phases with the church and associated parking constructed in the first phase. The property contains 40-acres and mostly wooded. The church’s intent is to create a campus design that blends into the wooded environment. In addition to the church supporting facilities to serve the needs for a variety of church ministries which included recreation, counseling, lodging, medical and class rooms. The applicant has indicated an attempt will be made to blend the church August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6886-A 3 and the facilities into the environment with the smallest amount of impact on the natural features of the site as possible. Configuration of the buildings and facilities will provide for preservation of a large portion of trees and land area, which currently exist on the site. The applicant is also proposing two monument signs, one for each entry, which will be located along West 36th Street. The site plan includes the placement of a 100-foot buffer along the north property line and a 50-foot buffer on the east and west property lines. Parking fields have been designed to preserve as many existing trees as possible within the parking area. The site plan includes the placement of 891 parking spaces on the site. Six hundred thirty of these spaces will be constructed in Phase I. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a tree covered site located north of West 36th Street and west of I-430. The topography of the site slopes gently from north to south. There are single- family homes located to the south of the site on large tracts accessed by West 36th Street. To the west of the site are two single-family homes recently rezoned to O-1. The Sandpiper Subdivision is located to the north of the site. West 36th Street is a narrow roadway with open ditches for drainage. The Master Street Plan indicates a collector street in this area extending to the north and curving westward to connect to Bowman Road. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. The Sandpiper Neighborhood Association, the John Barrow Neighborhood Association, all owners of property located within 200-feet of the site and all residents located within 300-feet of the site, who could be identified, were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1. West 36th Street is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45-feet from centerline will be required. 2. Provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one- half street improvements to the street including a 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development. 3. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6886-A 4 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 (detention basin shown). 6. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per Section 8-283 prior to construction. 7. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. Driveway spacing must be 150- feet from the property boundary and 300-feet center to center. The width of the driveway must not exceed 36-feet. 8. The Master Street Plan calls for a collector to be constructed through, or along the western boundary of this property. 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: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. 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. 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). A 20-foot-wide-waterline easement is needed along the east line of this property to allow for installation of a proposed 16-inch water main across this property. 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. 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. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6886-A 5 Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the I-430 Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision to a Planned Office Development for revisions to the site plan. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: West 36th Street and Bowman Road are shown as Minor Arterials on the Master Street Plan and may require dedication of right-of-way and street improvements along 36th Street. A Minor Arterial provides connections to and though an urban area and their primary function are to provide short distance travel within the urbanized area. A proposed Collector street is located on the western side of the property and connects to the west with Bowman Road. A Collector street is the traffic connection from residential streets to arterials or to activity centers, with the secondary function of providing access to adjoining property. A Master Street Plan Amendment was a separate item on this agenda and has since been withdrawn. 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: The proposed parking areas need interior landscape islands of at least 300 square feet in area and 7 ½ feet in width to help break up the long rows of parking. This is a requirement of the Landscape Ordinance. A 6-foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed to the adjacent residential property, a wall or dense evergreen plantings is required along the northern and western perimeters of the site. Credit toward fulfilling this requirement can be given for existing trees and vegetation that satisfies this year- around requirement. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6886-A 6 Prior to obtaining 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 tree-covered site. Extra credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when properly preserving trees of 6-inch caliper or larger. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) Mr. Todd Jacobs was present representing the request. Staff stated the request was a revision to a previously approved Planned Office Development to revise the approved site plan. Staff requested Mr. Jacobs provide additional information concerning the proposed activities of the church and dumpster locations. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the site was located in a flood hazard area and a special grading permit would be required. Staff also noted driveway widths must not exceed 36-feet in width. There was a general discussion concerning the applicant’s request for the removal of a proposed collector street from the Master Street Plan. Staff stated they were not supportive of the removal of the collector street and felt the applicant should construct a portion of the street along their western property line. Mr. Jacobs stated he would work with the church to see if they would be willing to revise their plan to accommodate the proposed collector street. Mr. Jacobs questioned Central Arkansas Water’s comment concerning easements. Staff stated an easement was needed along the Interstate. Staff stated the area had been indicated as undisturbed but an undisturbed buffer was not required. 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 August 5,2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the proposed collector street will be constructed along their western property line as requested by staff. With this indication on the site plan the request for the Master Street Plan amendment is now being withdrawn by staff since the amendment is no longer necessary. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6886-A 7 The applicant has also indicated proposed dumpster locations along with a note concerning the required screening. The applicant has indicated the maximum steeple height of 68 feet and the maximum building height of 58 feet. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s indicated steeple height. Typically steeples are allowed to not exceed two times the height of the structure. The indicated steeple height is well below the maximum typically allowed per the zoning ordinance. The applicant has also indicated evergreen plantings will be placed in areas where existing screening is not sufficient to meet the minimum ordinance requirements. The applicant has indicated the desire is to maintain a wooded setting and feels the placement of plantings will enhance the site. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s indicated screening. The applicant has indicated signage will be placed on each driveway location. The applicant has indicated signage will be constructed consistent with signage allowed in office zones or a maximum of six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area. Staff is supportive of the indicated signage. The applicant has indicated gates within the proposed development to allow for control of traffic through the site. The applicant has indicated the gates will be closed “after dark” to eliminate undesirable activity on the site when church activities are not taking place on the site. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request to gate the site when activities are not taking place. The applicant has indicated the church does not intend to clear cut the site. The new Master Site plan has been designed to fit the topography/terrain and protect/presser has many existing trees as possible. The applicant has indicated tree protect devices and measures will be part of the civil submittal at the time of building permit. The applicant has indicated the activities on the site will include church services on Sunday Morning at 8:00 am, 9:30 am and 11:00 am and Monday Night at 7:00 pm. The applicant has indicated church related activities will occur most evenings through out the week such as Bible Study, Study Group Activities, Student Ministry and are scheduled from 6:00 pm to 10:00 pm. The applicant has indicated the total building square footage of the site will be 137,670 square feet. The Church will contain 73,000 square feet and have a seating capacity of 2500. The applicant has indicated the development of 630 parking spaces with Phase I of the development and 224 parking spaces will be added in subsequent phases for a final total of 854 parking spaces. Based on August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6886-A 8 the seating capacity of the Church the typical minimum parking required for the sanctuary would be 625 parking spaces. The indicated parking is adequate to meet the typical minimum parking demand. Other buildings included on the proposed site plan are a youth building, education building, child ministry, family ministry, teen ministry, ministry apartment, welfare building, medical clinic, hill top chapel, visitors lodge and maintenance/storage building. The Child Ministry Care Center will provide temporary housing for abused or neglected children. The children are at the care center until they can be retuned home, placed with relatives or placed in long term foster care. The applicant has indicated the Family Ministry Care Center will provide temporary housing for families in transition. The center will house three to four families at a time. The center will provide food housing and assistance in securing employment and permanent housing. The Teenage Ministry Care Center will provide housing and support for teenagers who are abused or neglected. The center will provide a safe haven for ten to twelve displaced teenagers. The goal for the teenagers will be return them to their home place with relatives or place the children in long term foster care. The Medical Care Center is proposed to provide incidental medical treatment at no cost to the patient. The center will be staffed by volunteer medical personnel and the center will operate two to three days per week. The applicant has also indicated a Maintenance/Storage facility. The facility will be used to store equipment for the entire church campus. The applicant has indicated donations of auto’s will be accepted by the church. The church will then inspect the cars and perform any necessary repairs. The church will then give the cars to someone unable to afford transportation to work or school. The applicant has indicated only minor car repair will be conducted on the site. The applicant has indicated no salvaged cars will be accepted. The applicant has indicated the facility will accommodate two cars at a time, which will be located inside the building. The applicant has indicated there will be no salvaged auto parts stored on the property and there will be no test driving of vehicles in surrounding neighborhoods. The Visitor Lodge has been indicated to provide housing for groups that come to Little Rock for a few days to volunteer for the church campus or in other areas of the City. The applicant has indicated the Apartment Facility will be used to provide temporary housing for family members or persons from out of town who are undergoing extended medical treatment in a local hospital or to provide temporary housing for an employees in transition. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6886-A 9 Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The indicated uses are similar to the uses proposed as a part of the original approval the applicant’s request to revise the site plan allows for placement of the proposed uses around the site in a manner which will allow for better utilization of the existing vegetation. To Staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. The development of the site as proposed should have minimal impact on adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) 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 conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 20 FILE NO.: Z-7433-A NAME: Malstrome Revised Short-form POD LOCATION: Located on the Northwest corner of Kanis Road and Autumn Road DEVELOPER: Pat Malmstrome 11610 Kanis Road Little Rock, AR 72211 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 319 President Clinton Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 2.79 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: POD ALLOWED USES: Office with 10 percent commercial uses PROPOSED ZONING: Revised POD PROPOSED USE: 51% Office 49% Commercial VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: The Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed a proposal at their July 24, 2003 Public Hearing to rezone the site from O-3 and R-2 to POD. The Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 18,917 on August 19, 2003 establishing the Malmstrome Short- form POD. A grading permit was issued for the site in December of 2003. The applicant began grading the site but work has since stopped. The site consisted of three tracts of the Montclair Subdivision is zoned O-3 and a portion of a fourth tract zoned as R-2. The applicant requested to rezone the area to Planned Office Development (POD) and to replat the properties to a single tract for an office development and leave the remainder of the fourth tract as a separate lot. The August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7433-A 2 result would be the creation of a two lot plat as well as the rezoning to POD. Neither of the lots required waivers or variances. The applicant indicated the development would be developed in four phases. The applicant proposed the construction of approximately 7,500 square feet of office space in each of the first three phases and 8,100 square feet of office space in the fourth phase. The requested uses included those allowed in O-3, General Office District and the 10% accessory uses permitted in O-3, General Office District. The applicant indicated the ancillary space would be an aggregate square footage throughout the site based on a fully completed master plan. The hours of operation were proposed from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm Monday through Friday. The applicant indicated the building height not to exceed 35-feet allowed under the O-3 zoning classification. The applicant indicated storm water detention would be a detention pond in the first two phases. However, upon final construction of the project, an underground detention system would be implemented. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now proposing to revise the previously approved POD to allow the development of the site with 51% office uses and 49% commercial uses. The applicant has indicated the construction of two single-story buildings containing 30,391 square feet. Building A is proposed with 21,059 square feet and Building B with 9,332 square feet. The site plan includes the placement of 80 parking spaces. The applicant is requesting the uses of the site for O-1, O-2 and O-3 permitted uses except all accessory and conditional uses listed under O-1, O-2 and O-3 and the following itemized list: Fire station, Orphanage, Rooming or boarding, single-family residences, Two family residences, Cemetery or Mausoleum, College dormitory, Convent or Monastery, Lodge or Fraternal Organization, Mortuary or Funeral home, Multi-family dwellings, Nursing home or convalescent home, College fraternity or sorority, Governmental or private recreational uses, Hospital, or Office warehouse. In addition the applicant is requested all commercial uses permitted under C-1, C-2 and C-3 except the following itemized list: Fire station, Orphanage, Rooming or boarding, Single-family residences, Two family Residences, Cemetery or Mausoleum, College dormitory, Convent or Monastery, Lodge or Fraternal Organization, Mortuary or funeral home, Multi- family dwellings, Nursing home or convalescent home, College fraternity or sorority, Hospital, Animal clinic, Appliance repair, Cabinet or woodwork shop, Catering/commercial, Convenience store with gas pumps, Establishment for the care of alcoholic narcotic or psychiatric patients, Muffler shop, Eating place with drive in service, Bar lounge or tavern, Hotel or motel, Lawn and garden center, August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7433-A 3 Seasonal and amusement commercial (outside), Automobile or motorcycle sales and service, Bus station and terminal, Cabinet or woodwork shop, Car wash, Feed store, Glass or glazer-installation or repair, High rise multi-family, Lawn and garden center open display, Service station with or without motor vehicle repair, Ambulance service post, Auto parts sales, Auto rental or leasing, Auto repair garage, Building material sales-open, Crematorium, Landscaping service, Lumberyard, Mini-warehouse, Office warehouse, Plant nursery, Small engine repair, Tool and equipment rental-with outside display, Upholstery shop-auto or furniture. The applicant has indicated no more than 3800 square feet will be used as dining facilities. The proposed uses of the building will be directly tied to the available parking based on current ordinance requirements. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an existing office building with a single-family home located on the western portion of the site. The area to the north of the site contains an office building with Pinnacle Point Hospital further north. To the east of the site is a vacant non-conforming office building and Kid’s Sport (zoned POD) is located to the northeast of the site both fronting onto Autumn Road. The uses to the south include office and commercial uses. There is a large tract of O-3 zoned property located to the southwest near the Kanis/Bowman Road intersection. The site has been cleared with the exception of the hard corner of Kanis Road and Autumn Road. Kanis Road is a narrow roadway with open ditches for drainage. Street improvements have not been constructed to Autumn Road adjacent to the site. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. The Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Association, the John Barrow Neighborhood Association, the Birchwood Neighborhood Association, the Sandpiper Neighborhood Association, 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 were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1. All previous comments on the proposed development apply to this amendment. 2. Kanis Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. Dedication of right-of-way 45-feet from centerline will be required. Only 30-feet is shown on the plan. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7433-A 4 3. Autumn Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30-feet from centerline. 4. Provide design of the street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvements to the street including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. Autumn Road must be 18-feet from centerline. Kanis Road requires an in-lieu payment. 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. 6. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. Conform with maximum grades in Section 31-210. 7. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the location of the proposed storm water detention facilities. 8. A grading permit will be required per Section 29-186 (c) and (d). E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements if service is required for the project. If a food preparation facility is to be a tenant a grease trap will be required. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional information. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. 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 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). 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: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional information. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7433-A 5 County Planning: No comment. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the I-430 Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Office Commercial for this property. The applicant has applied for a change to a Planned Office Development for a change in the mix of uses. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Kanis Road is shown as a Minor Arterial and Autumn Road is shown as a Collector in the Master Street Plan. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and street improvements. A Minor Arterial provides connections to and though an urban area and their primary function are to provide short distance travel within the urbanized area. A Collector street is the traffic connection from residential streets to arterials or to activity centers, with the secondary function of providing access to adjoining property. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Walnut Valley Neighborhood Action Plan. The goals for Commercial Development, Neighborhood Quality, and Transportation are to “maintain and reinvigorate retail areas to provide retail for local residents,” “preserve the welcoming attractive neighborhood where current residents are proud to live and others wish to reside,” and “improve the flow of vehicles through the neighborhood to reduce negative impacts to area residents,” respectively. This zoning action provides neighborhood retail for local residents. Landscape: The plan submitted does not allow for eight-percent (2,991 square feet) of the interior of the vehicular use area to be landscaped with interior islands of at least 150 square feet in area and 7 ½ feet in width. Building landscaping cannot count as interior landscaping. These are requirements of the Landscape Ordinance. A 6-foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen plantings, is required along with western perimeter of the site. Prior to a building permit being issued, it will be necessary to provide landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. An irrigation system to water landscape areas will be required. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7433-A 6 G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) Mr. Pat McGetrick and Mr. Andrew Hicks were present representing the request. Staff stated the proposed development was previously approved as a POD to allow the development of the site with office uses and the allowable ten percent accessory uses. Staff stated the applicant was now requesting to use the site with 60 percent commercial uses and 40 percent office uses. Staff questioned the applicant if they would not reduce the percentage of commercial uses. Mr. Hicks questioned what percentage of commercial was acceptable to staff. Staff stated no more than 49%. Staff also requested the applicant provide the maximum building height in the general note section of the site plan. Staff stated all building setback dimensions should be included on the site plan. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a deferral of street improvements to Autumn Road would be acceptable and an in-lieu contribution for Kanis Road would be requested. Staff stated the right-of-way would be required for both roadways. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the building landscaping must be a minimum of eighteen feet. Staff also stated the interior landscaping appeared to be short of the minimum eight percent required. Staff stated irrigation of landscaped area would be required when submitting for a building permit. Staff stated the area to the west of the site was zoned R-2, Single-family and would require screening. Staff stated the building could act as screening if the openings were limited to those required by fire code. 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 August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the development will be constructed with 49% commercial uses and 51% office uses. The applicant has indicated the maximum building height will be 35-feet and the site plan includes all setback dimensions from property lines. The applicant has indicated there will be 114 parking spaces on the site. If the site is developed as indicated the required parking would be 39 parking spaces required for the office development, 37 parking spaces required for the commercial non-restaurant space and 38 parking spaces required for the restaurant potion of the site. Based on the typical minimum parking requirements a total of 114 parking spaces would be required. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7433-A 7 The applicant has indicated the site will be developed with O-1, O-2 and O-3 uses with the exception of Fire station, Orphanage, Rooming or boarding, Single- family residences, Two family residences, Cemetery or mausoleum, College dormitory, Convent or monastery, Lodge or fraternal organization, Mortuary or funeral home, Multi-family dwellings, Nursing home or convalescent home, College fraternity or sorority, Governmental or private recreational uses, Hospital, or office warehouse. In addition the applicant is requested all commercial uses permitted under C-1, C-2 and C-3 except the following itemized list: Fire station, Orphanage, Rooming or boarding, Single-family residences, Two family residences, Cemetery or mausoleum, College dormitory, Convent or monastery, Lodge or fraternal organization, Mortuary or funeral home, Multi-family dwellings, Nursing home or convalescent home, College fraternity or sorority, Hospital, Animal clinic, Appliance repair, Cabinet or woodwork shop, Catering/commercial, Convenience store with gas pumps, Establishment for the care of alcoholic narcotic or psychiatric patients, Muffler shop, Eating place with drive in service, Bar lounge or tavern, Hotel or motel, Lawn and garden center, Seasonal and amusement commercial (outside), Automobile or motorcycle sales and service, Bus station and terminal, Cabinet or woodwork shop, Car wash, Feed store, Glass or glazer-installation or repair, High rise multi-family, Lawn and garden center open display, Service station with or without motor vehicle repair, Ambulance service post, Auto parts sales, Auto rental or leasing, Auto repair garage, Building material sales-open, Crematorium, Landscaping service, Lumberyard, Mini-warehouse, Office warehouse, Plant nursery, Small engine repair, Tool and equipment rental-with outside display, Upholstery shop-auto or furniture. The applicant has indicated no more than 3800 square feet will be used as dining facilities. The proposed uses of the building will be directly tied to the available parking based on current ordinance requirements. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s requested uses. The exclusion of the specific uses and the limiting the use of the site to a specific amount of restaurant space staff feels allows for adequate parking. Staff feels the indicated uses appropriate for the site. The applicant has indicated increased landscaped areas within the proposed parking area. The applicant has indicated landscaped islands sufficient to meet the minimum ordinance requirements. The applicant has also indicated a screening fence will be added to the eastern property line adjacent to the residentially zoned property. Staff is supportive of the proposed landscaping plan and the indicated screening. The applicant has indicated a pole sign located at the intersection of Kanis Road and Autumn Road a maximum of thirty-six feet in height and one hundred sixty square feet in area. Staff is not supportive of the proposed signage. Staff would recommend a single ground mounted monument style sign be located at the intersection of Kanis Road and Autumn Road a maximum of ten feet in height August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7433-A 8 and one hundred square feet in area. The applicant has also indicated signage located near the western drive on Kanis Road a maximum of six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area and a sign located along Autumn Road near the northern driveway also a maximum of six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area. Staff is supportive of the two proposed ground mounted signs. The applicant has indicated the dedication of right-of-way per the Master Street Plan requirements. The applicant has also indicated street construction will be made in compliance with staff recommendations. Staff recommends a deferral of street improvements to Autumn Road and an in-lieu contribution for Kanis Road street construction be made to the City. Staff is supportive of the proposed request with the exception of the indicated pole sign located at the intersection of Kanis Road and Autumn Road. Staff feels the proposed revision to the POD to allow additional uses to locate on the site should have minimal impact on adjoining properties. The proposed uses of the site must meet parking requirements prior to tenant finish out and the percent use mix must be maintained. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff recommends a deferral of street improvements to Autumn Road and an in- lieu contribution for Kanis Road street construction be made to the City. Staff recommends the sign located at the intersection of Kanis Road and Autumn Road be a maximum of ten feet in height and one hundred square feet in area. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) 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 conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff presented a recommendation of deferral of street improvements to Autumn Road and an in-lieu contribution for Kanis Road street construction be made to the City and staff presented a recommendation the sign located at the intersection of Kanis Road and Autumn Road be a maximum of ten feet in height and one hundred square feet in area. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 21 FILE NO.: Z-7694 NAME: Montgomery Short-form PD-C LOCATION: Located at 7908 Mabelvale Cut-off DEVELOPER: Alphonso and Monique Montgomery 7908 Mabelvale Cut-off Mabelvale, AR 72103 ENGINEER: Donald W. Brooks, Inc. 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 1.17 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PD-C PROPOSED USE: Single-family residential and a single chair beauty salon VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is requesting the addition of a single-chair beauty salon on the site located at 7908 Mabelvale Cut-off. The applicant indicated she and her husband recently purchased the home, which contains a residence and a four car garage and workshop. The applicant’s cover letter indicates her desire is to turn the workshop into an owner/operator one person beauty salon for herself. She stated her beauty salon is currently located at 3316 Mabelvale Pike. The applicant has indicated she has been leasing the site for seven years and for three of those years she has operated alone. The cover letter states the last four years she had four other booth rental operations which allowed her to manage the business on both ends. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 21 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7694 2 The applicant states her desire is to no longer lease space and have a facility she can call her own. She stated the area she is requesting to modify to the salon would not require much work to transform. The building has plumbing and electricity, it would simply need cosmetic work to bring it up to par. The applicant indicates her hours of operation are from 9:00 am to 6:00 pm Thursday through Saturday. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a single-family home on a large lot with two outbuildings located near the rear property line. The area is a mix of single-family and non- conforming non-residential uses. To the north of the site is a single-family subdivision developed with smaller lots. There are single-family homes to the east and west of the site similar in area to the applicant’s lot. Other uses in the area include an adult day care, a contractors storage yard office uses and commercial uses located nearer the Chicot and Mabelvale Cut- off intersection. Mabelvale Cut-off is a narrow roadway, which is scheduled for improvement by the city in the near future. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has not received any comment from area residents. Southwest Little Rock United for Progress, the Rob Roy Way Neighborhood Association, the Chicot Neighborhood Association, the Yorkwood Neighborhood Association, all owners of property located within 200-feet of the site and all residents located within 300-feet of the site who could be identified were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1. Mabelvale Cut-off is scheduled to be widened and improved by the City. No Master Street Plan improvements are required. 2. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. The project would qualify for a contribution in-lieu of construction at the time of the building permit. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 21 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7694 3 Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: Approved as submitted. 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 992-2431 if you would like to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this project. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Geyer Springs West Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Development Commercial for a one-chair beauty salon. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Mabelvale Cut Off Road is shown as a Minor Arterial on the Master Street Plan and may require dedication of right-of-way and will require street improvements. A Minor Arterial provides connections to and though an urban area and their primary function are to provide short distance travel within the urbanized area. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Chicot West / I-30 South Neighborhood Action Plan. The Economic Development Goal is to “provide a mixed commercial / residential environment that will promote the safety, attractiveness, and value of the area while creating a competitive and adaptable economic climate that encourages August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 21 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7694 4 investment in the diversity of employment opportunities. One objective of the Economic Development Goal specifically relates to this case: “Attract neighborhood oriented businesses.” This zoning action creates a neighborhood- oriented business as desired by the plan. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) Mr. Monique Montgomery was present representing the request. Staff stated the applicant was proposing the placement of a single-chair beauty salon on the site in an existing garage area. Staff stated there were additional items necessary to complete the review. Staff stated the applicant had indicated a parking pad near the shop entrance in the rear of the site. Staff stated a driveway would also be required to be extended to allow access to the parking pad. Staff questioned if the applicant would be willing to allow an existing turn-around on the drive to be extended to allow for two cars with the allowance for one of the residents to back out and still turn-around. Staff stated then a sidewalk would need to be extended to allow the customers access to the building. Staff questioned the hours of operation. Ms. Montgomery stated the hours were from 9:00 am to 6:00 pm Thursday through Saturday. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated there were no street improvements required. Staff also stated storm water detention would apply to the development if new on-site paved area were proposed, but an in-lieu contribution would be acceptable. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has revised the site plan to include a 20 foot by 27 foot parking pad connecting to the existing driveway. The applicant has also indicated a walkway from the parking to the entrance of the proposed salon will be added. Staff is supportive of this configuration. Staff feels with the placement of the extension to the existing driveway will maintain the residential character of the site. The site contains a two car carport and a smaller area for a turn-around. The proposed extension to a parking pad will allow for the parking of two cars and still allow the homeowners a turn-around. In addition the applicant has indicated a sidewalk will be extended to the proposed salon, which will allow customer access to the building. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 21 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7694 5 The site is shown as Mixed on the City’s Future Land Use Plan. Although the entire site is not shown on the Land Use Plan as Mixed the plan is general in nature. The proposed use of the site as a single chair owner operated beauty salon should have minimal impact. The applicant is requesting approval for her sole use and the use is not transferable to any other owner of the property. The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation from 9:00 am to 6:00 pm Thursday through Saturday which staff feels should not negatively impact the single-family homes to the north. Since all the activity of the site will take place indoors there should be minimal noise generated from the site. There are five parking spaces on the site plan. The applicant has indicated two for customer parking with two additional for the residences. Typically a beauty salon would require the placement of one parking space per 200 square feet of space. Staff feels the proposed parking adequate to meet the parking demand generate from the salon. The salon is to be a single chair salon with no employees. The placement of two spaces would allow for customer parking and one space for the next customer waiting to be served. The applicant has indicated a single sign will be added to the building. The applicant is not proposing the placement of any ground mounted signage on the site. The sign is proposed as a two foot by three foot sign indicating the name, address and phone number of the business. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request for a single-chair beauty salon on the site. The use will not be transferable to other owner of the property, which staff feels is appropriate. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff feels if developed as proposed the use of the site should have minimal impact on adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. The request is to allow the current owner the ability to operate a single-chair beauty salon on the site. The use is not transferable to any other owner of the property. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) 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 conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 21 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7694 6 Staff stated the request was to allow the current owner the ability to operate a single- chair beauty salon on the site. Staff stated the use was not transferable to any other owner of the property. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 recuse (Norm Floyd). August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 22 FILE NO.: Z-7695 NAME: Smith Short-form PD-R LOCATION: Located at 1600 South Battery Street DEVELOPER: Shelby Smith 2700 Shelly Drive Little Rock, AR 72210 ENGINEER: Donald Brooks 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.22 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-3, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family and non-conforming four-plex PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R PROPOSED USE: Five unit multi-family building VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: In 2003, the applicant purchased the building located at 1600 Battery Street (on the corner of 16th and Battery Streets). The building was constructed in the mid 1940s as 4-plex apartment building with each apartment having secured storage room in the attic of the building. The structure is built of wood with aluminum siding on the exterior. Originally there was covered parking on the west side of the property that facilitated four vehicles. There was also a decorative iron fence surrounding the property. Both the carport and the decorative fence had been removed before the applicant purchased the property. The facility was not air- conditioned at the time of purchase. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 22 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7695 2 The applicant is currently remodeling the apartment building. When the project is finished the facility will house five units, both furnished and unfurnished air- conditioned apartments. The exterior improvements will include new paint and new energy efficient windows, new roofing, resurfaced and covered tenant parking and landscaping. The applicant is requesting the rezoning of the property to bring it into compliance with city ordinance regarding the use of the property. The applicant is proposing to develop a fifth apartment utilizing the present attic space in the building. There will be a need for additional parking space. To facilitate the parking for an extra tenant, the applicant is proposing the placement of a 20-foot by 20-foot parking pad along Battery Street. The site plan indicates the applicant will reconstruct a decorative iron fence on the north and east property lines and place a wood fence on the south property line. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an existing multi-family structure which is being renovated. To the west of the site is a mixture of single-family and two-family homes most of which have been renovated and are occupied. To the north of the site across West 16th if a funeral home with single-family homes located further north. To the south of the site is a four plex building with single-family and two family homes located further south. East of the site are also residential uses with one home boarded. There is a city park located to the northeast of the site. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: The Central High Neighborhood Association, the Wrights Avenue Neighborhood Association, the Downtown Neighborhood Association, all owners of property located within 200-feet of the site and all residents located within 300-feet of the site who could be identified were notified of the public hearing. As of this writing staff has not received any comment from area residents. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1. If parking is approved on the Battery Street side, provide a driveway with concrete apron per City Ordinance. 2. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalks that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 3. Plans for all work in the 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). August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 22 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7695 3 E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. If multiple units are served off a single meter, 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 992-2431 if you would like to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this project. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Central City Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Development Residential for addition of one unit to an existing multi-family building. The proposal does not have a significant impact on the Land Use Plan, which would necessitate a Plan Amendment. Master Street Plan: Battery and West 16th Streets are shown as Local on the Master Street Plan and may require dedication of right-of-way and street improvements. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 22 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7695 4 City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. Landscape: The proposed width of the on site street landscape buffer along Battery Street is less than the 6-foot 9-inch minimum allowed by Zoning and Landscape Ordinances. This takes into account the reductions allowed within the designated mature area of the City. The face side of the proposed wooden fence must be directed outward. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) Mr. Shelby Smith was present representing the request. Staff stated the applicant was proposing the conversion of an existing four unit apartment building into a five unit apartment building by converting attic space. Staff stated there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff questioned if there was to be any signage as a part of the development. Mr. Smith stated a single sign would be located near the intersection of West 16th and Battery Streets. Mr. Smith stated the sign would be approximately three feet by four feet. Staff questioned if there was to be a dumpster located on the site. Mr. Smith stated a dumpster would be located near the drive on West 16th Street. The proposed parking plan was discussed at length. Staff stated the proposed parking along Battery Street was not acceptable. Mr. Smith stated he would revise the plan to include a 20-foot by 20-foot parking pad along Battery and landscape the area to shield the pad from the street. Staff also stated the parking area along the western perimeter could be reconfigured to allow for an additional parking space. Mr. Smith stated he did not feel the site was adequate to allow for maneuvering if placed along the western perimeter. He stated he would go to the site and measure to ensure if the parking was relocated there would be sufficient room to allow residents to back out and not damage the building. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated any broken sidewalk or curb would be required to be replaced prior to occupancy. Staff also stated the proposed driveway along Battery Street would have to meet City ordinance requirements. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed width of the on site street landscape buffer along Battery Street was less than the six feet nine inch minimum required by the zoning and landscape ordinances. Staff August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 22 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7695 5 stated the face side of the proposed fence along the southern property line must face out. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the placement of a 20-foot by 20-foot parking pad along Battery Street. Staff is supportive of the placement of the pad in this configuration. The applicant has indicated a parking space will be added to the existing parking area on the western property line. This will allow for a total of seven parking spaces on the site. The typical minimum parking required for a multi-family development with five units is seven parking spaces. Staff feels the indicated parking sufficient to meet the minimum parking demand. The applicant has indicated a dumpster location on the site plan. Staff is not supportive of the placement of a dumpster on the site. Staff feels a dumpster will be out of character with the neighborhood. Staff feels the placement of garbage cans more desirable for garbage collection for the site. The applicant has also indicated a two-foot by four-foot sign located in the front yard area. The ordinance typically allows for the placement of a single sign not to exceed twenty-four square feet of sign area. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s indicated signage plan. The applicant has indicated the placement of a six foot wood fence along the southern perimeter of the site. The site plan indicates the fence will be turned with the finished site outward to comply with typical ordinance requirements. The applicant has also indicated the placement of wrought iron fencing along the street side of the development. The fence is proposed as four feet in height and detailed to match an existing portion of fencing on the site. A six foot wrought iron fence will also be placed between West 16th Street and the southern property line, outside the building setback. Staff is supportive of the proposed fencing. With the redesign of the parking pad along Battery Street the applicant has increased the landscape area to comply with minimum ordinance requirements. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The applicant has requested the conversion of an existing four unit apartment building into a five unit apartment building. The applicant has indicated the placement of seven parking spaces on the site which is sufficient to meet the typical minimum ordinance requirements August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 22 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7695 6 for a multi-family development. There is a mixture of uses in the area including single-family, two-family and multi-family residences and staff does not feel the placement of the fifth unit will have a significant impact on the adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff recommends a dumpster not be allowed to be placed on the site and garbage collection handled through the placement of garbage cans on the site. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) 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 conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff presented a recommendation a dumpster not be allowed to be placed on the site and garbage collection handled through the placement of garbage cans on the site. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to approve the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 23 FILE NO.: Z-7696 NAME: Carter Short-form PCD LOCATION: located at 3516 Baseline Road DEVELOPER: Mark Carter 23201 I-30 Bryant, AR 72022 ENGINEER: Jocom, Inc. 507 Boone Road Bryant, AR 72022 AREA: 1.3 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: Commercial and Office uses VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes the construction of two buildings each containing 3200 square feet of gross floor space. The applicant has indicated one of the buildings will be utilize C-3, General Commercial District uses while the second building will be used as general and professional office uses. The applicant has indicated the building will be constructed of 26 gage colored panels with a 26 gage metal roof. The applicant has also indicated the buildings will be single story buildings. The fronts of the buildings will have doors and windows and the rear of the building will have a single entry door and an overhead door. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 23 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7696 2 The applicant has indicated there is no signage other than building signage proposed as a part of the development. The site plan indicates 21 parking spaces. The days and hours of operation are proposed as 7:00 am to 7:00 pm seven days per week. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a level site, which was graded at some point in the past. There is not any significant vegetation located on the site. To the west of the site is a commercial business and to the east of the site is vacant land. North of the site is a mixture of non-residential uses including commercial businesses and a church. South of the site are also commercial uses and the Upper Baseline Elementary School is located to the southwest of the site. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has received one informational phone call from the Upper Baseline Neighborhood Association. All owners of property located within 200- feet of the site, all residents located within 300-feet of the site who could be identified and the Upper Baseline Neighborhood Association and Southwest Little Rock United for Progress were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalks that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 2. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any ADDITIONAL 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. A special grading permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per Section 8-283 prior to construction. 4. Show the limits of the 100-year floodway and floodplain. Minimum floor elevations may be required. 5. Plans for all work in the 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). E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 23 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7696 3 Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: Approved as submitted. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. An 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). 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 992-2431 if you would like to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this project. 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: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Geyer Springs East Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Office Commercial for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial Development for two buildings, one with commercial uses and one with office uses. The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Master Street Plan: Baseline Road is shown as a Principal Arterial on the Master Street Plan and may require dedication of right-of-way and 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. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the area covered by the Upper Baseline Neighborhood Action Plan. The Economic August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 23 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7696 4 Development goal listed two objectives relevant to this case: 1) “promote public investment in improvement and facilities to encourage private reinvestment in neighborhood areas, 2) “establish neighborhood-oriented businesses.” The Traffic Control Goal is to “ensure safe and efficient movement of traffic in, around, and through the neighborhood. This promotes reinvestment into the area by bringing in new commercial business and minimally affects traffic due to its location on Baseline Road, a Primary Arterial. Landscape: The plan submitted does not provide for the minimum 9-foot wide buffer and landscaping strips along the southern, eastern and western perimeters required by both Zoning and Landscape Ordinances. Additionally, the plan submitted does not provide for the eight-percent interior landscaping of the parking areas nor the building landscaping required by the Landscape Ordinance. Unless otherwise provided for, a 6-foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen plantings, is required to help screen this site from the adjacent residential properties to the north, east and west. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development stating there were additional items necessary to complete the review process. Staff requested the applicant provide building setback dimensions from all property lines. Staff also requested the applicant redesign the parking lot to allow for maneuvering room and also not pave from property line to property line. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the existing right-of-way and dedication should be indicated on the proposed site plan. Staff also requested the floodplain line to be indicated on the site plan. Staff noted there should not be any additional land clearing without a grading permit. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the site plan did not allow for the minimum 9-foot wide landscape strip along the southern, eastern and western perimeters. Staff also stated the plan did not allow for the eight percent interior landscaping of the parking areas nor the building landscaping required by the Landscape Ordinance. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 23 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7696 5 H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant as indicated the building setback dimensions from all property lines, redesigned the parking area to allow for maneuvering room and has not paved from property line to property line. The applicant has also indicated right-of-way along Baseline Road will be made to the City per the Master Street Plan requirement. The proposed site plan includes a nine-foot landscape strip along the eastern and western property lines. The applicant has indicated a six foot fence will be installed along the northern perimeter of the site. The applicant is requesting the required screening not be placed along the eastern and western perimeters. Staff is supportive of this request. The area to the west is a non-conforming commercial use and the area to the east will more than likely redevelop as a use other than residential. The applicant has indicated the building will be constructed of 26 gage colored panels with a 26 gage metal roof. The applicant has also indicated the buildings will be single story buildings. The fronts of the buildings will have doors and windows and the rear of the building will have a single entry door and an overhead door. The applicant has indicated there is no signage other than building signage proposed as a part of the development. Staff would recommend signage be limited to signage allowed in commercial zones or a maximum of 36-feet in height and 160 square feet in area. The applicant has indicated 21 parking spaces on the proposed site plan. The site will contain 3200 square feet of commercial space and 3200 square feet of office space. The typical minimum parking required for a development of this type would be 16 parking spaces. The indicated parking is adequate to meet the typical minimum parking demand. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The site is shown on the City’s Future Land Use Plan as Mixed Office Commercial. The applicant’s request is to develop the site with an office building (general and professional office uses) and a commercial building (C-3 General Commercial District uses); consistent with uses allowed in this land use designation. Staff would recommend the proposed use to the building must not exceed the minimum parking required for the proposed use of the building. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the request. The proposed request is consistent with uses allowed in the area per the City’s Future Land Use Plan. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 23 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7696 6 I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff recommends any proposed signage comply with signage allowed in commercial zones. Staff recommends the proposed use of the building not exceed the minimum parking required for the proposed use of the building. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) 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 conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff presented a recommendation any proposed signage comply with signage allowed in commercial zones and the proposed use of the building not exceed the minimum parking required for the proposed use of the building. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 24 FILE NO.: Z-7697 NAME: Ransom Short-form PD-R LOCATION: 14105 Taylor Loop Road DEVELOPER: Mike Ransom 7 Valley Forge Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 ENGINEER: Donald Brooks 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.37 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R PROPOSED USE: Town house development with eight units VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. The applicant failed to provide staff with the requested information following the August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff recommends this item be deferred to the October 7, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had failed to provide staff with the requested information following the August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred to the October 7, 2004, Public Hearing. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 24 FILE NO.: (Z-7697) 2 There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 25 FILE NO.: Z-7698 NAME: Kathy’s Long-form PD-C LOCATION: Located at 13810 Colonel Glenn Road DEVELOPER: Katherine and William McMurry 13810 Colonel Glenn Road Little Rock, AR 72210 ENGINEER: The Holloway Firm, Inc. 200 Casey Drive Maumelle, AR 72113 AREA: 6.3 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family and a non-conforming beauty salon PROPOSED ZONING: PD-C PROPOSED USE: Single-family, beauty salon and office VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A waiver of Master Street Plan improvements to Colonel Glenn Road. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The site is located on the north side of Colonel Glenn Road, west of I-430 approximately 1.5 miles and contains 6.3 acres. The site is located in an area of relatively large rural tracts of undeveloped wooded land and farms, with some single-family residences in the area. The abutting property is lightly wooded and undeveloped. The requested PCD zoning will not change the use of the property. Its present uses are a beauty salon in one building that has been in operation approximately twenty-five years, a quiet office (general and professional) in the second August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 25 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7698 2 structure and the applicant’s residence in the remaining larger portion of the property. The requested PCD zoning is for the indicated non-residential uses with single-family as alternative uses for each of the structures. The buildings are served by two paved driveways from Colonel Glenn Road and a paved parking area for the beauty salon. All buildings have adequate setbacks from the property line and each other to satisfy planning criteria. The beauty salon has two stations, a nail station and a tanning area and provides for handicapped parking. A Central Arkansas Water fire hydrant is located within one hundred feet of the property. The property is served by septic systems, electricity, gas and water from Central Arkansas Water. The granting of the PCD and allowing the continuation of the present uses on the property produces no adverse impact or changes to adjoining landowners or the area as a whole. To the contrary, it will allow the property to continue to provide useful, desirable services to the area. The applicant is also proposing a three lot plat as a part of the request. The applicant has indicated two of the lots will contain non-residential uses with the third remaining zoned R-2, Single-family and containing the applicant’s residence. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains three single-family structures, one being used as a home and the other two as non-residential uses. Kathy’s Beauty Salon has been operation from one of the structures for several years. The second structure is a newer located along the eastern property line and is currently being used as an office. This use is a violation of the City’s Zoning Ordinance and is currently under enforcement. The area is predominately single-family homes on acreage and pasture areas. Colonel Glenn Road is a two lane roadway with open ditches for drainage. Just west of this site is a large curve. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: All owners of property located within 200-feet of the site and all residents located within 300-feet of the site who could be identified were notified of the public hearing. There is not an active neighborhood association located within the area. As of this writing staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 25 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7698 3 1. Colonel Glenn is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial. Dedication of right-of-way to 55-feet from centerline will be required (as shown on the plat). 2. Provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one- half street improvement including a 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development. If construction is not completed prior to final platting, a Board deferral or waiver would be required. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Outside the service boundary. Provide an approval letter from the Pulaski County Sanitarian concerning the proposed septic system. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: Any existing water meters that are residential should be changed to commercial for existing or proposed businesses. Due to use as a beauty Shop, installation of an approved reduced pressure zone backflow preventer assembly (RPZA) is required on the domestic water service for that facility. 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 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 992-2431 if you would like to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this project. Additional fire hydrant(s) may be required. Contact the Fire Department having jurisdiction to obtain information regarding fire hydrant requirements and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). Should be platted to allow the rear lot to have a minimum of 20-feet of frontage on public right-of-way in order to retain water service. The meter must be relocated to the area that has frontage on the right-of-way if it is not currently at that location. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional information. County Planning: Colonel Glenn is a Class IV roadway, which requires an 80-foot minimum right-of-way. Existing right-of-way is not noted on the plat. CATA: No comment received. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 25 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7698 4 F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial Development for an adoption agency and a one-chair beauty salon in separate buildings. With the reversion of this property to single family with the sale of the property or business operations cease, this will not have a significant impact on the Future Land Use plan and no amendment is required at this time. Master Street Plan: Colonel Glenn Road is shown as a Minor Arterial on the Master Street Plan and this street may require dedication of right-of-way and street improvements. A Minor Arterial provides connections to and though an urban area and their primary function are to provide short distance travel within the urbanized area. 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: (August 5, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed request indicating the request was in response to an enforcement action. Staff stated the site contained a beauty salon and two single-family structures one of which was being used as an adoption agency. Staff stated the applicant was requesting a Planned Commercial Development and the creation of a three lot plat to allow the three uses to be located on individual lots. Staff noted all three structures could be used as single-family homes at some point in the future. Staff questioned if the request was for the sole use of the existing users or if additional uses and/or users were being request. Mr. McMurry stated the use was solely for the adoption agency and his wife’s salon. Staff also requested the applicant provide a pipe-stem lot for the rear lots to allow all utilities to be located on the applicant’s property. Mr. Holloway stated this would not be a problem. Staff questioned if there would be a dumpster located on the site. Mr. McMurry stated there would not be a dumpster on the site. He also stated the request included one additional stylist at the salon and the office use for approximately August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 25 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7698 5 six employees. He stated the intent was to not change the residential characteristics of the structures and at some point in the future return the use to single-family. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated per the Master Street Plan street improvements would be required along the property frontage. Staff noted a five deferral would be supported by staff but for commercial development a waiver was not typically supported. Staff noted there were no landscaping issues related to the proposed development. Staff stated since there were no new paved areas being added and the intent was to maintain the residential character of the structures no new landscaping would be required at this time. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing the issues raised at the August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the use of the site solely for the existing uses. The applicant has indicated there would be the addition of one employee for the beauty salon and the adoption agency currently has six employees. The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation are six days per week from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. There is an existing sign located on the lot proposed as the beauty salon, which is six feet in height and 20 square feet in area. The signage is consistent with signage allowed in office zones. The applicant has indicated no signage will be added to the proposed lot housing the office use. The site plan indicates there is to be no dumpsters located on the site and no new fencing is proposed. The applicant has indicated the uses are not intense uses and generate garbage similar to a single-family home. The applicant is requesting a waiver of street improvements to Colonel Glenn Road. The applicant has indicated since the site will not remain as non- residential uses a waiver is being sought. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The office use has a limited lease agreement which would leave the beauty salon as the non-residential uses. The salon has been in existence for several years and staff feels the waiver appropriate since the uses will revert to single-family at some point in the future. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The applicant is requesting a PD-C to allow the uses of the site to continue and to allow the creation of a three lot August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 25 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7698 6 plat. There are three structures located on the site, which will revert to single- family uses when the current lease of the office use expires and the current owner decides to no longer operate a beauty shop on the site. Staff feels the creation of the plat appropriate to allow the owner to sell one or all the structures if desired in the future. The beauty salon has operated on the site for twenty plus years. The adoption agency has no customer traffic and a limited number of employees. Staff feels with there being no customer traffic to the office site this should limit the impact on adjoining properties. In addition staff feels since the use is limit to the current lease agreement after which the site will return to single-family staff feels the impacts should be minimal. The applicant is not proposing any structural modifications or exterior modifications, which would change the character of the site. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff recommends the office use on proposed Lot 2 be limited to the current user and to the current lease agreement. After the lease agreement expires the site will be returned to single-family use. Staff recommends the beauty salon on proposed Lot 1 be limited to the ownership of the applicant and not be transferable to any other owner. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff stated the request was a rezoning of the site to allow an existing beauty salon to operate on the western most lot and an adoption agency on the eastern most lot. Staff stated the proposal included a three lot plat with one of the lots requiring a variance to allow a pipe stem lot. Staff presented a recommendation the office use on proposed Lot 2 be limited to the current user and to the current lease agreement and after the lease agreement expired the site would return to a single-family use. Staff recommended the beauty salon on proposed Lot 1 be limited to the ownership of the applicant and not be transferable to any other owner. Mr. Tony Fletcher spoke in opposition of the proposed request. He stated the area was primarily agriculture and single-family homes. Mr. Fletcher stated he had lived in the area for 25 years and the city was slowly coming closer to the area. He stated the area did not need commercial uses and should remain as residential. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 25 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7698 7 Ms. Barbara Fletcher addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated the City limits were slowly encroaching into the area. She stated the area was primarily residential and should remain as residential. Chairman Rahman stated the request was to allow the existing uses to continue and after eighteen months the office use would return to a residential use. Chairman Rahman stated the beauty salon had been in the area for 25 plus years and was to remain. He stated the uses being requested were no different than the uses of the site as they existed today. The applicant stated the adoption agency did have limited customer traffic. He stated on occasion there were one to two clients that would come to the site. He stated there was to be no construction on the site. Staff requested the applicant revoke the PD-C zoning after the lease expired for the adoption agency. The applicant stated this was acceptable and after the lease agreement expired they would request the PD-C zoning be revoked on the site. Staff noted the beauty salon would be able to continue to operate as a non-conforming use. The other structures would become residential. There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to approve the proposed request as amended. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 26 FILE NO.: Z-7699 NAME: HWY 10 Executive Suite Short-form POD LOCATION: Located at 16601 Cantrell Road DEVELOPER: Parkhill Partnership LLC 11500 Rodney Parham, Suite 15 Little Rock, AR 72212 ENGINEER: Crafton, Tull and Associates 10825 Financial Centre Parkway, Suite 300 Little Rock, AR 72211 AREA: 0.44 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: POD PROPOSED USE: O-3, General and Professional Office VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to construct a 5600 square foot office building and associated parking on a 0.44 acre lot. Fourteen parking spaces are proposed. In order to serve the property, water and sanitary sewer mains will be extended to serve the site. The proposed site plan indicates 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 has indicated O-3, General Office uses will be utilized as uses for the site. The office hours are proposed as 8:00 am to 5:00 pm Monday through August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 26 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7699 2 Friday. The maximum building height proposed is 30-feet. The site plan includes the placement of a dumpster on the site along the eastern boundary. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site once contained a manufactured home but is now a vacant lot. There are non-residential uses located to the west of the site in the form of converted single-family structures to office and commercial businesses. To the east of the site is a vacant tract with an area further east used as a residence and small sandblasting business. The area south of the site is a newly developing single- family subdivision accessed from South Katilus Road. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: The Johnson Ranch Neighborhood Association, the Westbury Property Owners 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 not received any comment from area residents. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1. Cantrell Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial. Dedication of right-of-way 55-feet from centerline will be required. No survey or proposed dedication is provided to document compliance. 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. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. Plans should show if an existing AHTD apron is to be used or if this is a new apron. 4. Provide the direction of flow and all storm water flows (Q) entering and leaving the property and any proposed piping. 5. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan. 6. Plans for all work in the 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) and AHTD, District 6. 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. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 26 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7699 3 Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. 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: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Transition for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Office Development for a two-story office building. 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 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. 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: The plan submitted does not provide for the average 25-foot wide landscape buffers required along the eastern and western perimeters of the site by the Highway 10 Overlay District Ordinance nor the minimum 6-foot 9-inches along the eastern perimeter required by the Landscape Ordinance. Additionally, the plan submitted does not allow for the eight-percent interior landscaping required within the interior of the paved area nor the building landscaping required by the Landscape Ordinance. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 26 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7699 4 A 6-foot high screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the sites southern, eastern and western perimeters of the site. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) 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 signage complete with the proposed details including height, area and location and the proposed uses of the building. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated storm water detention would be required for the proposed development. Staff also questioned if an existing driveway apron would be utilized or if a apron would be installed. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the indicated landscape areas did not meet the typical Highway 10 Design Overlay requirements. Staff also noted the site plan did not allow the eight percent interior landscaping required by the Landscape Ordinance. Staff noted screening would be required along the eastern and southern perimeters. Staff stated the western perimeter of the site was zoned non- residentially. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated screening will be provided along the eastern perimeter of the site with a six foot wood fence. The applicant has indicated the southern perimeter currently has a wood fence in place. The applicant is requesting to utilize the existing fence as their screening requirement. Staff is supportive of this request. The area to the west is currently zoned PD-O which would not typically require screening. The applicant has indicated the use of the site as O-3, General Office District uses. The site plan includes the placement of fourteen parking spaces consistent with the typical number of parking spaces required for an office August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 26 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7699 5 development. The building is proposed as a two story building with a total square footage of 5600 square feet and a maximum building height of 30-feet. Based on one space per four hundred square feet the minimum parking required would be fourteen spaces. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s proposed parking. The applicant has indicated a dumpster on the proposed site plan. The applicant has also indicated the dumpster will be enclosed with a six foot wood fence per the ordinance requirement. Staff is supportive of the proposed dumpster placement and proposed screening. The applicant has indicated the placement of a single monument style sign to be located in the front yard area. The sign proposed as a maximum of ten feet in height and one hundred square feet in sign area. The proposed signage is consistent with signage allowed in the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has increased the minimum landscape strip along the eastern perimeter to 6-feet 9-inches require by the Landscape ordinance. The applicant has also included the placement of the eight percent interior and the building landscaping as required by the landscape ordinance will cause the site to be limited as an office development. The applicant has indicated they will seek relief from the City Beautiful Commission as well as from the Commission from this requirement. The applicant is requested a reduced landscape strip along the eastern, western and southern property lines. The proposed site plan indicates the placement of a forty-foot landscape area in the front yard and a one hundred foot building setback from Highway 10. Both are consistent with the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. The applicant has indicated a 25-foot side yard setback along the eastern property line and twelve- foot building setback along the western property line. The rear yard setback is proposed as 25-feet. The Highway 10 Design Overlay District typically requires the placement of a 40-foot building setback from the rear property line and a 30- foot building setback from the side yard. In addition the ordinance typically requires the placement of a 25-foot landscape strip along the sides and rear yard areas. Staff is supportive of the reduced design standards. The applicant has indicated the front setbacks and landscaped areas consistent with the Highway 10 Design Overlay District requirements. The site is a relatively small site and meeting the minimum requirements would be difficult at best. The lot was preexisting prior to the adoption of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District and staff feels through the filing of the POD zoning the negative impacts will be minimized. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The site is shown as Transition on the City’s Future Land Use Plan, which allows for the development of office uses. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 26 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7699 6 Staff feels the proposed request is consistent with the development pattern in the area but staff has some concerns with the placement of a two story building in close proximity to single-family residential. Staff feels the limiting of doors and windows on the second floor of the structure should minimize the impact of adjoining properties. If proper protection is given to those adjoining homes staff does not feel the development of the site with a two story office building will have a significant impact on adjoining properties. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff recommends the applicant not be allowed any openings on the second floor of the structure other than those required by fire code. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) 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 conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff presented a recommendation the applicant not be allowed any openings on the rear of the second floor of the structure other than those required by fire code. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 27 FILE NO.: LU04-01-05 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - River Mountain Planning District Location: South side of Cantrell Road west of Taylor Loop Road Request: Transition to Commercial Source: Charles Basham Staff requests that this item be deferred to the October 7, 2004 agenda due to lack of information being provided by applicant. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 27.1 FILE NO.: Z-7700 NAME: Basham Cantrell Long-form PCD LOCATION: Located South of Cantrell Road, West of Taylor Loop Road DEVELOPER: Basham Inc. 1123 South University Avenue, Suite 245 Little Rock, AR 72204 ENGINEER: DCI Consultants, Inc. 2200 North Rodney Parham Road Little Rock, AR 72212 AREA: 6.49 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: Office and commercial VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. Staff has been unable to contact the applicant concerning outstanding issues from the August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff recommends this item be deferred to the October 7, 2004 Public Hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant was working with them to resolve outstanding technical issues associated with the proposed site plan. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred to the October 7, 2004, Public Hearing to allow the applicant additional time to resolve the outstanding issues. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 27.1 FILE NO.: (Z-7700) 2 There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 28 FILE NO.: LU04-18-03 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Ellis Mountain Planning District Location: Kanis and Cooper Orbit Roads Request: Suburban Office to Commercial Source: Pat Malmstrome PROPOSAL / REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the Ellis Mountain Planning District from Suburban Office to Commercial. The Commercial category includes a broad range of retail and wholesale sales of products, personal and professional services, and general business activities. Commercial activities vary in type and scale, depending on the trade area that they serve. The applicant wishes to utilize an existing building for an indoor dog run and kennel. Staff is not expanding the application since the Land Use Plan in this area was reviewed within the last eight months. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is mostly vacant with one existing structure and currently zoned R- 2, Single Family, and is 1.8 acres ± in size. The subject property lies in an area of rural type development. Kanis Road runs diagonally southeast and northwest creating the lot’s northeastern edge. Immediately surrounding this site is land zoned R-2 with several existing buildings. Just under a quarter mile to the north is a development (Parkway Place) consisting of single family homes. Almost immediately to southeast is an abandoned mobile home park consisting of a handful of vacant mobile homes zoned MF6 Multifamily District. Less than a quarter mile to the southeast lie several pieces of property zoned C-1, Neighborhood Commercial, and a large section of land zoned for a PRD, Planned Residential Development. Most of these parcels consist of small buildings on large parcels of land. Less than quarter mile northwest of the property is mostly undeveloped land zoned POD, Planned Office Development, and further to the northwest is more undeveloped land zoned for O-2, Office and Institutional District. Northeast of the property, homes exist and several are vacant or for sale marketing non-residential potential. Southwest of the property is a parcel zoned PRD and R-2 with several new multi -level apartment buildings and curbed streets for construction of new single family residences. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 28 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-18-03 2 FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: April 6, 2004, a change was made from Single Family to Suburban Office southeast of Pride Valley and North of Kanis Road to convert an existing structure into an office. July 3, 2001, a change from Low Density Residential, Mixed Office Commercial, and Neighborhood Commercial to Single Family in an area bounded by Bowman Road, Panther Creek, Cooper Orbit Roads, and Bowman Creek to remove non- residential uses to develop a single family subdivision. MASTER STREET PLAN: Kanis Road is shown as a Minor Arterial on the plan and is built as a rural two- lane road and will be subject to street improvements. A Minor Arterial provides connections to and though an urban area and their primary function are to provide short distance travel within the urbanized area. A portion of Cooper Orbit Road is a Local Road that connects with Kanis Road about a quarter mile to the southeast of the site. However, the Master Street Plan shows the proposed alignment for Cooper Orbit Road to intersect with Kanis Road immediately southeast of the property. This extension of Cooper Orbit Road is a Minor Arterial and will lessen traffic at the five-way intersection with Kanis Road and Kirby Drive. To the south of this application, Cooper Orbit Road has been realigned and improved due to development of a PRD and residential subdivision. This alignment built Cooper Orbit Road to its Minor Arterial classification and provided a safe intersection into the new development. The roadway improvement and alignment of Cooper Orbit Road is consistent with the Master Street Plan. PARKS: Parkland is located less than one mile to the north in the median of Chenal Parkway between Wellington Hills and Gamble Road. This is considered one of Little Rock’s “Green Fingers” that will be used to link existing and proposed parks to one another. This “Green Finger” is an area where residents can enjoy passive and active recreation. A trail through this area is presently being developed per the Master Parks Plan. HISTORIC DISTRICTS: There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this amendment. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 28 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-18-03 3 CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN: The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. ANALYSIS: This is a rural area located in Pulaski County within the city’s extraterritorial jurisdiction. Southwest of this site is an area that is developing with multi-family and single family homes. An additional item of concern for this site is the identification of the new Cooper Orbit Road and Kanis Road intersection immediately southeast of the property. With recent development southwest of the property, the residential population is increasing and the new intersection is anticipated in the future. With new residential development occurring in this area it is important that future commercial development is kept in designated areas to reduce possible land use conflicts that might occur. The applicant’s property is in an area shown as Suburban Office on the Future Land Use Plan which also parallels the southern side of Kanis Road from the MOC to the east, through the future intersection of Kanis Road and Cooper Orbit Road and just past the applicant’s property. The Suburban Office category provides for low intensity development of office or office parks in close proximity to lower density residential areas to assure compatibility and requires a Planned Zoning District. The applicant’s request to change to a Commercial land use will place Commercial adjacent to Single Family, near Low Density Residential, and divide the existing Suburban Office area into two sections. The applicant’s area is shown as Suburban Office to facilitate an orderly flow of uses between the area’s Mixed Office Commercial and Residential areas. The Mixed Office Commercial area on the Land Use Plan is located just to the east, at the present intersection of Cooper Orbit Road, Kirby Drive, and Kanis Road. Changing this site from Suburban Office to Commercial would allow for a more intense use in the middle of an area designated for lower intensity uses. The amendment to the Land Use Plan might also encourage other properties in the area to look to amend their land to Commercial uses, placing more intense uses adjacent to low intensity uses. Just because the property is located alongside a Minor Arterial does not mean it is appropriate for Commercial uses in a vacant area shown as MOC. The present intersection of Cooper Orbit, Kirby, and Kanis Roads has space readily available for possible commercial development as well as properties shown as Commercial less than a mile to the north along Chenal Parkway. Demand for Commercial property near the applicant’s the property in question has been low, which has left MOC land nearby vacant. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 28 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-18-03 4 Previous use of the property in question was heavy commercial which is foreign to the area’s present Single Family and Suburban Office designations. Use of a pre-existing building would be an adaptive use to the site, and the new use could be looked upon as a positive improvement to the area. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Parkway Place, Spring Valley Manor Property Owners Association, and Gibralter/Pt. West/Timber Ridge. Staff has received no comments from area residents. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is not appropriate. Presently demand for Commercial development in the area is low, and land available for Commercial development is available nearby. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The item was placed on the consent agenda for withdrawal. A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 28.1 FILE NO.: Z-7701 NAME: Sach’s Suburban Tract’s Short-form PD-C LOCATION: Located near the Kanis Road and Cooper Orbit Road intersection DEVELOPER: Pat Malstrome 11610 Kanis Road Little Rock, AR 72212 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 319 President Clinton Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 1.11 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PD-C PROPOSED USE: Dog Kennel and grooming facility VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes the redevelopment of the site as a dog kennel and grooming facility. The applicant has indicated there will be approximately 30 stalls within the enclosed building. The applicant has indicated there will be no outdoor runs or kennels located on the site. The proposed hours of operation are from 6:00 am to 6:00 pm seven days per week. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 28.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7701 2 The applicant is not proposing any exterior modifications to the site. All existing parking will be maintained and no new on-site paved areas will be added. The applicant has indicated one-half street improvements will be put in place for an existing 40-foot right-of-way located along the eastern property line. The applicant is also proposing a preliminary plat in conjunction with the proposed request (Item No. 1 File No. S-878-B). The proposal includes the subdivision of a 9.15 acre tract into two lots. One lot will remain zoned R-2, Single-family and held for future residential development. The second lot is proposed as this rezoning to PD-C. The lots are proposed as 1.11 acres and 8.04 acres. The applicant has indicated annexation will be sought to provide wastewater service from the Little Rock Wastewater Utility for the development of proposed Lot 2. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is located outside the City limits but within the City’s Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction. The site contains an existing vacant industrial building, the former FMC manufacturing company. South of the site is an area currently zoned MF-6 which once housed several manufactured homes; this site is now vacant with the exception of one unit. North of the site are single-family homes along with a non-conforming retail shop. North and west of the site are vacant R-2, Single-family zoned properties. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has received two informational phone calls from area residents. The Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Association and the Parkway Place Property Owners Association along with all property owners located within 200-feet of the site and all residents located within 300-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1. See related comments on the pending new plat. 2. The existing driveway should be relocated west to the shared drive location when the Master Street Plan improvements occur. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 28.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7701 3 E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Outside the service boundary. Provide an approval letter from the Pulaski County Sanitarian concerning the proposed septic system treatment. Entergy: No comment received. Center-Point Energy: Approved as submitted. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: If a kennel is operated at this site, 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 992-2431 if you would like to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this project. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional information. County Planning: There is a question related to the 40-foot right-of-way indicated on the proposed site plan. The site plan indicates a gravel drive in the right-of- way. Staff has some concerns with the multiple access points and the angles of the drives onto Kanis Road. The site plan does not indicate setbacks sufficient to meet the commercial building site plan review set by County Ordinances. CATA: No comment received. 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 Commercial District for a kennel. A land use plan amendment for a change to Commercial is a separate item on this agenda. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 28.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7701 4 Master Street Plan: Kanis Road is shown as a Minor Arterial on the Master Street Plan and may require dedication of right-of-way and will require street improvements. A Minor Arterial provides connections to and though an urban area and their primary function are to provide short distance travel within the urbanized area. Cooper Orbit Road’s intersection with Kanis is proposed to be relocated to the northwest of the existing intersection but south of the subject area. That new alignment will require dedication of right-of-way and street improvements. 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: Since no building or paving expansions are proposed, no landscaping upgrade is required by ordinance. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 5, 2004) Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the applicant. Staff presented an overview of the proposed request indicating there were additional item necessary to complete the review. Staff requested the applicant provide the name and address of the landowner along with the source of title on the proposed preliminary plat. Staff also requested the applicant provide a front building line on each of the proposed lots. Staff requested the applicant provide the names of owners of all abutting lands on the proposed preliminary plat and provide a note concerning the proposed phasing of the development. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the plat indicated an existing right-of-way, which would need to be dealt with. Staff stated the street either needed to be constructed or a waiver approved by the Board of Directors or be abandoned. Mr. McGetrick stated the developer was willing to construct the street but was interested in the construction at the best location for the City. Mr. McGetrick stated the Master Street Plan indicated a connection in this area but he understood the connection was nearer Cooper Orbit Road than the proposed site. Staff also questioned the indicated driveways. Staff stated the property frontage did not allow for two drives and a shared drive should be placed on the property line. Mr. McGetrick stated he did not feel a shared drive between the two properties would create a conflict. He stated both developments would take access from the 40-foot street, which was to be constructed. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 28.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7701 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 plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the August 5, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the location of a dumpster on the site plan along with a general note concerning the proposed screening. The applicant has also indicated a single sign located in the front yard area consistent with signage allowed in office zones or a maximum of six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area. The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm Monday through Friday and from 8:00 am to 3:00 pm on Saturday. The site plan indicates there will be thirty kennels within the building. The site plan indicates three deck locations. The applicant has indicated the decks shown on the site plan are existing and will be used by employees only and not an area for outdoor runs. The site plan also indicates the placement of a six foot chain link fence around the site. Portions of the proposed fencing will be located within the required setback. Staff is supportive of the fencing as proposed. The applicant has indicated the existing forty-foot right-of-way will be constructed per city Master Street Plan standard. The proposed site plan indicates the dedication of five-feet which is typically required to allow for a minimum street right-of-way of fifty feet. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s indicated street improvements. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The applicant has indicated the placement of a kennel with thirty spaces on the site and a grooming facility. The site is shown as Suburban Office on the City’s Future Land Use Plan and the applicant has applied for a revision to Commercial as a separate item on this agenda. Although, staff is not supportive of the applicant’s request for a Commercial land use designation, staff is supportive of the placement of a kennel on the site. The use of the site will be contained solely within the building and any walking of animals will be with a handler. The building was constructed as a manufacturing facility and it is unlike the building will be converted to a suburban office use since the building is much larger than typical suburban office buildings. In addition if the applicant were proposing the placement of a veterinarian clinic on the site the use would be appropriate use under Suburban Office. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 28.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7701 6 To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. Staff feels the redevelopment of the site as indicated should have minimal impact on the adjoining properties in the area. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) 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 conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 29 FILE NO.: Z-4506 NAME: Lot 7 Tall Timber West PRD Revocation LOCATION: Located at 5413 Timberland Drive DEVELOPER: G & S Builders 2723 Foxcroft Suite 104 Little Rock, AR 72227 ENGINEER: McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 319 President Clinton Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 0.20 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PRD ALLOWED USES: Duplex housing PROPOSED ZONING: R-2, Single-family PROPOSED USE: Single-family residential VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposed to revoke the existing PDR zoning of Lot 7 Tall Timber West, Phase II to the City of Little Rock and restore the previous R-2, Single- family zoning classification. The original PRD zoning was approved August 13, 1985 and zoned for the placement of duplex units on seven lots. Six of the lots have developed with duplex housing and the seventh lot is currently vacant. The applicant is requesting the revocation of the PRD zoning to allow the construction of a single-family home on the lot. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 29 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4506 2 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The Tall Timber West Subdivision is primarily built-out. There are duplex units located near Stagecoach Road and single-family homes located within the subdivision. The lot proposed for revocation is vacant and tree covered. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: The Pecan Lake and the Tall Timber West Neighborhood Association and all property owners located within 200-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. As of this writhing staff has received one information phone call from the Pecan Lake Neighborhood Association. D. ANALYSIS: Staff is supportive of the revocation request. The applicant has indicated a desire to construct an owner occupied single-family home on the lot currently vacant. The subdivision was developed with a mixture of duplex and detached single-family housing, which allows for a diverse neighborhood. The single- family has developed quiet well in the area and the demand for duplex housing does not appear to be in the area. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The applicant has not developed the site and is requesting the current PZD zoning be revoked and the original R-2 zoning be restored. Per Section 36-454(d) the Owner may for cause request repeal of the ordinance establishing the development. E. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request to revoke the PRD zoning classification for Lot 7 of the Tall Timber West Subdivision and restore the original R-2, Single-family zoning classification. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request to revoke the PRD zoning classification for Lot 7 of the Tall Timber West Subdivision and restore the original R-2, Single-family zoning classification. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. August 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 30 FILE NO.: S-1261-C NAME: Kenwood Estates Lot 86 Revised Preliminary Plat LOCATION: Located at 22 Waldron Circle DEVELOPER: Frank McIllwain 22 Waldron Circle Little Rock, AR 72210 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 0.20 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT: 18 – Ellis Mountain CENSUS TRACT: 24.05 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: A preliminary plat was approved for the site on November 19, 1999. As a part of the approval the owner agreed to the placement of a 10-foot undisturbed buffer on the proposed lots adjacent to David O Dodd Road. The applicant is requesting to eliminate the 10-foot undistributed buffer, which will allow an existing 6-foot wood privacy fence to remain in place. The applicant purchased the home on Lot 86 after construction was complete and trusted that constructed conformed to all City requirements. The lot is a cul- de-sac lot, which limits the depth of the backyard. The privacy fence was installed on the property line and within the required buffer area. The applicant has indicated if the privacy fence is moved in accordance with the undisturbed buffer, the privacy fence will be 15-feet from the applicant back door. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 30 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1261-C 2 The undisturbed buffer was crated through a concession that the subdivision developer made in response to comments from Mr. Chad Young and Mr. Doug Meyer during public meetings for preliminary platting of the subdivision. The applicant has provided letters stating these two individuals support the removal of the buffer on the applicant’s lot. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The subdivision is developing with single-family homes. The indicated fence has been installed on the applicant’ property line as are several of the fences within the proposed subdivision abutting David O Dodd Road. There are single-family homes located across David O Dodd Road on large tracts. There is a school located to the north of the site. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: The Stagecoach Dodd Neighborhood Association along with all owners of property abutting the site were notified of the public hearing. Staff has not received any comment from area residents concerning the proposed request. D. ANALYSIS: Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. As the time of development the developer agreed to the placement of the buffer on the site, which seamed to appeal to adjoining neighbors. The subdivision has since developed and several of the existing fences have been placed in the buffer area. There is currently a case before the City of Little Rock Board of Adjustment to allow the placement of a six foot fence within the setback for the lots abutting David O Dodd Road. The request before the Board of Adjustment does not eliminate the required buffer area. In staff’s opinion the removal of the buffer area on the applicant’s lot does not appear to have a negative impact on the adjoining properties. E. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request to remove the required buffer along the rear of Lot 86 of the Kenwood Estates Subdivision. The applicant will be required to file a replat with the City if approved to remove the indicated buffer from the indicated lot. August 26, 2004 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 30 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1261-C 3 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 26, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request to remove the required buffer along the rear of Lot 86 of the Kenwood Estates Subdivision. Staff stated the applicant would be required to file a replat with the City to remove the indicated buffer from the rear of the lot. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the item for inclusion on the consent agenda for approval. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 1 nay and 2 absent.