pc_12 02 2004sub
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION HEARING
SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD
DECEMBER 2, 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
Gary Langlais
Robert Stebbins
Norm Floyd
Mizan Rahman
Bill Rector
Jerry Meyer
Fred Allen, Jr.
Chauncey Taylor
Members Absent: Bob Lowry
Darrin Williams
City Attorney: Cindy Dawson
III. Approval of the Minutes of the October 7, 2004 Meeting
of the Little Rock Planning Commission. The Minutes were
approved as presented.
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION HEARING
AGENDA
DECEMBER 2, 2004
4:00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
II. Approval of Minutes of the October 7, 2004 Meeting
III. Presentation of the Consent Agenda
IV. Presentation of Hearing Items
V. Citizen Communication
FOR YOUR INFORMATION:
Next Month's Meeting Dates:
Filing Date: December 6, 2004
Subdivision Committee Meeting: December 23, 2004
Planning Commission Meeting: January 20, 2005
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION AGENDA
DECEMBER 2, 2004
I. DEFERRED ITEMS:
A. Hickory Grove Revised Long-form PD-R (Z-4562-D), located on the West
side of Hinson Road, just South of Pebble Beach Drive.
B. LU04-01-05 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the River Mountain Planning
District from Transition to Commercial.
B.1 Basham Cantrell Long-form PCD (Z-7700), located South of Cantrell
Road, West of Taylor Loop Road.
C. Whispering Hills Preliminary Plat (S-1454), located South of Alexander
Road, West of Pam Drive South.
D. Hampton Site Plan Review (S-1457), located on the Southeast corner of
Dixon Road and HWY 65/167.
E. Yelenich Revised Long-form PCD (Z-4644-C), located at 2000 and
2010 South University Avenue.
F. LU04-01-06 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Chenal Planning District
at the Southwest Corner of Cantrell Road and Bella Rosa Road from
Transition to Commercial.
F.1. Bella Rosa Revised Long-form POD (Z-6219-B), located on the Southwest
corner of Cantrell Road and Bella Rosa Road.
II. PRELIMINARY PLATS:
1. Northwest Territory Phase II Addition Preliminary Plat (S-200-K), located
North of Cantrell Road, East of Chenal Parkway.
2. The Pines Subdivision Preliminary Plat (S-643-C), located on Castle
Valley Road, West of Chicot Road.
3. Chenal Valley Tract 1 Preliminary Plat Lots A – G (S-867-OOOOO),
located on the Northeast corner of Rahling Road and Chenal Parkway.
4. Davis Addition Preliminary Plat (S-1463), located at 16123 Whippoorwill
Lane.
Agenda, Page Two
III. LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENTS - PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS:
5. Little Rock Auto Group Revised Short-form PCD (Z-5803-A), located at
12601 West Markham Street.
6. Capitol Lakes Estates Governors Manor Long-form PD-R (Z-6120-J),
located North of Capitol Hills Boulevard at Rushmore Avenue.
7. LU04-17-02 - A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Crystal Valley Planning
District at 17415 Lawson Road from Neighborhood Commercial to
Commercial.
7.1 Loux Short-form PCD (Z-6683-A), located at 17415 Lawson Road.
8 Creekwood Plaza Revised Long-form PCD (Z-7025-B), located on the
Northeast corner of Kanis Road and Bowman Road.
9. Grandpa’s Catfish Revised Short-form PCD (Z-7346-A), located at
9219 Stagecoach Road.
10 LU04-01-07 - A Land Use Plan Amendment in the River Mountain
Planning District on the North side of Cantrell Road West of Pinnacle
Road from Transition and Suburban Office to Mixed Use.
10.1 PDC Company Short-form POD (Z-7603-A), located North of Cantrell
Road, West of Taylor Loop Road.
11. LU04-29-01- A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Barrett Planning District
at Cantrell Road and Goodson Road from Neighborhood Commercial to
Commercial.
11.1 Presley Long-form PCD (Z-7737), located at 25914 Highway 10.
12. Albright Short-form PD-C (Z-7738), located at 19125 Kanis Road.
13. Markham Bank Short-form PD-O (Z-7739), located on the North side of
West Markham Street between Jackson and Monroe Streets.
IV. OTHER ITEMS:
14. Expansion of Midtown Redevelopment District #1, located East of
University Avenue, Lee Avenue to Evergreen Street.
15. Rees Development NOV #0226 - Appeal of a Notice of Violation from the
Land Alteration Ordinance, located at 14602 Cantrell Road.
16. Adoption of the 2005 Planning Commission Calendar
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: A 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.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (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.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (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.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (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).
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (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.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (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
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (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.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (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.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (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.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4562-D
10
STAFF UPDATE:
This item was deferred for two cycles at the August 26, 2004 Public Hearing to allow the
applicant time to determine if a related item, a Master Street Plan issue, would be
appealed to the Board of Directors. The applicant later determined an appeal would not
be sought on the Commission recommendation of denial of the proposed removal of the
proposed connection of Dorado Beach Drive.
The applicant submitted a letter dated September 7, 2004 requesting this item be
withdrawn from consideration without prejudice. Staff is supportive of this request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated
the applicant had submitted a letter dated September 7, 2004 requesting the item be
withdrawn without prejudice. Staff stated they were supportive of the request.
There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to place the item on
the Consent Agenda for Withdrawal. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: B 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
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the River Mountain Planning District from
Transition 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 desires to develop
the property with commercial uses at the front of the property fronting Cantrell
Road and office uses on the rear half of the property.
Staff is not expanding the application since the Land Use Plan in this area was
reviewed within 12 months.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is vacant currently zoned R-2, Single Family, and is 6.7 acres ± in
size. Bordering this property on the north and running northwest is Highway
10/Cantrell Road. The land directly north of Cantrell Road is zoned R2 with two
homes and several outbuildings. Northwest of the property are several homes
on large lots zoned POD, Planned Office Development and PDO, Planned
Development Office, which have uses of residential, offices and a bank. Further
to the northeast is a Walgreen’s store zoned PDC and a development zoned C3,
General Commercial District, anchored by a hardware store and other small
businesses. Directly to the east of the site is a PCD with a large antique and
home furnishings store. Further east are POD, Planned Office Development,
PDO, Planned Development Office, and even farther east are areas zoned as R2
and PCD. These uses include banks, a church, offices, a hair salon, an animal
clinic and single-family homes. South and east of the property is a R2 zone
developed with single-family homes. A little further south and east is vacant land
zoned PR for parks and recreational use.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On April 6, 2004, a change was made from Transition to Commercial about a
quarter mile northeast of the applicants property to accommodate proposed
development.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-01-05
2
On August 19, 2003 a change was made from Transition to Commercial to about
a half mile to the northwest of the property to accommodate a proposed
development.
On February 18, 2003 multiple changes were made within a 1 mile radius of the
project site recognize existing conditions. These include Transition to Suburban
Office north of the site, Transition to Single Family about quarter mile west of the
site, Transition to Commercial about a half mile east of the site and on the
opposite side of Cantrell Road, and Transition to Single family about one mile
due east of the site.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial on the plan. Cantrell Road is built
as a five-lane road through that area. East of the property is Taylor Loop Road
and further east is Pinnacle Valley, both Minor Arterials, which are built below
standard. The primary function of the Principal Arterial, Cantrell Road, is to serve
through traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within
urbanized areas. 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 not to provide access.
PARKS:
There are no parks immediately adjacent or accessible to this property. To the
south and east of the property is Taylor Loop Community Park. Taylor Loop is
an undeveloped park consisting of 35.0 acres and is separated from the property
by a street lined with single-family homes. Running through the park is a creek.
This area is not in a “Service Deficit Area”.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this
amendment.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The area under review is located near the western edge of the River Mountain
Neighborhood 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.”
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-01-05
3
To address the Sustainable Natural Environmental Goal for the neighborhood
trees need to be preserved at the edge of properties in order to buffer different
uses and runoff needs to be controlled. The property is located on a Principal
Arterial and access points must be minimized to ensure that the guidelines for
the Infrastructure goal are met.
ANALYSIS:
The Land Use Plan identifies this area as Transition. New development has
occurred immediately northeast of Highway 10/Cantrell Road and Taylor Loop
Road intersection in a C3 zoned area, as well as new development just east of
Pinnacle Valley. The Future Land Use Plan shows a concentration of
commercial uses located at the intersection of Taylor Loop and Cantrell Roads.
Presently Highway 10/Cantrell Road has a node system in place. The existing
Commercial node at Taylor Loop Road and Highway 10/Cantrell Road has 19.5
acres zoned for Commercial while the Land Use Plan recognizes 17.6 ± acres
available for Commercial uses. Amending this site would increase commercial
zoning about 36% in the area and increase Commercial uses on the Land Use
Plan by about 34%. Nodes on Highway 10/Cantrell Road are focused at major
intersections. This Commercial node is focused at the Taylor Loop Road
intersection and this change would result in an expansion of the existing node.
The Land Use Plan identifies this area as Transition. Single Family lies directly
south of the site and Commercial directly east. Most Transition areas along
Highway 10/Cantrell Road were created to recognize that the area was not going
to stay residential, and would allow some densification of use while being
compatible with existing homes in the area. This particular area of Transitional
use area could now be recognized as a buffer between the two uses of different
intensities immediately adjacent to this property, Commercial and Single Family.
Located in the Commercial area is an antique and home furnishings store that
backs directly to homes in a Single Family area. The back of the store is visible
on Westchester Drive from Taylor Loop Road to Westchester Cove
(approximately five single family homes) even with the existing ten-foot natural
buffer. In ideal circumstances Commercial uses will not back directly on a
Single Family area with a small natural buffer, instead the buffer will be a use of
less intensity. In this case some of the buffer has been lost and minimized as a
result of the existing PCD, so it is important that the remainder is preserved.
Amending the land use plan would further decrease the buffer between the
area’s Commercial and Single Family areas even more and would put two uses
adjacent to each other with a minimal natural buffer in place.
However, in the general area there is vacant land shown as Commercial on the
Land Use Plan and zoned for Commercial development. It is questionable that
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-01-05
4
Commercial development of this property is justifiable because property is readily
available for this type of development in nearby existing commercial areas.
Furthermore, commercial development of this property along Highway
10/Cantrell Road could create pressure to develop land west and north of this
property with commercial uses, expanding the commercial node and decreasing
buffers with Single Family areas.
A study involving the Highway 10/Cantrell Road corridor will be started soon
analyzing the area’s Land Use Plan and determine what types of land uses will
be appropriate for this section of Little Rock. This study will take inventory of
existing uses, growth patterns, and identify the need and appropriateness of
specific land uses along the Highway 10 corridor. This study will provide
guidance on future land use decisions in the area.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following: Walton Heights-Candlewood Neighborhood
Association, Pleasant Valley Property Owners Association, Pankey Community
Improvement Association, Pleasant Forest Neighborhood Association Pleasant
Forest Neighborhood Association, Westbury Neighborhood Association,
Westchester/Heatherbrae Property Owners Association, Secluded Hills Property
Owners Association, Piedmont Neighborhood Association, and River Valley
Property Owners Association. Staff has received one comment from an area
resident of neutral nature.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
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.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant has met with the Westchester Neighborhood Association, which
has resulted in a site plan change. This does not change the application as filed.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-01-05
5
At the present time the Planning Staff is reviewing the Land Use Plan along
Highway 10, which includes this site upon request of the Board of Directors. The
Highway 10 Land Use Review’s intent is to address specific demand for uses in
specific locations and identify appropriate locations for different uses between
Pankey and the Joe T. Robinson School’s. The review has just begun and the
Planning Staff is still receiving information on the current Highway 10 Land Use
Plan. Any change at this time would be premature and possibly detrimental to
the study effort.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 7, 2004)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the December 2,
2004 Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to wavier the by-laws
for a five-day notice to defer prior to the Planning Commission meeting. The
motion was made and approved with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, and 2 absent. A
motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote
of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant has contacted Staff and amended the Land Use Plan Amendment
to better reflect the current application. The applicant now requests a change
from Transition to Mixed Office Commercial and Suburban Office. This applicant
requests the northern half fronting Cantrell Road as Mixed Office and
Commercial (MOC) and the southern half as Suburban Office. The MOC
category provides for a mixture of office and commercial uses to occur.
Acceptable uses are office or mixed office and commercial, and a Planned
Zoning District is required if the use is mixed office and commercial. The
Suburban Office category provides for low intensity development of office or
office parks in close proximity to lower density residential areas and to assure
compatibility a Planned Zoning District is also required.
Since the initial application, staff has received 45 comments relating to the Land
Use Plan Amendment. All 45 comments were negative in nature with over 80%
(37 comments) in support of the existing Transition land use category and 10
comments recommending a compromise regarding the office use closest to the
existing single family subdivision. Their suggestion was a 100 foot wooded
buffer separating the properties from the proposed development similar to the
buffer set by the construction of the current David Claiborne / Victorian Garden
building over fifteen years ago. As part of the Transition land use category,
proposals are to be “compatible with the quality of life in nearby residential
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-01-05
6
areas.” The buffer proposed by the adjacent neighborhood is a request that can
be strengthened with the existing Transition land use category due to its
neighborhood compatibility clause. Staff has not received any new comments
about the revised application; however, the applicant is scheduled to meet with
the Westchester Neighborhood Association, which might result in additional
comments.
The applicant’s new request more accurately reflects the type of development
that will be on the site. Suburban Office requires a Planned Zoning District (PZD)
and this change would continue the requirement of a PZD for new non-residential
developments, while the Mixed Office Commercial also will require a PZD for this
application since it includes commercial activity. In an area shown as
Transition, office uses are allowed, and some office uses allow up to 10% of
commercial accessory uses that are “clearly incidental to the primary use.” In
this particular case the applicant has concentrated his commercial uses on one
lot creating an area of commercial that is not “clearly incidental” to the primary
office uses, which has resulted in this Land Use Plan Amendment to MOC. The
addition of MOC to this area could result in additional commercial activities
focused offsite, not the nearby office uses, resulting in an expansion of
commercial activities west on Cantrell Road. Showing this area as Mixed Office
Commercial will add 4 acres ± of potential commercial activity to the area. This
would be a 20% increase and could be viewed as a catalyst for future
commercial expansion west of the Taylor Loop and Cantrell Road commercial
node.
A change to Suburban Office for the southern half of the site is not necessary
because the applicant’s office activity is an allowed use in the Transition area.
This amendment would remove the possibility of multifamily or single family
development in this area.
Staff feels that the existing Transition in this area will allow for developments to
be more compatible with the surrounding low intensity developments and
provides for a step down in intensity from the Taylor Loop and Cantrell Road
commercial node. Since the purpose of Transition is to provide “an orderly
transition between residential uses and other more intense uses,” keeping this
category will allow for development compatible with the nearby uses. At this
present time independent commercial use is not appropriate for this site, and the
existing Transition category allows for the applicant’s office development. Staff
recommends denial of the amended Land Use Plan Amendment.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-01-05
7
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 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.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: B.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.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes the development of this site as an office and retail
development through a planned commercial development and the creation of a
three lot plat. The site plan includes the placement of four office buildings
totaling 40,000 square feet on the rear lot (Lot 3) and the placement of a 10,200
square foot retail building on proposed Lot 2. Lot 1 is proposed to be held for
future development.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7700
2
The proposed uses requested in the application are as follows: Lots 1 & 2 are
proposed to have the following commercial uses: Antique shop, with repair, Auto
parts and accessories, Bakery or confectionery shop, Bank or savings and loan
office, Barber and beauty shop, Beverage shop, Book and stationery store,
Butcher shop, Camera shop, Cigar, tobacco and candy store, Clinic (medical,
dental or optical), Clothing store, Community welfare or health center, Custom
sewing and millinery, Day nursery or day care center, Drugstore or pharmacy,
Duplication shop, Eating place without drive-in service, Establishment of a
religious, charitable or philanthropic organization, Feed store, Florist shop, Food
store, Furniture store, Handicraft, ceramic sculpture or similar artwork, Hardware
or sporting goods store, Health studio or spa, Hobby shop, Jewelry store, Job
printing, lithographer, printing or blueprinting, Key shop, Laboratory, Dry
Cleaners or pickup station, Lawn and garden center, enclosed, Library, art
gallery, museum or similar public use, Lodge or fraternal organization, Medical
appliance fittings and sales, Office (general and professional), Office equipment
sales and service, Optical shop, Paint and wallpaper store, Pet shop,
Photography studio, Retail uses not listed (enclosed), School (business), School
(commercial, trade, or craft), Shoe repair, Studio (art, music, speech, drama,
dance or other artistic endeavors), Studio broadcasting and recording, Tailor,
Tool and equipment rental (inside display only), Travel bureau.
Lot 3 is to be limited to the following general office uses: Bank or savings and
loans office, Clinic (medical, dental or optical), Duplication shop, Establishment of
religious, charitable or philanthropic organization, Laboratory, Lodge or fraternal
organization, Mortuary or funeral home, Office (general or professional),
Photography studio, School (business), School (public or denominational), Studio
(broadcasting and recording), Studio (art, music, speech, drama, dance or other
artistic endeavors), Travel bureau. The applicant is also requesting accessory
uses allowed under 0-3 zoning up to ten percent of the total floor area for Lot 3.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is tree covered site. To the east of the site is a commercial business,
David Claiborne’s Antiques, and to the west of the site is a single-family home.
To the south of the site are single-family homes in the Westchester Subdivision.
North of the site is a mixture of residential and non-residential uses. A Wal-
Green’s Pharmacy is located to the northeast and a bank to the northwest.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Johnson Ranch Neighborhood Association, the Westchester/Heatherbrae
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 received several
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7700
3
phone calls in opposition to the request 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. All
driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance.
3. Provide the direction of flow and all storm water flows (Q) entering and
leaving the property and any proposed piping.
4. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Shown the
proposed location for storm water detention facilities on the plan.
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) and
AHTD, District 6.
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. 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 Philpott) for more information.
8. Show cross-access easement for properties to the east and west.
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: 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 connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal
charges. This fee will apply to all connections including metered connections off
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7700
4
the private fire system. A water main extension will be required in order to
provide service to this property. On site fire protection will be required. This
development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system.
Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire
protection.
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 Transition for this property. The applicant has applied for
a Planned Commercial Development for three lots with two lots of commercial
uses fronting on Cantrell Road and one lot in the rear with four office buildings.
A land use plan amendment for a change to Commercial is a separate item on
this agenda (LU04-01-05).
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: Areas set-aside for buffers and landscaping meet with ordinance
requirements.
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 the southern and
western perimeters of the site.
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.
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many trees as
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7700
5
feasible on this property. Extra credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance
requirements can be given when properly preserving trees of 6-inch caliper or
larger.
A tree count of trees 6-inch caliper or larger should be provided within the
proposed 40-foot wide southern perimeter land use buffer. This buffer should be
labeled as an undisturbed area. Temporary fencing must be in place to protect
trees prior to site work taking place.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 16 2004)
Mr. Robert Brown and Mr. Charles Basham were present representing the
request. Staff stated the item was a deferred item from the August 26, 2004,
public hearing and the applicant had requested to discuss the item before the
Subdivision Committee prior to the public hearing. Staff noted all comments
were previously given to the applicant and the applicant had addressed most of
the issues.
Staff stated the site had a history of drainage complaints. Staff questioned the
proposed detention. Mr. Brown stated detention would be handled from a
detention basin located near Cantrell Road. Mr. Brown stated there was not a
defined channel, just surface flow through the site. He stated a small portion of
the site would drain to the southwest along an existing drainage basin.
Mr. Brown stated landscaping comments had been addressed. He stated the
development would include the placement of the required buffer and screening.
He stated in addition a row of evergreen plantings would be added to the rear of
the buildings to further screen the development from the adjoining single-family
homes.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant has submitted a revised site plan indicating four single story office
buildings on proposed Lot 3. The applicant has also indicated a 10,200 square
foot retail building on Lot 2 and has indicated Lot 1 will be held for future
commercial development. The applicant is requesting the approval of a three lot
plat in conjunction with the PCD zoning request. The applicant has indicated Lot
1 will contain 1.26 acres, Lot 2 will contain 1.66 acres and Lot 3 will contain 3.57
acres. The Highway 10 Design Overlay District typically requires a two acre
minimum lot size for development. Through the Planned Development process,
sites containing less than two acres may be developed.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7700
6
The applicant has indicated signage on the proposed site plan consistent with
signage allowed in the Highway 10 Design Overlay District for Lots 1 and 2. The
applicant has indicated a single sign located on each of the proposed lots
abutting Cantrell Road a maximum of six feet in height and seventy-two square
feet in area. The applicant has indicated each of the buildings on Lot 3 will have
a single ground mounted sign a maximum of six feet in height and sixty-four
square feet in area. The ordinance typically allows a single sign for each
individual lot.
The applicant has indicated the proposed development of the site as an office
and retail development. The proposed uses requested in the application are as
follows: Lots 1 & 2 are proposed to have the following commercial uses: Antique
shop, with repair, Auto parts and accessories, Bakery or confectionery shop,
Bank or savings and loan office, Barber and beauty shop, Beverage shop, Book
and stationery store, Butcher shop, Camera shop, Cigar, tobacco and candy
store, Clinic (medical, dental or optical), Clothing store, Community welfare or
health center, Custom sewing and millinery, Day nursery or day care center,
Drugstore or pharmacy, Duplication shop, Eating place without drive-in service,
Establishment of a religious, charitable or philanthropic organization, Feed store,
Florist shop, Food store, Furniture store, Handicraft, ceramic sculpture or similar
artwork, Hardware or sporting goods store, Health studio or spa, Hobby shop,
Jewelry store, Job printing, lithographer, printing or blueprinting, Key shop,
Laboratory, Dry Cleaners or pickup station, Lawn and garden center, enclosed,
Library, art gallery, museum or similar public use, Lodge or fraternal organization,
Medical appliance fittings and sales, Office (general and professional), Office
equipment sales and service, Optical shop, Paint and wallpaper store, Pet shop,
Photography studio, Retail uses not listed (enclosed), School (business), School
(commercial, trade, or craft), Shoe repair, Studio (art, music, speech, drama,
dance or other artistic endeavors), Studio broadcasting and recording, Tailor,
Tool and equipment rental (inside display only), Travel bureau.
Lot 3 is to be limited to the following general office uses: Bank or savings and
loans office, Clinic (medical, dental or optical), Duplication shop, Establishment of
religious, charitable or philanthropic organization, Laboratory, Lodge or fraternal
organization, Mortuary or funeral home, Office (general or professional),
Photography studio, School (business), School (public or denominational), Studio
(broadcasting and recording), Studio (art, music, speech, drama, dance or other
artistic endeavors), Travel bureau. The applicant is also requesting accessory
uses allowed under 0-3 zoning up to ten percent of the total floor area for Lot 3.
The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation for the office
development will be from 7:00 am and 6:00 pm, Monday through Saturday only.
Lot 1 is proposed to have limited hours of operation and may be open between
the hours of 5:00 am and 2:00 am seven days per week. Lot 2 is proposed to
have limited hours of operation between 6:00 am and 11:00 pm seven days per
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7700
7
week.
The applicant has provided the following phasing plan for proposed Lot 3. The
southern two buildings will be completed within 1.5 to 2 years following approval.
The other two buildings would be completed within 3 to 4 years following
approval. The applicant has indicated if a development is secured for Lot 1 the
PCD will be revised to indicate the building footprint, parking and landscaped
areas.
Staff is not supportive of the applicant’s request. The site is located in an area,
shown as Transition on the City’s Future Land Use Plan, which does not allow for
commercial development. Staff feels the development is too far west of an
existing commercial node and does not feel the expansion of this node is
appropriate at this time. Staff feels the site should be developed with uses
allowed in the Transition category of the Future Land Use Plan to allow a step
down from the commercial node located at the intersection of Taylor Loop Road
and Cantrell Road. Staff feels the placement of the four office buildings on the
rear of the site is appropriate but also feels the front two lots should also be
developed with office uses. Staff would also question some of the requested
uses for the proposed office site. Staff does not feel a mortuary or funeral home,
studio (broadcasting and recording) or lodge or fraternal organization are
appropriate uses for the site.
In addition, the applicant has indicated the development of the site with a three
lot plat, two of which are less than the minimum square footage required by the
Highway 10 Design Overlay District. Staff feels the development of these two
lots with less than the minimum acreage required will erode the corridor. Staff
feels the site should be developed as an office development limiting the
commercial uses to those allowed in office zones or ten percent of the gross floor
area.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request.
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.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to place the
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7700
8
item for inclusion on the consent agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of
9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 7, 2004)
Mr. Randy Frazier was present representing the applicant. There were registered
objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request dated October 4,
2004, requesting this item be deferred to the December 2, 2004, Public Hearing. Staff
stated the request would require a waiver of the By-Laws for the late deferral request.
Staff stated they were supportive of the applicant’s request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place
the item on the Consent Agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes,
0 noes and 2 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff and revised the list of requested uses for
the proposed development. The revised site plan includes the placement of a 13,600
square foot office building on proposed Lot 2 and the placement of four buildings
totaling 40,000 square feet of office on proposed Lot 3. The applicant has indicated
Lots 1 and 2 will be developed with entirely O-3, General Office uses with no allowance
for accessory uses. The applicant is requesting to concentrate the allowable ten
percent commercial activities, typically allowed for O-3 zoned properties, on proposed
Lot 1. The applicant has indicated a maximum of 5,300 square feet of accessory retail
will be located in the proposed building for Lot 1.
The applicant is now requesting Lots 2 and 3 be allowed O-3, General Office uses with
no accessory or conditional uses. The applicant is requesting the 5300 square foot
building on Lot 1 be allowed O-3, General Office uses; O-3 accessory uses; plus the
following commercial uses: Bakery, Specialty foods, Butcher shop, Commercial
catering, Store or studio for artwork or ceramics or handicraft, Hardware store, Sporting
goods store, Medical support services, Office equipment sales and service, Optical
shop, Paint and wallpaper store, Video rental store, and Window treatments and/or
interior decorator shop with no limit on the percentages.
The applicant has indicated the proposed drainage will run along the south side of
Cantrell Road and carry storm water directly to the creek channel west of the site,
instead of releasing it at the western edges of the site. The applicant has indicated it
may also be possible to accomplish this by connecting to the existing drainage facilities
existing along Cantrell Road.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7700
9
The site plan includes the placement of an eight foot wood fence along the southern
and eastern perimeters to act as screening were adjacent to residentially zoned
properties. The applicant as also included the placement of a 48-foot buffer along the
southern boundary to act as a buffer to the adjoining single-family neighborhood. The
site plan includes the placement of 36-feet of undisturbed buffer area and 8-feet of
landscaping to be replanted with evergreen shrubs such as southern magnolias that are
eight feet in height, and branched full to the ground. The Highway 10 Design Overlay
District typically requires a 40-foot rear yard buffer. The proposed buffer exceeds the
minimum ordinance requirement by 20 percent.
Staff is not supportive of the proposed development. The development is proposed as
a three lot plat with a mixture of office and commercial uses. The applicant is proposing
Lot 1 to potentially be developed as 100 percent commercial. Staff does not feel the
intent of the Mixed Office Commercial Land Use designation is to allow lots within a
development to develop independently as a retail development and two office lots. Staff
feels the intent of a Mixed Office Development is to allow a truly mixed development
within the buildings and without independent lots. As staff previously indicated staff is
supportive of the site developing as an office development and the individual buildings
being allowed ten percent accessory uses but not of concentrating the commercial
activity on one lot within the development.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
Mr. Robert Brown was present representing the request. There were registered
objectors present. Staff presented the item indicating the request had been amended to
a POD. Staff stated the applicant was now requesting an office development with O-3
uses being allowable uses and the allowable ten percent accessory uses listed with no
more than ten percent of the gross floor area in each building. Staff stated the building
foot print for Lot 1 had not been determined and an amendment would be sought when
development plans were secured. Staff stated the request was consistent with the
City’s Future Land Use Plan and consistent with the requirements of the Highway 10
Design Overlay District. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the request.
Mr. Robert Brown addressed the Commission on the merits of the proposed request.
He stated the proposed site contained 6.6 acres. He stated of the 6.6 acres 1.56 acres
were being held as buffers for adjoining properties. He stated there had been several
revisions to the proposed request. He stated there had been two meetings with the
neighborhood and some of their request had been included in the proposed request.
He stated the neighborhood was requesting a 75 to 100-foot buffer along the southern
perimeter similar to the commercial development to the east. He stated Harvest Foods
was developed as a commercial development and the 100-foot buffer made sense to
protect the neighborhood. He stated the request before the Commission currently was
an office development not a commercial development. He stated the proposed site plan
included the placement of a 48-foot setback with 36-feet remaining undisturbed.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7700
10
He stated he was well aware of the flooding problems the neighborhood suffered. He
stated the developer had committed to pipe the water from the site to Cantrell Road. He
stated only a small portion of the site would continue to drain to the south. He stated
there was an existing drainage way along the western edge of the property, which
would be handled by canalization or piping around the southern perimeter and along the
western property line.
He stated the developer had agreed to place additional plantings within the buffer area
both in the disturbed and undisturbed areas. He stated a six foot fence would also be
placed along the retaining wall to add additional screening. He stated the buffer area
contained mature trees, which did not allow for under growth. He stated the developer
had also agreed to not place any HVAC units on the rears of the buildings adjacent to
the single-family subdivision.
Mr. Robbie Linn addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He
stated his home was located at 14 Westchester Court immediately south of the
proposed development. He stated the neighborhood had very little notice of the
proposed changes to the request. He provided pictures of the proposed development
and the indicated buffer areas. He also provided an elevation of the proposed building
height in relation to the proposed single-family homes. He stated the proposed
development would tower above the homes with little buffer or screening. Mr. Linn
stated the retaining wall would be 24-feet in height and the buildings would be 15-feet in
height. He stated the buildings would be 40-feet above the homes. He stated the
lighting would then be 50 to 60-feet above the neighboring homes.
Mr. Linn stated he disagreed with staff concerning the compatibility of the proposed
request. He stated according to the City codes proposed developments were to provide
for a transition between adjoining uses and not be used for the sole benefit of the
applicant. He stated he felt the proposed development would adversely affect the
quality of life of the adjoining property owners and he felt the request did not comply
with the existing codes and ordinances. Mr. Linn stated the neighborhood was
requesting a 100-foot buffer similar to the buffer provided by Harvest Foods. He stated
the site contained 53 parking spaces more than was typically required by ordinance. He
stated with the removal of the additional parking spaces additional buffers could be
provided. He also requested the developer provide a detailed drainage analysis prior to
approval to ensure the drainage proposed was adequate to handle the development
and run-off.
Mr. Bob Altof addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He
stated planning was for the past, present and future. He stated the City was aware of
the neighborhood’s flooding problems. He stated the subdivision’s drainage was listed
on the City’s un-funded infrastructure improvement list. He stated it was important to
address the existing problems before approving a plan which would provide additional
drainage problems.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: B.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7700
11
Mr. William Ripple addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request.
He stated the property currently drained to the northeast. He stated the proposed
development would directly affect the existing drainage of the site. He stated the water
flow would be impeded with the proposed buffer. He stated if the buffer were increased
to 100-feet the drainage concerns could be minimized.
Mr. Nathan Culp addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He
stated he was President of the Westbury Neighborhood Association. He stated the
neighborhood was opposed to the development of the site as intensely as requested.
He stated the primary concerned with for the quality of life of the area residents. He
stated two buildings containing 10,000 square feet each sitting on top of a 24-foot
retaining wall would not contribute to the quality of life of the area residents.
Mr. Robert Brown stated the drainage plan was part of the PZD request. He stated the
proposal was to take six to six and one-half acres out of the existing watershed. He
stated water would be collected and piped to Cantrell Road. He stated the retaining
walls would be poured in place walls for the building foundation and architectural blocks
could be used in the other locations.
There was a general discussion concerning the proposed development and the
indicated retaining walls. Staff stated the walls would require a variance to allow the
indicated height. Mr. Brown stated he was willing to terrace the walls and provide an
additional ten feet of building setback to provide the required ten foot bench. Mr. Brown
stated landscaping would be placed on the bench to provide additional screening. The
Commission questioned the required landscaping. Staff stated the spacing would be
fifteen feet with two inch caliper trees and also shrubs put in place to break the massing
of the wall. Staff stated both the lower and upper terraces would require plantings.
A motion was made to approve the request as amended. The amendment included the
placement of additional plantings within the buffer both the disturbed and undisturbed
areas, the uses of the site be limited to O-3 uses and the allowable accessory uses
limited to ten percent of the gross floor area of each building, the placement of
architectural blocks limited to a maximum wall height of fifteen feet with a ten foot
terrace to be planted with trees on a minimum of 15-foot centers and additional shrubs,
and the planting of trees and shrubs on the top of the terrace and a six foot fence with
the face side directed outward. The motion failed by a vote of 5 ayes, 4 noes and
2 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: C FILE NO.: S-1454
NAME: Whispering Hills Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: Located South of Alexander Road and West of Pam Drive South
DEVELOPER:
P.E. Investments, LLC
2212 South Broadway
Little Rock, AR 72202
ENGINEER:
Laha Engineers
6602 Baseline Road, Suite E
Little Rock, AR 72209
AREA: 5.09 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 15 FT. NEW STREET: 970
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
PLANNING DISTRICT: 16 – Otter Creek Planning District
CENSUS TRACT: 41.04
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1. A variance to allow a reduced front building line for Lots 1 – 15 (15-feet).
2. A variance to allow a reduced rear yard setback for Lots 1 – 15 (15-feet).
3. A variance to allow a reduced lot width for Lot 10.
4. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the street to exceed the length of a
minor residential street.
5. The applicant is requesting an in-lieu contribution for the required storm water
detention.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes the subdivision of this 4.09-acre tract into fifteen (15)
single-family lots. The lots are indicated to average 8,900 square feet with the
minimum lot size proposed as 7,000 square feet. The proposed subdivision will
result in a density of 3.14 units per acre. The applicant has indicated the
development will be constructed in two phases with Lots 1 – 3 and Lots 8 – 15
developed in the first phase. Lots 4 – 7 will be developed in the second phase.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1454
2
The development includes the placement of a new cul-de-sac street extending
from Alexander Road. The applicant has indicated 970 linear feet of new street
will be added to the City as a result of the proposed development.
The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a reduced front building line for
Lots 1 – 15 and a reduced rear yard setback for the indicated lots also set at 15-
feet. The applicant is also requesting a reduced lot width for Lot 10.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a vacant tree covered site located south of Alexander Road. Pam
Drive has not been extended to the proposed subdivision with current access to
the site from Whispering Drive. There is a pond located to the east of the site on
an adjoining parcel. To the west of the site is a single-family neighborhood,
Whispering Hills Subdivision Phase I. To the south of the site is vacant R-2,
Single-family zoned property. North of the site has developed with single-family
homes located on large lots accessed by Alexander Road.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area
residents concerning the proposed development and the proposed minimum
square footages of the new homes. Staff has indicated this is not a question
typically requested of the applicant. Staff has noted the indicated lot sizes meet
with minimum ordinance requirements. All abutting property owners, the
Southwest Little Rock United for Progress and the Alexander Road
Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Alexander Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A
dedication of right-of-way 45-feet from centerline will be required.
2. 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. The area reserved for storm water detention is a fairly small, odd shaped
area. Provide additional details of construction.
4. A standard street width of 26-feet measured back of curb to back of curb is
required (length of street exceeds the criteria for a minor residential street).
Sidewalk is required on one side of the street.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1454
3
5. For service consideration, the subdivision should connect through to the west
as was originally planned, especially since no was cul-de-sac constructed in
Whispering Hills.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements to serve all the
indicated lots. Contact the 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 water main extension will be
required in order to provide service to portions of 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. 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.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 16, 2004)
Mr. Troy Laha was present representing the applicant. Staff gave a brief
overview of the proposed request and indicated there were additional items
necessary to complete the review process. Staff requested Mr. Laha dimension
all property lines and provide the buildable area on each of the indicated lots.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the development would
require on-site detention. Mr. Laha stated he was providing detention and would
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1454
4
provide staff with additional details concerning the proposed detention. Staff also
noted the indicated street exceeded the maximum length of a minor residential
street. Staff stated a standard 26-foot street with sidewalks would be required
unless a variance was approved. Staff stated they would support a variance due
to the limited number of lots proposed.
There was a general discussion concerning Whispering Drive located to the
west. Staff stated the proposed street should be extended westward and access
to the proposed subdivision taken from the existing street. Mr. Laha stated he
felt the neighbors would be less opposed to the proposed development if access
was not proposed from their neighborhood. Staff stated a cul-de-sac or turn-
around should be provided at the end of the existing street to allow for proper
turning around of trucks and automobiles.
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 September 16, 2004, Subdivision Committee meeting. The
applicant has indicated the dimensions of all property lines and included the
buildable area for each of the lots on the proposed preliminary plat. The
applicant has revised the preliminary plat to allow Whispering Drive, which
currently terminates at the western property line, to extend to the east and allow
a connection to the proposed subdivision. The applicant is also requesting an
access to Alexander Road via Pam Drive South. The applicant has requested
the proposed street to be a minor residential street. The applicant is also
requesting an in-lieu contribution for the required storm water detention facility.
The indicated lot sizes meet the typical ordinance requirement for single-family
development. The applicant has indicated one of the lots Lot 10 with a reduced
lot width. The ordinance typically requires a lot to have a minimum lot width at
the building line of 60-feet. The indicated lot has a lot width at the building line of
50 feet.
The applicant is requesting a reduced building line of 15-feet for all the indicated
lots. The applicant is also requested a reduced rear yard setback of fifteen feet
for all the indicated lots. The applicant has indicated with the reduced building
setbacks there will be more buildable area, increasing the desirability of the lots.
The lots indicate a building area ranging from 1500 to 1600 square feet. The
proposed lots range in size from 7000 square feet to 18,260 square feet. The
average lot size proposed is 8,900 square feet. The indicated lot sizes are
adequate to meet the minimum ordinance requirements.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1454
5
Staff is not supportive of the proposed preliminary plat. The indicated plat results
in a variance to all the indicated lots and the in ability to meet the detention
ordinance requirement. This leads staff to question if the application should be
revised and resubmitted as a PRD development. In addition, even though the
lots meet the minimum square footage requirements set forth in the Subdivision
Ordinance staff does not feel the configuration of the lots is such that the lots will
be buildable lots. Staff feels the applicant is “over building the site” and should
reconsider the placement of this large number of lots on this site.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the proposed request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 7, 2004)
Mr. Troy Laha was present representing the request. There were registered objectors
present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. Staff stated they
felt the development should be filed as a PRD. Staff stated there were a number of
variances being requested and some question as to the buildability of several of the
indicated lots.
Mr. Laha stated the developer was requesting a variance to allow a 15-foot building line
on all the indicated lots and a reduced rear yard setback on all lots. He stated this was
being requested to avoid confusion of builders. He stated the development had
indicated detention on the site plan. He stated the development would not generate a
great deal of water to address and the indicated detention should be adequate to handle
the run-off from the development.
Mr. Harold Williams addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request.
He stated he lived at the end of Whispering Drive. He stated the road was a 2 inch
asphalt street which could not withstand a lot of construction traffic. He stated the
proposal he first saw indicated the development of 10 homes and not the indicated 16
homes. He stated with the development of ten homes that would be ten cars per day.
He stated most homes had two cars and with children the number would only be
increased. He stated he was opposed to the development of the subdivision based on
the number of homes proposed and the condition of the existing roadway.
Mr. Raymond Schieber addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed
request. He stated his home was located at 13511 Alexander Road. He stated the
area did not have a property owners association and he was not informed of the request
in a timely manner. He stated the reduced setbacks were a concern for area residents.
He stated the Bill of Assurance for the existing subdivision had certain criteria for
development including minimum lot sizes, minimum square footages of homes and a
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1454
6
25-foot building line. He stated based on the indicated plat there appeared to be
several lots which would not be buildable. Mr. Schieber stated the Alexander Road
area were soils types that were not stable and the development could have stabilization
problems.
Mr. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She
stated the site was a difficult site to develop and based on the number of variances and
the detention variances it appeared the developer was trying to maximize the buildable
area. She stated she also felt the development should be reconsidered as a PRD.
Ms. Janet Berry addressed the Commission in support of the proposed request. She
stated as President of the Southwest Little Rock United for Progress and a member of
the Neighborhood Action Plan Steering Committee she was in favor of new
development in the area. She stated when the action plan was being developed and
updated a few years ago the members were shocked to see how few new homes had
been constructed in the area. She stated the area needed new construction.
Mr. Paul Evans, the developer, addressed the Commission. He stated his desire was to
construct quality homes in the 1300 to 1600 square foot range. He stated CDBG Grant
money would be sought to assist homebuyers with down payment assistance. He
stated Whispering Drive could be blocked during construction not allowing heavy trucks
and equipment to access the roadway.
There was a general discussion concerning the proposed request and the need for a
PRD vs. a single-family plat. Staff stated the Board recently denied a request for a plat
with a number of variances which was to be re-filed as a PRD and brought back to the
Commission at their December 2004 public hearing. Staff stated they felt with the
number of variances being requested and the lot configuration there were serious
concerns with the buildability of four of the indicated lots.
Mr. Laha stated his original proposal did not include the extension of Whispering Drive.
He stated the road was added at the instruction of staff. He stated the developer’s
desire was to not allow the connection and add an additional lot. Staff stated the street
needed to be extended since a turn-around was not constructed in the previous plat.
There was a discussion concerning the reason the developer did not want to file the
application as a PRD. Mr. Laha stated the develop was not ready to commit to the floor
plan for each of the indicated lots. The Commission stated maximum buildable area
was all that would be required.
There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion to approve
the request for deferral to the December 2, 2004 Public Hearing. The motion carried by
a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1454
7
STAFF UPDATE:
As was recommended at the public hearing held October 7, 2004 the applicant has
amended his request to include a rezoning from R-2, Single-family to PD-R to allow the
development of a single-family subdivision. The applicant is requesting the
development of fifteen single-family lots with a reduced front building line and a reduced
rear yard setback. The applicant has indicated all lots will be developed with a fifteen
foot front building line and a 15-foot rear yard setback. The applicant has also indicated
the side yards will be set at ten feet, sufficient to meet the minimum side yard setback
per the Subdivision Ordinance.
The applicant has indicated a minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet and a maximum lot
size of 18,260 square feet. The average lot size proposed is 8,900 square feet. The
applicant has also indicated a maximum build area on the proposed site plan. The
proposed site plan includes the placement of a detention basin on the eastern property
line.
The applicant has indicated the construction of Whispering Drive to connect to the
proposed subdivision. The applicant indicates a 50-foot right-of-way sufficient to meet
the Master Street Plan requirement. The applicant has also indicated the construction
of Pam Drive South, a new residential street containing 970 linear feet of new street.
The applicant has indicated the homes will contain a minimum of 1,000 square feet of
heated and cooled space and at a minimum a single car carport. The applicant has
indicated the structures will be one and two story structures with a maximum building
height of 35-feet.
As was previously stated staff supports the proposed development as filed. Staff feels
with the large number of variances being requested the application is a classic case
where the PZD ordinance applies to address the large number of variance issues.
Staff recommends approval of the requested PD-R to allow the development of fifteen
single-family homes on this 5.09 acre tract.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
Mr. Troy Laha and Mr. Paul Evans were present representing the request. There were
registered objectors present. Staff presented the item was a recommendation of
approval. Staff stated the application was deferred from the October 7, 2004, Public
Hearing to allow the developer to re-file the request as a PD-R and establish a buildable
area and provide commitments with regard to minimum square footages and building
construction materials.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1454
8
Mr. Troy Laha stated he and the developer had met with the neighborhood to address
concerns. He stated the neighborhood was not supportive of the request as filed but
the indicated design had addressed staff’s concerns. He stated the drainage issue
previously raised had been addressed to staff’s satisfaction.
Mr. Harold Williams stated he did not wish to speak.
Mr. Ray Shever addressed the Commission on behalf of the area residents and the
neighborhood association. He stated the neighborhood was not trying to stop
development only to make the development compatible with the existing neighborhood.
He stated the developers had shown the neighborhood a site plan containing ten
homes, which was more in keeping with the neighborhood. He stated the existing
homes in the area were on ½ acre lots and contained 2000 square feet of heated and
cooled space. He stated the homes had large setbacks, which made the area feel rural
even though the homes were now, located within the City limits. He stated he had met
with the developer and he was confident the developer would construct a quality
development. He stated the area contained poor soils types and in some cases the
homes had had sediment problems causing foundations to fail. He requested the
Commission deny the request to place fifteen homes on the site and approve a request
to place ten homes on the site.
Mr. Homer Ellis addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He
stated his primary concern was with drainage. He stated the developer had indicated
drainage would be addressed but he was not convinced the drainage would be
addressed. He stated the site was low and with the existing vacant land carried a large
amount of water. He stated the roadway and the rooftops would not allow absorption,
which would require additional areas for run-off. He stated there was an existing lake
on the property, which served as detention for portions of the area. He stated with the
additional water the lake would overflow resulting in additional water that would have
nowhere to go. He stated he was not opposed to development if the development
improved the neighborhood. He stated the indicated lots were to small to be compatible
with the existing neighborhood. He stated the developer was not trying to improve the
neighborhood only to make a profit at the neighborhoods expense.
There was a general discussion concerning the proposed request. The Commission
questioned staff if a development had been approved with the number of variances
being requested. Staff stated an item on the current agenda also contained a large
number of variances. Staff stated the Commission made a recommendation of approval
of the request as a preliminary plat and the Board of Directors had denied the plat
variance request but encouraged the developers to re-file the request as a PRD. Staff
also noted there had been several item in recent months the Commission had approved
with variances as both plats and PRD request.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1454
9
A motion was made to approve the request as amended to allow the placement of
fifteen homes on the site through a PD-R request. The motion carried by a vote of 7
ayes, 2 noes and 2 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: D FILE NO.: S-1457
NAME: Hampton Site Plan Review
LOCATION: Located on the Southeast corner of Dixon Road and HWY 65/167
DEVELOPER:
Dr. Reginald J. Hampton
1714 South Broadway
Little Rock, AR 72206
ENGINEER:
McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers
319 President Clinton Avenue, Suite 202
Little Rock, AR 72201
AREA: 17.91 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: Not zoned
PLANNING DISTRICT: 27 – Fish Creek Planning District
CENSUS TRACT: 40.01
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
The applicant submitted a request dated September 23, 2004 requesting this
item be deferred to the December 2, 2004 Public Hearing. Staff is supportive of
this request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 7, 2004)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
stated the applicant had not resolved the issue related to the means of wastewater
disposal. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred to the December 2,
2004, Public Hearing to allow additional time to resolve the issue related to the
proposed septic system and placement.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1457
2
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place
the item on the Consent Agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes,
0 noes and 2 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant has not resolved all the outstanding issues associated with the proposed
wastewater collection and treatment system. The applicant is requesting this item be
deferred to the January 20, 2005 Public Hearing.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had not resolved all the outstanding issues
associated with the proposed wastewater collection and treatment system and
requested that the item be deferred to the January 20, 2005 Commission meeting.
There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to place the item on
the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: E FILE NO.: Z-4644-C
NAME: Yelenich Revised Long-form PCD
LOCATION: Located at 2000 and 2010 South University Avenue
DEVELOPER:
Marc Yelenich
110 South Shore Drive
Maumelle, AR 72113
ENGINEER:
ETC Engineers
1510 S. Broadway
Little Rock, AR 72202
AREA: 10+ Acre NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: Mini-warehouse and General Commercial (C-3 uses)
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD
PROPOSED USE: Mini-warehouse and General Commercial (C-3 uses) – Placement
of banners of decorative light poles.
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
On December 19, 2002, the Little Rock Planning Commission provided a
recommendation of approval of a request for a two lot subdivision as a part of a PCD
request. On Lot 1, the applicant proposed the placement of 90,000 square feet of self-
storage, mini-warehouse. The applicant proposed a 2-story 2,400 square foot resident
manager’s office as a part of the development. The units would be ground level single
story units. Approximately 25% of the units would be climate controlled units.
Lot 2 consisted of a 22,500 square foot retail strip center with C-3, General Commercial
District uses being requested. There were approximately 10 individual business bays
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4644-C
2
within the development, however, the interior walls would be moveable to accommodate
various sizes of lease space which would affect the total number of tenants. The
applicant requested a ground mounted sign to be located on this lot in addition to
proposed signage for Lot 1. The sign would be located near the driveway at be
approximately 10-feet by 15-feet or 150 square feet in area. The applicant proposed a
LED reader board as part of the signage. The applicant indicated the building façade
would have sign area above each retail bay for individual tenant identification.
The Board of Directors approved the PCD request on January 21, 2003, with the
adoption of Ordinance No. 18,810.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant now proposes to revise his previously approved PCD to allow the
placement of banners on the decorative light poles within the development. The
applicant has indicated the banners will be located on seven of the light poles
within the parking lot. The banner bars would allow up to three feet wide by five
feet tall seasonal banners (i.e.) Holidays, Christmas, Fourth of July, Easter,
Thanksgiving.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site has developed with two mini-warehouse buildings and a strip retail center.
The area to the east of the site is vacant and tree covered with the area to the
southeast being the UALR Cooperative Extension Service Center. Uses to the north
of the site are commercial type uses such as check cashing, liquor store and
restaurants. Uses to the south and west of the site are single-family residences of
the Boardmoore and Point O’ Woods neighborhoods.
South University Avenue is a four lane roadway without a median break at this
location. Median breaks are located to the south at Berkshire Drive and to the north
at Boyle Park Road. Currently there are plans to widen South University Avenue.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Broadmore Neighborhood Association, the Curran-Conway Neighborhood
Association, the Oak Forest Neighborhood Association, the Point O Woods
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.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4644-C
3
D. ANALYSIS:
Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. Staff does not feel the placement of
banners on the decorative light poles will have any negative impact on the
adjoining properties. The applicant has indicated the banners will not be used as
advertising only to add character to the development and greet customers with
seasonal messages. The zoning ordinance does not allow the placement of
banners without special approval. The applicant is requesting the revision to the
PCD to allow the placement. All other aspects of the previously approved
development will remain. To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues
associated with the proposed request.
E. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request to allow the placement of banners on
the light poles within the development subject to compliance with the following
conditions:
1. The banners are not to contain any advertising including the name of any
business on the site.
2. The banners must be properly maintained. Any banner that is damaged
must be immediately removed or replaced.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 7, 2004)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
stated the applicant failed to notify property owners as required by the Planning
Commission By-laws. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred to the
December 2, 2004 Public Hearing.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place
the item on the Consent Agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes,
0 noes and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated to
their knowledge there were no outstanding issues associated with the proposed request
and presented a recommendation of approval of the request to allow the placement of
banners on the light poles within the development subject to compliance with the
following conditions:
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4644-C
4
1. The banners are not to contain any advertising including the name of any
business on the site.
2. The banners must be properly maintained. Any banner that is damaged must be
immediately removed or replaced.
There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to place the item on
the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: F FILE NO.: LU04-01-06
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - River Mountain Planning District
Location: SWC Cantrell Road and Bella Rosa Drive
Request: Transition to Commercial
Source: McGetrick, Pat
On September 24, 2004, the applicant asked to defer the request for six weeks.
Staff recommends deferral to the December 2, 2004 agenda.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 7, 2004)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the December 2,
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.
STAFF UPDATE:
After further review of the site and meetings with the applicant to further clarify
the zoning application, it has been determined that a Land Use Plan Amendment
for this site at this time is not necessary. Staff recommends that the application
be withdrawn.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 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.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: F.1 FILE NO.: Z-6219-B
NAME: Bella Rosa Revised Long-form POD
LOCATION: On the Southwest corner of Cantrell Road and Bella Rosa Drive
DEVELOPER:
HWY 107 Associates, LLC
3801 Woodland Heights
Little Rock, AR 72212
ENGINEER:
McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers
319 President Clinton Avenue, Suite 202
Little Rock, AR 72201
AREA: 7.5 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: PCD
ALLOWED USES: Office/Warehouse – Mini-warehouse development
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD
PROPOSED USE: Office/Showroom/Warehouse – Mini-warehouse
development
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
The Planning Commission previously reviewed and denied a request to rezone the site
from R-2, Single-family to POD to allow the site to develop with limited office space,
conditioned storage and mini-storage. The proposal included the placement of
102,775 square feet of improvements, containing approximately 18,000 square feet of
office and office/warehouse space, including an on-site manager’s office and apartment
comprising approximately 1,600 square feet. The balance of the project was to be self-
storage units.
The applicant proposed the perimeter of the two buildings located adjacent to Cantrell
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: F.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6219-B
2
Road to be constructed of “drivet” wall system over a steel super structure mixed with
glass office front. The roof system was to be a flat roof hidden behind a metal parapet.
The self-storage units were proposed as metal system over a steel structure with
access provided by overhead doors.
On March 11, 2004 the Little Rock Planning Commission made a recommendation of
approval of a request to redevelop this 7.5-acre site located on the southwest corner of
Cantrell Road and Bella Rosa Drive. The applicant intended to develop the site with a
total of 82,800 square feet of office/retail and mini-warehouse buildings. The site was to
contain a single building of office/retail containing a total of 29,000 square feet and an
office/managers residence for the mini-warehouse development. A second building
would contain 28,000 square feet of conditioned storage accessed from interior halls.
There were three buildings of stand-alone mini-warehouse buildings containing a total of
25,800 square feet of space. The total building coverage proposed was 34.3 percent
with 27 percent of the site designated as landscaped/green space area. The site
contained 117 parking spaces with 19 spaces proposed for boat and RV storage. The
applicant indicated the days and hours of operation from 7 am to 8 pm seven days per
week. The mini-warehouse would have 24-hour access. The Little Rock Board of
Directors adopted Ordinance No. 19,072 on April 6, 2004, establishing the Bella Rosa
Long-form PCD as presented to the Little Rock Planning Commission.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting to amend the previously approved POD to add
office/showroom/warehouse as allowable activities for the site (currently
allowable in O-3 with a Conditional Use Permit). The previous approval allows
O-3 uses and an allowance for ten percent of the gross floor area as O-3
accessory uses. No changes are proposed to the approved site plan.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site has been cleared for construction of the new center. The site is
relatively flat with a creek running along the western and southern perimeters.
The property to the east of the site (across Bella Rosa Drive) is vacant and has
been cleared. Further to the west is the Seven Acres Business Park zoned POD
and developed with a mix of commercial and office uses. To the southeast are
single-family homes adjoining the northern bank of the creek. To the south of the
site (across the creek) are vacant lands and single-family homes fronting Bella
Rosa Drive. To the west of the proposed site (west of the creek) are also vacant
lands fronting Cantrell Road. North of the site are single-family homes on large
acreages.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: F.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6219-B
3
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Johnson Ranch Neighborhood Association, the Westbury Neighborhood
Association, the Westchester Property Owners Association, all residents located
within 300-feet of the site who could be identified and all owners of property
located within 200-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. As of this
writing staff has received several phone calls concerning the proposed request.
D. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the River Mountain Planning
District. The Land Use Plan shows Transition for this property. Transition
provides for an orderly transition between residential uses and more intense
uses. Uses that might be considered in this area are low-density multifamily
residential and office uses if proposals are compatible with the quality of life in
nearby residential areas. The applicant has applied for a revised POD -Planned
Office Development to remove Office from the plan and facilitate an Office,
Showroom and Warehouse, which will not add any additional square footage to
the development. When comparing zoning permitted uses to the Land Use Plan,
the Office Showroom and Warehouse is considered a commercial use, not office,
thus not consistent with the area’s land use plan. A Land Use Plan amendment
is a separate item on this agenda (Item #F – File No. LU04-19-03).
This application would normally require a Land Use Plan Amendment. Presently
the Planning Staff is reviewing the Land Use Plan along this section of Highway
10. The review has just begun and the Planning staff is still receiving information
on the current Highway 10 Land Use Plan. Any change at this time would be
premature and possibly detrimental to the study effort.
Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial and Bella
Rosa is shown as a Local Street on the Master Street Plan. The purpose of a
Principal Arterial is to connect major traffic generators in an area and not to
provide access to adjoining properties. The function of a Local Street is to
provide access to adjacent property and the movement of traffic is considered a
secondary purpose. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and
may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site.
Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of
the development.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not
located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood
action plan.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: F.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6219-B
4
E. ANALYSIS:
The applicant is proposing to revise the previously approved POD to add an
additional use to the site. The applicant’s request is to add
office/showroom/warehouse activities to the site to allow flexibility in the
marketing of the site. The current approved site plan includes office/warehouse
and O-3, General Office uses, along with the ten percent accessory uses, as
allowable uses. The Zoning Ordinance defines Office/Showroom/Warehouse as
a facility for mixed use with the following characteristics: (1) A showroom for
display of product line which does not include items for user purchase, expect
within C-3 general commercial district; (2) A storage or warehouse facility which
occupies not more than sixty percent of the gross floor areas of the structure; (3)
The principal office of the business; (4) Sales to contractors or other businesses
installing or delivering to consumer and users. Staff does not feel the addition of
“showroom” activities will generate a large amount of additional customer traffic.
Contractor’s sales would be an allowable use for the site but not a retail paint
store.
Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request to add office/showroom/warehouse
as an allowable use on the site. The previous approval allowed O-3 uses with
ten percent of the gross floor area being utilized as O-3 accessory uses to be
located in the 29,000 square foot office/retail building. Staff does not feel the
addition of office/showroom warehouse as an allowable use for the site changes
the character of the development. The applicant has provided a building
elevation, which details and gives the appearance an office setting. Staff feels
limiting the commercial to ten percent of the gross floor area will not allow the
development to become a retail center. Staff does not feel the mini-warehouse
portion of the development will have a negative impact on the adjoining
properties since the mini-warehouse is located to the rear and screened by the
office uses in the front of the development. Staff feels the site will maintain an
overall office feel. The applicant has indicated through building elevations the
rear of the site will be screened and none of the commercial uses will be visible
from Cantrell Road. Only through this scenario does staff feel comfortable
allowing this development to locate on this site. The applicant has indicated
there is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for the proposed site.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request to allow office/showroom/warehouse
activities to locate within the development.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: F.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6219-B
5
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 7, 2004)
The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
stated the applicant had submitted a request dated September 23 2004, requesting the
item be deferred to the December 2, 2004 Public Hearing. Staff stated they were
supportive of the applicant’s request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion to place
the item on the Consent Agenda for deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes,
0 noes and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had filed to notify properties owners as
required by the Commission’s By-laws. Staff requested the item be deferred to the
January 20, 2005 Public Hearing.
There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to place the item on
the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: S-200-K
NAME: Northwest Territory Phase II Addition Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: Located North of Cantrell Road, East of Chenal Parkway.
DEVELOPER:
Pfeifer Development Company
900 South Shackleford Road, Suite 409
Little Rock, AR 72211
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 37.51 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 4 FT. NEW STREET: 6530 LF
CURRENT ZONING: C-3 – General Commercial District, O-3 – General Office
District and MF-18 – Multi-family District
PLANNING DISTRICT: 20 – Pinnacle Planning District
CENSUS TRACT: 42.05
Variance/Waivers: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 19,054 on February
17, 2004 zoning the area to C-3, O-3 and MF-18. The applicant is now
proposing a preliminary plat for the area. The preliminary plat includes four lots
totaling 37.51 acres. Two of the lots are zoned C-3 and contain 3.23 acres and
1.72 acres. One lot is zoned O-3 containing 7.23 acres and one lot is zoned MF-
18 containing 17.13 acres.
The applicant is proposing the development of 6530 linear feet of new streets as
a part of the development. Northwest Territory Parkway, a collector street, will
be extended from Cantrell Road to the north/northwest intersecting with Chenal
Parkway and Northwest Territory Court will be constructed to Commercial Street
standard.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-200-K
2
The applicant has indicated the development will be phased based on the market
demand. The proposed preliminary plat indicates the source of water from
Central Arkansas Water and the means of wastewater disposal from Little Rock
Wastewater Utility. No portion of the site is located within a floodway/floodplain.
The applicant has indicated the average slope of the lots is ten percent with
ranges from five to fifteen percent.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The property is undeveloped and mostly tree-covered. The property has varying
degrees of slope. There is one (1) single-family residence located at the
southeast corner of the overall property (19400 Cantrell Road) which takes
access from Cantrell Road. The general area contains a mixture of uses and
zoning. There is a convenience store, mini-warehouse development, apartment
complex and Easter Seals residential facility located along Chenal Parkway,
within the Northwest Territory Subdivision. There are single-family residences on
large tracts located to the northwest, with undeveloped R-2 zoned property
located to the north. There are single-family homes on large tracts and
undeveloped C-3 zoned property to the south across Cantrell Road. There is
undeveloped R-2 zoned property and a private school located to the east along
the north side of Cantrell Road. A church, single-family residences and
undeveloped R-2 zoned property are located to the west.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area
neighborhood association. The abutting property owners along with the
Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association, the Duquesne Place Property
Owners Association, the Margaux Place Property Owners Association, the
Maywood Manor Neighborhood Association and the Pinnacle Neighborhood
Association were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
1. The standard conditions shown on the plans as “Public Works Notes” apply to
the plat.
2. Additional right-of-way and turn lanes will be required at the intersection of the
Northwest Territory Parkway with Cantrell Road and Chenal Parkway. At
Cantrell Road, provide five lanes with 250-feet of stacking spaces
(northbound through, 2 south bound left turn lanes, southbound through and
south bound right). At Chenal Parkway provide four lanes (north bound
through, 2 south bound left turn lanes, south bound right/through).
3. Temporary cul-de-sacs may be required depending on phasing of
development.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-200-K
3
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 details.
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. This fee will apply to all meter connections including any
metered connections off the private fire system. There will be limits to floor
elevations allowed in this area. The limits will be determined by the uses and the
required fire flows. Water main extensions will be required. The hilltop adjacent to
this plat CANNOT be served because developer chose to install a main that is
inadequate to supply the elevations in that area.
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: (October 28, 2004)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the
request. Staff stated the proposal was a preliminary plat to subdivide 37 plus
acres of commercial, office and multi-family zoned property into four lots. Staff
noted there were additional items necessary to complete the review process.
Staff requested Mr. White provide a drainage analysis and a preliminary storm
drainage plan. Staff also requested Mr. White include the names of recorded
subdivisions abutting the plat area and the names of owners of abutting lands.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-200-K
4
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff questioned the street grade for
Northwest Territory Court. Staff stated Mr. White could provide a profile or a topo
with the grade indicated to assure the grade would comply with the Master Street
Plan requirement. Staff also stated a temporary turn-around would be required
on Northwest Territory Court. Mr. White questioned the requested design of
Northwest Territory Parkway. He stated the number of lanes was excessive for a
proposed collector street. Staff stated at the intersection with an arterial the
indicated design was required. Mr. White stated he would meet with staff to
discuss the request prior to the Public Hearing.
Staff stated there was a fire station to be located on a portion of Mr. Pfeifer’s
property and questioned the location of the proposed fire station. Mr. White
stated he was not clear on the exact location but would contact the owner and
provide staff with the exact location previously identified.
Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and
agencies indicating Mr. White contact them individually for further 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 October 28, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant
has indicated the names of recorded subdivisions abutting the plat area along
with the names of owners of abutting lands. The applicant has also provided a
preliminary storm drainage plan and a drainage analysis.
The applicant has indicated a temporary turn-around for Northwest Territory
Court as requested by staff at the October 28, 2004 Subdivision Committee
Meeting. The applicant has indicated new street construction for Northwest
Territory Parkway per Public Works requirements. The applicant has also
indicated the street grade per the Master Street Plan will be met.
The applicant has provided staff with the area selected for a future fire station.
The applicant has indicated the location of the fire station adjacent to the existing
mini-warehouse development fronting Chenal Parkway.
Staff is supportive of the proposed preliminary plat. The applicant is requesting
to subdivide 37 acres into four non-residential lots. The indicated lots follow
existing zoning lines of multi-family, office and commercial properties. The
indicated lots are adequate to meet the minimum requirements per the Zoning
Ordinance for each zoning classification. The proposed preliminary plat also
includes the placement of two new streets totaling 6530 linear feet. The streets
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-200-K
5
will be constructed to Master Street Plan standard with a 60-foot right-of-way and
36-feet of paving. The plat includes the phasing of the indicated lots and the
proposed street construction. The applicant has indicated the phases will be
market driven.
To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff feels the development of the indicated preliminary plat
should have minimal impact on the adjoining properties. The plat indicates lots
following existing zoning lines to allow the development of the area with future
multi-family, office and commercial uses.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the staff report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff stated to their knowledge there were no outstanding issues
associated with the proposed request and 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. A motion was made to place the item on
the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: S-643-C
NAME: The Pines Subdivision Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: located on Castle Valley Road, West of Chicot Road.
DEVELOPER:
Karim Shamoon/Ahmad Safi
7622 A Baseline Road
Little Rock, AR 72209
ENGINEER:
McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers
10 Otter Creek Court – Suite A
Little Rock, AR 72210
AREA: 33.81 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 64 FT. NEW STREET: 2820 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2 - Single-family, C-2 – Shopping Center District and MF-
12 – Multifamily 12 units per acre
PLANNING DISTRICT: 15 – Geyer Springs West
CENSUS TRACT: 41.05
Variance/Waivers: None requested.
The applicant failed to provide staff with the additional information requested at the
October 28, 2004, Subdivision Committee meeting. Staff recommends this item be
deferred to the January 20, 2005, Planning Commission Public Hearing.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
Mr. Pat McGetrick was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had failed to provide staff with the
additional information requested at the October 28, 2004 Subdivision Committee
meeting. Staff presented a recommendation the item be deferred to the January 20,
2005 Commission meeting.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-643-C
2
There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to place the item on
the Consent Agenda for Deferral. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: 3 FILE NO.: S-867-OOOOO
NAME: Chenal Valley Tract 1 Preliminary Plat Lots A – G
LOCATION: located on the Northeast corner of Rahling Road and Chenal Parkway
DEVELOPER:
Chenal Properties
#7 Valley Club Circle
Little Rock, AR 72211
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 16.95 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 7 FT. NEW STREET: 1724 LF
CURRENT ZONING: C-3 – General Commercial District, O-2 – Office and
Institutional District and MF-24 – Multi-family District
PLANNING DISTRICT: 19 – Chenal Planning District
CENSUS TRACT: 42.11
Variance/Waivers: None requested.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is proposing a preliminary plat for a site containing 16.95 acres
located east of Chenal Parkway and North of Rahling Road. The proposal
includes the subdivision of this parcel into seven lots currently zoned C-3, O-2
and MF-24. The average lot size proposed is 2.40 acres. The applicant has
indicated 1724 linear feet of new street will be added as a result of the proposed
preliminary plat. The applicant has identified North Drive and East Drive to be
constructed to Commercial Street standard with 60-feet of right-of-way and
36-feet of pavement.
The applicant has indicated building lines for the lots abutting Rahling Road. The
proposed preliminary plat indicates a 35-foot landscape buffer along Rahling
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-867-OOOOO
2
Road and a previously reserved 100-foot tract along Chenal Parkway indicated
as a 100-foot natural buffer. Three proposed front building lines are indicated
along Rahling Road. The proposed plat indicates a 50-foot building setback with
no parking, a 95-foot building setback with a single bay of parking and a 125-foot
building setback with a double bay of parking. The remainder of the lots will
conform to building setbacks per the Zoning Ordinance.
The proposed plat indicates streets will be constructed in one phase with the
sidewalk construction being phased with the final platting of the individual lots.
The proposed preliminary plat indicates the source of water as Central Arkansas
Water and the means of wastewater disposal as Little Rock Wastewater. The
proposed plat indicates no portion of the proposed plat area is located within the
floodway/floodplain.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is a vacant tree covered site bounded by Chenal Parkway to the west
and Rahling Road to the south. The site is currently zoned C-3, O-2 and MF-24.
The Villages at Rahling Road is located to the south and is currently zoned PCD.
Uses in the Villages at Rahling Road development include office and commercial
uses with a new Central Arkansas Branch Library under construction. To the
southwest of the site is a forty acre parcel currently zoned C-2, Shopping Center
District, which was recently approved for the development of a 500,000 plus
square foot Village Design shopping center.
Rahling Road is constructed as a four lane roadway with a median at the
intersection of Rahling Road and Chenal Parkway. Chenal Parkway is a
boulevard style street with a median and breaks only at major intersections.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. The
abutting property owners along with the Chenal Ridge Property Owners
Association and the Margaux Place Property Owners Association were notified of
the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
1. At arterial to arterial intersections, dual left turns are required under the
Master Street Plan. Provide two left turn lanes, two through lanes and a right
turn lane at Rahling Road.
2. A 20-foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of
Rahling Road and Chenal Parkway.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-867-OOOOO
3
3. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with
Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code of Ordinances and the Master Street
Plan.
4. The standard conditions shown on the plans as “Public Works Notes” apply to
the project.
5. Show location of Rahling Circle on the site plan. The new street should line
up with Rahling Circle or be spaced a sufficient distance to prevent traffic
conflicts.
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 details.
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. 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.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-867-OOOOO
4
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 28, 2004)
Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the
application. Staff presented an overview of the proposed preliminary plat
indicating there were additional items necessary to complete the review process.
Staff requested the applicant provide the source of title of the landowner, a storm
drainage analysis and a preliminary storm drainage plan. Staff also requested
the applicant provide the names of recorded subdivisions abutting the plat area
and the names of owners of abutting lands. Staff stated the majority of the plat
area was zoned C-3, General Commercial District. Staff stated a portion of the
property was currently zoned O-2 and MF-24 and requested the applicant apply
for a rezoning of these areas to “clean-up” the plat area.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff requested the indicated street
line up with Rahling Circle to the south. Staff also requested the applicant
indicate driveway locations on the proposed preliminary plat. Staff requested the
applicant provide sufficient stacking and taper at the intersection with Rahling
Road. Staff also questioned the phasing of the development. Mr. White stated
the lots would be final platted in phases based on the market demand. Staff
questioned when sidewalks would be put in place. Mr. White stated sidewalks
would be placed at the time of final platting or an in-lieu contribution would be
made for their construction.
Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and
agencies indicating Mr. White contact them individually for further 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 October 28, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant
has indicated the source of title of the landowner, a storm drainage analysis and
a preliminary storm drainage plan. The applicant has also included the names of
recorded subdivisions abutting the plat area and the names of owners of abutting
lands. The proposed preliminary plat indicates the roadway alignment with
Rahling Circle. The roadway also includes sufficient stacking and taper at the
intersection with Rahling Road.
The proposed preliminary plat indicates the proposed driveway locations with the
configuration being shared drives. The applicant has indicated the proposed
sidewalk placement will be at the time of final platting of each individual lot. Staff
is supportive of this request. Typically all improvements are required prior to the
City accepting a lot for final platting. The request is consistent with previous City
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-867-OOOOO
5
practices.
Staff is supportive of the proposed request. The applicant is proposing a
preliminary plat for a site containing 16.95 acres into seven lots currently zoned
C-3, O-2 and MF-24. The applicant has indicated 1724 linear feet of new street
will be added as a result of the proposed preliminary plat. North Drive and East
Drive will be constructed to Commercial Street standard with 60-feet of right-of-
way and 36-feet of pavement.
The applicant has indicated the building line for the lots abutting Rahling Road.
The proposed preliminary plat indicates a 35-foot landscape buffer along Rahling
Road and a previously reserved 100-foot wide tract along Chenal Parkway. The
building line indicates a 50-foot building setback with no parking, a 95-foot
building setback with a single bay of parking and a 125-foot building setback with
a double bay of parking. The remainder of the lots will conform to building
setbacks per the Zoning Ordinance. The indicated building setbacks are
adequate to meet the C-3, General Commercial District zoned properties building
setback requirement.
To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff is supportive of the proposed preliminary plat to allow
the development of this 16.95-acre site with seven commercially zoned lots
provided the applicant rezone the portions of proposed Lots C, D and E currently
zoned O-2 and MF-24 prior to final platting.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the
conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the staff report.
Staff recommends the applicant rezone the portions of Lots C, D and E currently
zoned O-2 and MF-24 prior to final platting.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff presented the item indicating to their knowledge there were no
outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. 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 the applicant rezone the portions of Lots C, D
and E currently zoned O-2 and MF-24 prior to final platting.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-867-OOOOO
6
There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to place the item on
the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: S-1463
NAME: Davis Addition Preliminary Plat
LOCATION: located at 16123 Whippoorwill Lane
DEVELOPER:
Richard and Leslie Davis
16123 Whippoorwill Lane
Little Rock, AR 72210
ENGINEER:
Donald W. Brooks
20820 Arch Street Pike
Hensley, AR 72065
AREA: 1.79 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family District
PLANNING DISTRICT: 17 – Crystal Valley Planning District
CENSUS TRACT: 42.08
Variance/Waivers: Waiver of required street construction to Whippoorwill Lane
and Crystal Valley Road.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes the subdivision of 1.79 acres into two single-family lots.
The proposed preliminary plat indicates dedication of right-of-way 55-feet from
centerline on Crystal Valley Road and 25-feet from centerline on Whippoorwill
Lane. The site plan also includes a private drive extending from Whippoorwill
Lane as a 20-foot access and utility easement.
The applicant has provided an approval from the Arkansas Department of Health
concerning the proposed wastewater collection and treatment system. The
applicant has also provided a letter from the area volunteer fire department
concerning their ability to serve the proposed development.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1463
2
The applicant is requesting a waiver of the required Master Street Plan one-half
street improvements to Crystal Valley Road and Whippoorwill Lane.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an existing single-family home located on acreage. The home
is located near the rear of the property adjacent to Whippoorwill Lane. There is
also a private drive located along the western property line allowing access to
homes and accessory structure to the south and southwest of the site. There are
several PCD zoning districts south of the site on Crystal Valley Road. These
areas were zoned as a part of the expansion of the Extraterritorial Planning
Jurisdiction into the area to recognize existing commercial uses present at the
time.
Homes in the area are both site built homes as well as singlewide and multi-
sectional manufactured homes. Crystal Valley Road is a two-lane roadway with
open ditches from drainage. Whippoorwill Lane is a narrow rural roadway
constructed of chip seal with open ditches for drainage.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. The
abutting property owners along with Southwest Little Rock United for Progress
Association were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
1. Crystal Valley Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal
arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 55-feet from centerline will be required.
Plat indicates the dedication.
2. Whippoorwill is classified as a local street (25-foot dedication from centerline)
and Crystal Lane is a private street. The plat indicates appropriate
dedications for right-of-way and easements.
3. Provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-
half street improvements to these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with the
planned development or obtain a Board of Directors waiver or deferral of
street construction.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Outside the service boundary. No comment.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1463
3
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at
the time of request for water service must be met. Contact Central Arkansas
Water regarding the size and location of the water meter. Approval of the City of
Little Rock is required prior to availability of water service.
Fire Department: Maintain access at 20-foot wide drives. Place fire hydrants per
code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional
information.
County Planning: This is a boundary survey. Pulaski County Planning &
Development requires the submittal of a subdivision plat with all certificates, data
and other pertinent notes attached, along with a Bill of Assurance.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: No comment.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 28, 2004)
Mr. and Mrs. Davis were present representing the request. Staff presented an
overview of the proposed development indicating there were additional items
necessary to complete the review process. Staff requested the applicant indicate
the names of owners of all abutting lands and the zoning classification within the
plat boundary. Staff also requested the applicant provide 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 the indicated rights-of-
ways were sufficient to meet the minimum Master Street Plan requirements.
Staff stated the applicant would be required to construct one-half street
improvements to the roadways or seek a waiver from the Little Rock Board of
Directors. Staff also stated the indicated private street was sufficient to meet the
minimum required width for fire department access.
Pulaski County Planning comments were addressed. Staff stated the indicated
plat did not contain the required information for the County to complete their
review. Staff requested the applicant indicate all certificates, data and other
pertinent notes attached, along with a Bill of Assurance for their final review.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1463
4
Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and
agencies indicating Ms. Davis contact them individually for further clarification.
Ms. Davis questioned if she was to coordinate with the Little Rock Fire
Department of the area Volunteer Fire Department. Staff stated it would be best
to work with both.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff addressing most of the
issues raised at the October 28, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The
revised preliminary plat indicates the names of owners of abutting lands and the
zoning classification within the plat boundary. The general notes section of the
proposed preliminary plat includes the source of water and the means of
wastewater disposal. The applicant has provided a letter from the area volunteer
fire department indicating their knowledge of the proposed development and their
ability to serve the new development.
Staff is supportive of the proposed request. The applicant has indicated the
subdivision of 1.79 acres into two single-family lots both to be served by the
placement of individual septic systems. The applicant has provided an approval
letter from the Arkansas Department of Health concerning the proposed
wastewater collection and treatment system. Staff is supportive of the
applicant’s indicated treatment.
The proposed preliminary plat indicates dedication of right-of-way 55-feet from
centerline on Crystal Valley Road and 25-feet from centerline on Whippoorwill
Lane. The site plan also includes a private drive extending from Whippoorwill
Lane as a 20-foot access and utility easement. The indicated rights-of-way are
adequate to meet the current Master Street Plan requirement and access criteria
for the fire department.
The applicant is requesting a waiver of the required Master Street Plan one-half
street improvements to Crystal Valley Road and Whippoorwill Lane. Staff is
supportive of this request. Historically in the Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction
the Board of Directors has waived the Master Street Plan construction
requirement for a lot split if the applicant were willing to dedicate right-of-way.
To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. The indicated lots are 0.95 acres and 0.84 acres sufficient to
meet the minimum ordinance requirements for single-family zoned property. The
proposed preliminary plat indicates a 35-foot building line adjacent to Crystal
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1463
5
Valley Road and 25-feet along Whippoorwill Lane. Both are adequate to meet
the minimum front building line requirement per the Subdivision Ordinance. Staff
does not feel the proposed subdivision of this parcel into two single-family lots
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 staff report.
Staff recommends approval of the applicant’s request for a waiver of required
street improvements to Whippoorwill Lane and Crystal Valley Road.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff stated to their knowledge there were no outstanding issues
associated with the proposed request and 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 applicant’s request for a
waiver of required street improvements to Whippoorwill Lane and Crystal Valley Road.
There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to place the item on
the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: Z-5803-A
NAME: Little Rock Auto Group Revised Short-form PCD
LOCATION: located at 12601 West Markham Street
DEVELOPER:
Little Rock Auto Group, Inc.
12601 West Markham Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
ENGINEER:
Development Consultants, Inc.
2200 North Rodney Parham Road, Suite 220
Little Rock, AR 72212
AREA: 3.31 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: PCD
ALLOWED USES: Automobile Dealership
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD
PROPOSED USE: Automobile Dealership – Placement of banners on utility
poles within the development
Variance/Waivers: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
On March 22, 1994, The Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed a request to rezone
the site from C-2, Shopping Center District to PCD to allow an automobile display, sales
and service business on the site located at the southwest corner of Chenal Parkway
and West Markham Street. The proposal involved the development of 3.31 acres and a
preliminary plat to subdivide 16.44 acres into two non-residential lots. The second lot
was to remain zoned C-2, Shopping Center District.
The PCD application proposed the construction of a 19,340 square foot building to
house the show room, offices and administration area, service area, and parts area; and
a 2,440 square foot sales office building. The building coverage was proposed at 15.11
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5803-A
2
percent of the land area and parking for 269 vehicles was proposed with the largest
majority being for display of vehicles. The main sales-service building was indicated as
an inverted “V” shaped building, and the two end points were proposed to be located
33.1 feet from the south property line.
The site plan included a primary sign to be a pole mounted sign no greater than
standard sign regulations for free-standing commercial signs (i.e. 36 feet in height and
160 square feet in area) and a monument sign which was to conform to the standards
set forth in the Design Overlay District for Chenal Parkway (i.e. 8 feet in height and 100
square feet in area). No additional right-of-way dedication was proposed along Chenal
Parkway. Construction of an additional traffic lane for Chenal Parkway was not
proposed; however construction of a deceleration lane on Chenal Parkway to the entry
drive off Chenal Parkway and the required sidewalk was to be built. The proposal
included Master Street Plan improvements to Atkins Road and West Markham Street.
During the Public Hearing process the applicant indicated to the Commission several
concessions were being offered to ease the area residents’ concerns. The developer
indicated a neighborhood meeting was held and several concerns were raised. The
developer stated there would be no body shop constructed as a part of the
development; there would be no outdoor paging of employees; there would be no off-
site parking of vehicles; there would be no on-street loading of vehicles being delivered;
there would be no circus tents, flashing lights, search lights, pendants or carnival type
promotions; test drive routes would be defined and not allowed through the Timber
Ridge neighborhood, and customers would be accompanied by sales representative
during test drives; and site lighting would be directional and controlled to light only the
site, and site lighting would be reduced after hours by two-thirds. The applicant offered
a second assurance he would not return to the Commission at a later time with a
request for tents or banners.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is interested in placing flags on approximately 17 light poles on the
Gwatney Pontiac Buick GMC Automobile dealership located at 12601 West
Markham Street. The flags would be approximately 3 ½ foot by 7 foot and
consist of 2 panels that are 21 inches wide and 7 feet long. The applicant has
indicated the flags are substantially similar to the ones that the City of Little Rock
uses for advertising activities at the zoo. The applicant has indicated the flags
will be used to differentiate the areas of the dealership between the different
brands of cars and also between the new and used cars sections.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site has a ownership different than the firm approved in 1994. The site is
now home to Gwatney Pontiac Buick GMC automobile dealership formerly
known as Dick Layton Buick GMC. To the south and east of the site are
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5803-A
3
commercial nodes including restaurants, furniture stores, fuel station, general
retail and a drycleaners to name a few. To the west of the site, across Atkins
Road, there is property zoned O-3 and PCD. The PCD zoned property is
developing as an office park. There is a branch bank proposed for the O-3
zoned property located at the corner of West Markham and Atkins Road.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from an area resident
concerning the proposed use of the property. All residents who could be
identified located within 300-feet of the site, the Parkway Place Property Owners
Association, the Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood
Association and all owners of property located within 200-feet of the site were
notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works: No comment regarding the placement of banners.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: No comment regarding the placement of banners.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: No objection to banners on light poles or other display
paraphernalia.
Fire Department: No comment regarding the placement of banners.
County Planning: No comment.
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 Commercial for this property. The applicant has
applied for a Revised PCD to allow the placement of banners on the property’s
exterior light poles.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5803-A
4
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
Master Street Plan: Chenal Parkway is shown as a Principal Arterial and West
Markham Street is shown as a Collector on the Master Street Plan. Chenal
Parkway is built to Principal Arterial standards and West Markham Street is built
to Collector Street standards adjacent to the property. The primary function of a
Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and connect major traffic generators or
activity centers within urbanized areas and the primary function of a Collector
Street is to provide a connection from local streets to arterials.
A Class I bikeway is identified on the 2004 Bicycle Plan on Chenal Parkway from
Bowman Road to Highway 10. The Chenal Parkway Class I Bikeway bypasses
the section of Chenal Parkway adjacent to the property and connects with West
Markham Street at Bowman Road and will not be affected by this case.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the
area covered by the Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan. The Office and
Commercial Development goal listed one objective relevant to this case. The
first objective is “Encourage all commercial and office development in the
community to be subject to neighborhood input prior to City approval.” This
objective consists of an action statement indicating the need to “Aggressively use
Planned Zoning Districts (PZDs) to influence more neighborhood-friendly and
better quality developments.” This application is an example of the how the
neighborhood’s input and concern can be expressed to the developer.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 28, 2004)
The applicant was not present. Staff stated the request was to place banners on
light poles within the automobile dealership. Staff presented a visual of the
requested banners and the proposed placement of the banners. Staff indicated
there were seventeen locations being requested on 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’s request is to place banners on seventeen light poles within the
existing automobile dealership. The flags are proposed at approximately 3 ½
feet by 7 feet and consist of 2 panels that are 21 inches wide and 7 feet long.
The proposal includes banners that are substantially similar to the ones that the
City of Little Rock uses for advertising activities at the zoo. The request includes
the placement of banners to differentiate the areas of the dealership between
various brand names of automobiles and between the new and used car section.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5803-A
5
Per Section 36-543 of the City of Little Rock Code of Ordinances banners,
pennants, festoons, searchlights are prohibited signs and sales promotional
devices except as allowed in Section 36-557, subsection (d). In this Section
temporary special event on-premises banners are allowed for a maximum of six
weeks per occasion, not to exceed four events per year.
Staff is not supportive of the applicant’s request. Typically in the past staff has
supported the placement of banners and pendants within shopping centers to
identify the shopping center and not individual businesses. Staff has also
supported the placement of banners along corridors and areas of special interest,
such as the River Market District, to publicize the area of interest. Staff is not
supportive of the placement of banners with business logos and names to
advertise specific businesses. Staff feels to allow the advertisement banners for
this automobile dealership is out of character with previous allowances and
should not be allowed in this case. In addition, the previous owner made
specific assurances to the neighborhood and the Commission this form of
advertisement would not be requested or allowed. Staff does not feel the change
in ownership should negate the previous commitments.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
Mr. Bill Gwatney and Mr. Ron Hope were present representing the request. There was
one registered objector present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of
denial.
Mr. Bill Gwatney addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. He stated his
firm leased the site from the owner and was not aware of previous commitments made
regarding the placement of banners on the site. He stated the site held three lines of
automobiles and was a difficult site to market due to ingress and egress problems. He
stated he was agreeable to amending his request to allow the placement of banners on
a reduced number of light poles. He stated it was important to allow banners for the
three franchises held for the site and a banner for the used automobile section.
Commissioner Rector questioned if he was requesting to be able to place banners in
eight locations for a total of sixteen banners. Mr. Gwatney stated this was his amended
request or four poles each containing two banners.
Mr. Ron Hope addressed the Commission. He stated he was not aware of any
neighborhood opposition to the request. He stated the banners would be tastefully
constructed and properly maintained. He stated the request was very similar to the
banners used by the City to advertise Boo at the Zoo.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5803-A
6
Ms. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in opposition to the proposed request. She
stated she was around when the sign ordinance was amended in 1994 to eliminate the
placement of banners on poles. She stated by allowing the banners to advertise special
events or to advertise neighborhoods was acceptable but to allow the banners to
advertise merchandise was not acceptable. She stated the dealership could
accomplish the same goal with the placement of ground-mounted signage directing
customers to particular areas. She stated the placement of banners on the poles was
commercial advertisement beyond the scope of what was acceptable. She stated the
neighborhood was not in attendance because the owner and the City made
commitments when the PCD was approved to not allow the placement of this form of
advertisement.
There was a general discussion by the Commission concerning the site and the need
for the placement of this advertisement mechanism to direct customers on the site. It
was stated typically on a lot the sales representatives directed customers to particular
areas and signage was not necessary. It was also suggested that if the automobile
dealerships were allowed to use this form of advertisement other businesses such as
Home Depot would also want to use banners to advertise their goods. Commissioner
Rector stated he did not feel this was the same since automobiles were located outside
and other businesses merchandise was located in doors. He stated he did not view this
as the same request.
A motion was made to approve the request as amended to allow the placement of
banners on eight light poles with two banners per pole for a total of sixteen banners.
The motion carried by a vote of 7 ayes, 2 noes and 2 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: Z-6120-J
NAME: Capitol Lakes Estates Governors Manor Long-form PD-R
LOCATION: located North of Capitol Hills Boulevard at Rushmore Avenue
DEVELOPER:
Capitol Lakes Estates LLC
P.O. Box 13256
Maumelle, AR 72113
ENGINEER:
William L. Dean, Civil Design, Inc.
15104 Cantrell Road
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 9.12 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 45 FT. NEW STREET: 1327 LF
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential
PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R
PROPOSED USE: Single-family residential
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Plat Variances -
1. A variance to allow a reduced front lot width on selected lots.
2. A variance to allow a reduced lot depth on selected lots.
3. A variance to allow a reduced minimum lot square footage on selected lots.
4. A variance to allow a reduced front yard building line on selected lots.
5. A variance to allow the development of the subdivision with private streets.
BACKGROUND:
The Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed a proposed preliminary plat application
for the site at their April 22, 2004 Public Hearing. The Commission made a
recommendation of approval of the proposed preliminary plat, which was then
forwarded to the Little Rock Board of Directors for final action on September 7, 2004.
The Little Rock Board of Directors denied the requested variances for the proposed
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6120-J
2
preliminary plat and suggested the applicant refile the request as a PD-R through the
planned development process. The applicant is now filing the PD-R request to rezone
the site and place certain conditions on the PD-R zoning as outlined below.
A. APPLICANT’S STATEMENT/PROPOSAL REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting the subdivision of this 9.12-acre site into 45 single-
family lots through the planned development process with the creation of a
plat/plan. The proposed request will result in a density of 4.9 units per acre.
There are several variances from the Subdivision Ordinance being requested as
a part of the development. The applicant has requested a reduced front building
line, reduced lot depth, a reduced lot width on several of the proposed lots and a
reduced minimum lot square footage. The applicant has also indicated the
subdivision will be designed as a gated community but the gates will not be
installed at this time.
The proposed development indicates the average size of the lots as 50-feet by
90-feet. The proposed lots are designed to accommodate “patio” or “garden
style” homes with smaller yards. Buildable areas on the lots range from
approximately 4600 to 2150 square feet with the smallest allowable residence to
be 1600 square feet. The proposed development will have a density of 4.9 units
per acre. The lots will have a 12.5-foot front building line, 5-foot side yard
setbacks, and 10-foot rear yard setback. Each lot will have a minimum of 1600
square feet of private open space.
The development will construct 1327 feet of private street, built to City standard.
The entrance of the development is designed to be gated at a later date if the
property owners association elects to install gates. All drainage facilities will be
constructed to current City standard.
All structures built inside the development will be subject to approval of an
Architectural Control Committee. The Developer will function as the Declarent
for the Architectural Control Committee until the Development has sufficient
members to fill the committee. The Declarent may appoint an Approving Agent
to administer all architectural control duties, which will approve or disapprove all
plans. No improvement shall be constructed or maintained on any lot unless
prior approval is obtained from the Declarent.
The proposed improvement plans shall indicate the location of the proposed
improvement on the lot, along with any driveways or sidewalks, to ensure
adequate views and privacy within the subdivision. Only one detached single-
family residence not to exceed two and one-half stories in height will be placed
on any lot. All residence less than 3000 square feet shall have a minimum roof
pitch of 10/12 and those greater than 3000 square feet shall have a minimum
roof pitch of 8/12. All roofs shall have architectural shingles. All exteriors shall
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6120-J
3
be 100 percent brick, dryvit or rock to the facia, with siding being permitted above
the facia. Each lot will be allowed one accessory structure. The accessory
structure will be of an architectural design and exterior finish in harmony with the
residence and general surroundings. The accessory structure shall not exceed
the height or floor area of the principal dwelling. No prefabricated structures or
metal buildings will be permitted as accessory structures.
The Declarent shall install a six foot tall wrought iron fence along all lot lines
which abut Capitol Hills Boulevard and the Oasis Renewal Center, specifically
the side lot line of Lots 1, 45, 37, 36, 29, and 28; which are adjacent to Capitol
Hills Boulevard, and the rear lot line of Lots 9 through 28; which are adjacent to
the Oasis Renewal Center. Lot owners shall not be allowed to remove or install
any other fencing along those lot lines where the Declarent has installed wrought
iron fencing. All privacy fences installed by the lot owner shall be six feet in
height and 100 percent cedar wood. No chain link or similar fence will be used
under any circumstances. Any retaining walls shall be constructed of 100
percent brick, brick or stucco material.
The applicant has indicated the Property Owners Association will be responsible
for maintaining the wrought iron fencing installed by the Declarent. The areas
designated on the plat as Pennsylvania Court, Governors Cove, Pennsylvania
Avenue, the entrance and exit gates to the property, all related landscaping
islands and related structures, and all improvements are to be maintained by the
Property Owners Association. The open space and Lake Governor is to be
maintained by the owners of lots in the proposed subdivision in conjunction with
the owners of lots in Phase 1B, Capitol Lakes Estates Addition to the City of Little
Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas.
The applicant has indicated there is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for this
parcel of property.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is vacant and tree covered. Capitol Hills Boulevard is in place to the
south of the proposed subdivision. Rushmore Avenue has also been constructed
extending to the south of Capitol Hills Boulevard.
A multi-family apartment complex is located to the south of the site. That
development will be constructed in three phases with the first phase complete
and two additional phases proposed.
Other uses in the area include the Oasis Renewal Center located northeast of
the site and the Spring Valley Manor Subdivision located south of the area.
Cooper Orbit Road borders the eastern boundary of the property. The roadway
is a narrow unimproved roadway with deep ditches in several locations.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6120-J
4
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from an area resident
concerning the proposed use of the property. All residents who could be
identified located within 300-feet of the site, the Spring Valley Manor
Homeowners Association and all owners of property located within 200-feet of
the site were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Private streets must be built to the same standard as public streets. A
continuous sidewalk would be required on Pennsylvania Avenue,
Pennsylvania Court, and Governor’s Cove. No sidewalk would be required
on the cul-de-sacs.
2. Street names and street naming conventions must be approved by Public
Works. Contact David Hathcock at (501) 371-4808.
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.
4. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing street lights as 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. Because of the exit gate arrangement, solid waste from Lots 43, 44 and 45
must be collected from the west side of Governor’s Cove.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements, if service is
required for the project. Relocation of existing sewer main required from under
proposed Lake and embankments.
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
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6120-J
5
to normal charges. A water main extension and installation of private fire
hydrants 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.
County Planning: No comment.
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 Single Family for this property. The applicant has
applied for a Planned Residential Development -PRD for a single family plat.
The density will not be greater than six homes per acres. The request does not
require a change to the Land Use Plan.
Master Street Plan: Capital Hills Boulevard is shown as a Minor Arterial while
Rushmore Avenue and Cooper Orbit Road are shown as Collectors on the
Master Street Plan. Partial improvements are in place on the streets and
portions of these streets 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: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 28, 2004)
Mr. James Dreher of Civil Design Consulting Engineers was present representing
the request. Staff stated the development was previously reviewed by the
Commission as a preliminary plat but the associated variances were denied by
the Board of Directors. Staff stated, upon encouragement by the Board of
Directors the applicant had resubmitted the request as a PD-R. Staff noted there
were assurances from the Bill of Assurance that could be considered through the
PD-R that could not be considered with a preliminary plat.
Staff requested Mr. Dreher provide additional items necessary to compete the
review process. Staff requested Mr. Dreher correct the number of lots in the
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6120-J
6
general notes section of the proposed site plan. Staff also requested he provide
the total acreage of the lake and the areas identified as green space on the
proposed preliminary plat. Staff questioned if the development would be
constructed on a single phase or in multiple phases. Mr. Dreher stated the
development could be final platted in one phase.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff noted sidewalks would be
required within the development. Mr. Dreher stated sidewalks would be placed
on all streets except the cul-de-sac streets. Staff noted a grading permit would
be required prior to final development.
Staff noted the comment from Little Rock Wastewater concerning the existing
sewer line located under the proposed lake. Mr. Dreher stated the sewer line
would be relocated prior to construction of the lake. 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 on November 3, 2004
addressing most of the issues raised at the October 28, 2004 Subdivision
Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated all proposed setbacks and
indicated the proposed open space areas as tracts. The applicant has also
indicated sidewalks as requested by Public Works. The applicant has indicated
the sewer line will be relocated prior to construction of the detention basin/pond.
The proposed development indicates an average lot size of fifty-feet by ninety-
feet or 4,500 square feet. The proposed development will require plat variances
from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow reduced front lot widths, reduced lot
depths and reduced lot minimum square footage. A variance is required for Lots
2 – 35 and 38 - 44 for a reduced minimum lot width and a variance is required for
Lots 1 – 34 and Lots 37 – 45 for a reduced lot depth. Lots 2 – 35 and 38 – 44
are proposed with square footages less then the required 7,000 square feet.
The applicant has also indicated a front building line of twelve and one-half-feet
on all the proposed lots adjacent to the interior streets. The applicant has
indicated the minimum buildable area on each lot with 2,150 square feet being
the minimum proposed and an average buildable area of 2,620 square feet. The
applicant has also indicated the side yard setback as five feet and a rear yard
setback of ten feet. The applicant has indicated the building line adjacent to
Capitol Hills Boulevard as thirty-five feet, consistent with the minimum required
building line adjacent to an arterial street.
The applicant has indicated the development will be enclosed with a six-foot
wood fence adjacent to the street and within the required building setback. The
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6120-J
7
typical maximum fencing height located within the required building setback is
four-feet. Staff is supportive of the placement of the six-foot fence within the
proposed building setback.
The applicant has indicated the development of the subdivision with private
streets. Approximately 1,318 linear feet of new street will be added as a result of
the development. The development is proposed as a gated community with the
gates to be added in the future should the Property Owners Association elect to
do so. The applicant has indicated the call box will be located sixty-six feet from
the roadway (Capitol Hills Boulevard); sufficient to allow stacking of three cars.
The site plan indicates a minimum opening of thirteen feet with a center island
between the two proposed gates. Typically staff is supportive of this
configuration when two entrances are proposed.
The applicant has indicated cul-de-sacs with a minimum fifty-foot turning radius.
The proposed turning radius is typical for cul-de-sac street development and is
adequate to allow turning of city vehicles such as fire and garbage collection
trucks.
Staff is supportive of the proposed development. The proposed development is
indicated as a patio home development and the applicant has indicated a
minimum buildable area sufficient to construct homes similar in size to homes in
the area. The proposed density of the development is 4.9 units per acre,
consistent with single-family development per the City’s Future Land Use Plan.
To staff’s knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff feels if the proposed homes are developed as proposed,
there will be minimal 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 approval of the requested variance to allow reduced lot widths
for Lots 2-35 and 38 – 44.
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow reduced lots
depths for Lots 1-34 and 37-45.
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow reduced lot
minimum square footages for Lots 2-35 and 38-44.
Staff recommends approval of the request to allow the development of the
subdivision with private streets.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6120-J
8
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow the placement of a
six-foot fence within the required building setback adjacent to Capitol Hills
Boulevard.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
The applicant was present representing the request. There was one registered objector
present. Staff presented the item with a positive recommendation of the proposed
rezoning request.
Mr. Baker Kurrus addressed the Commission with concerns for future development in
the area. He stated the City had barricaded the ends of the former Cooper Orbit Road,
which had effectively prohibited him access to his property. He stated the phasing plan
for Capitol Lake Estates indicated access to his property would be provided by a
connection through Tract C. He stated his main concern was that a new street would
not be constructed and the right-of-way would be abandoned and he would no longer
have access to his property.
Staff stated there was a proposed connection shown on the preliminary plat for Tract C.
Staff stated the right-of-way for Cooper Orbit Road had not been abandoned and
accommodations would be made to allow access to his property prior to that right-of-
way abandonment.
A motion was made to approve the request. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes,
0 noes and 2 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: LU04-17-02
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Crystal Valley Planning District
Location: 17415 Lawson Road
Request: Neighborhood Commercial to Commercial
Source: Kenny Loux
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the Crystal Valley Planning District from Neighborhood
Commercial to Commercial. The Commercial category includes a broad range of retail
and wholesale sales of products, personal and professional services, and general
business activities. The applicant would like to use an existing vacant building and
graveled lot for a used car lot and vehicle maintenance activities.
Prompted by this Land Use Amendment request, the Planning Staff expanded the area
of review to include the entire Neighborhood Commercial extending southwest from the
Lawson-Sullivan Road intersection. With these changes, 78% of the existing
Neighborhood Commercial node would be converted to Commercial. It is thought that
the additional area would make the boundaries more logical and incorporate existing
businesses.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is partially developed with a mobile home in the center of the lot and a
metal building located at the front of the lot currently zoned C-1 Neighborhood
Commercial District and 1.97 acres ± in size. The application is in the Extraterritorial
Planning Area and the area has several non-conforming uses. The land north of the
site and on the opposite side of Lawson Road is zoned R-2 -Single Family District
consisting of several single family homes and mobile homes situated on narrow lots
close to Lawson Road because of the hilly terrain rising from the roadway. Northwest of
the site is an area zoned C-1 -Neighborhood Commercial District similar in terrain with
additional homes, an abandoned multiple bay coin carwash, and land zoned C-3 with a
garage and a small auto/parts salvage yard. Directly east of the property is a CUP -
Conditional Use Permit for the Crystal Volunteer Fire Department. Further east at the
Lawson/Sullivan Road Intersection is a PCD with two small business uses including
Wickety Wax Candle Manufacturing and Tactfully Done Upholstery. On the opposite
side of Sullivan Road are two small buildings, one a seasonal sno-cone outlet and the
other an office use, Custom Advertising Products, Inc. Further southeast of the property
are additional single family homes fronting Lawson Road on narrow lots. South of the
site are several mobile homes on single family lots fronting Minton Road and vacant
wooded land. Immediately west is a PCD for a seasonal sno-cone stand and mobile
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-17-02
2
home. Further to the west at Morehart Road is land zoned R-2 with several single
family homes on large lots. Northwest of the property is additional R-2 land with an
abandoned auto sales building with a gravel lot, and a mobile home with a small
auto/parts salvage yard.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
June 1, 1999. A change was made from Single Family to Neighborhood Commercial on
the south side of Lawson Road, west of Sullivan Road, expanding the existing
Neighborhood Commercial to including the applicant’s property for proposed
development.
The surrounding areas are shown as Single Family. A node of Neighborhood
Commercial 6.4 acres ± in size exists at the intersection of Sullivan and Lawson Roads.
This node expands west from Sullivan Road on the south side of Lawson Road to
include the applicant’s property.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Lawson Road and Sullivan Road are shown as Minor Arterials on the Master Street
Plan. The purpose of a Minor Arterial is to provide connections to and through an urban
area. Lawson Road may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street
improvements.
Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the
development.
PARKS:
The property under review is not located in a recognized Park Planning District and
does not show any existing or proposed parks in the area.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this amendment.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock
recognized neighborhood action plan.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-17-02
3
ANALYSIS:
This section of Lawson Road lies in a rural area of Pulaski County and was added to the
City’s Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction March 1, 1988. The present Neighborhood
Commercial was established in 1992 to represent a small commercial node at the
intersection of two minor arterial streets. Typically commercial areas are located at
major intersections and limited to approximately five acres. The Neighborhood
Commercial area was chosen to provide low intensity commercial activities in the area
while protecting the area’s rural character. Originally (1992) the area shown as
Neighborhood Commercial was 2.4 acres ± in size and on June 1, 1999 Ordinance
#18,030 was approved expanding the Neighborhood Commercial area from the
southwest corner of the Sullivan-Lawson Road intersection towards the applicant’s
property which was shown as Single Family. This expansion was initiated at the
request of the owner of the land in 1999, not the present applicant. The expansion
added 4.2 acres ± of Neighborhood Commercial bringing the total amount shown to 6.4
acres ±, more than double that of 1999.
The existing Neighborhood Commercial area is surrounded by numerous single family
homes in a rural atmosphere. Because of steep terrain on the north side of the
roadway, a majority of the homes have situated themselves close to the roadway giving
this section of Lawson Road a rural community atmosphere. The existing area
presently shown as Neighborhood Commercial is more than adequate for area
residents at this time. Due to the topography of the area developments on the north
side of Lawson Road will have to be smaller scale to prevent major cuts or fills, which is
supportive of the Neighborhood Commercial concept. Also, when future street
improvements are made to Lawson Road topography will prevent large commercial
development from occurring on the north side of the property.
Showing this land as Commercial would result in a strip of Commercial shown on the
south side of Lawson Road. Identifying a strip of Commercial could lead to large scale
high intensity strip commercial development, which could be incompatible with adjacent
uses. Incompatible uses could result in pressure to expand the Commercial in the area
resulting in larger scale more intense uses. Due to the topography north of Lawson
Road large scale Commercial uses will be limited unless major cut and fill operations
are undergone. Further changes could also result in a higher intensity Commercial
node at the Stewart and Lawson Roads intersection. Since the area in question is
shown as Neighborhood Commercial, uses could be limited in scale and intensity
leading to more desirable commercial activities. The Neighborhood Commercial shown
does indicate a strip of Commercial on the south side of Lawson Road and could lead
strip commercial. However, since it is Neighborhood Commercial, scale and intensity
can be limited making future development more compatible with surrounding land uses.
Limiting uses in this area to Neighborhood Commercial will be more compatible with
surrounding Single Family and the existing Neighborhood Commercial in the area.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-17-02
4
Almost 90%, 5.6 acres ±, of the Neighborhood Commercial shown is being used for
commercial or office use. Generally the businesses located in the area are not targeted
at the immediate area residents. Auto repair, candle manufacturing, scrap yards,
advertising agencies, and upholstery typically draw from a larger demographic area as
compared to the local sno-cone shops. In turn showing this area as Commercial might
better recognize the existing businesses in the area and facilitate similar businesses in
the future. However, in the area there is an abundance of land shown as Commercial
or Mixed Commercial Industrial. This Neighborhood Commercial area makes up just
25% of the 33 acres ± identified for commercial uses within a mile of the site. Uses of
higher intensities have been centered at the intersection of Marsh and Lawson Roads
while the lower intensity uses have been centered at the present location of the
Neighborhood Commercial. Changing this area to a higher intensity use could be
considered premature due the amount of Commercial shown less than a mile west of
the property. The land west of the application is more suitable for Commercial activities
focusing on a larger demographic area.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Crystal Valley Property
Owners Association and the Plantation House Homeowners Association. Staff has
received four comments from area residents. None are in support, two are opposed to
the change, and two were neutral.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is not appropriate. A Neighborhood Commercial area
provides low intensity uses to a local area. Higher intensity commercial uses would be
incompatible with the existing rural residential character of the community, and land is
shown less than a mile west that can facilitate the applicant’s request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the January 20, 2005
Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to wavier 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 9 ayes, 0 noes, and 2 absent. A motion was made to approve
the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: 7.1 FILE NO.: Z-6683-A
NAME: Loux Short-form PCD
LOCATION: located at 17415 Lawson Road
DEVELOPER:
Kenny Loux
18305 Lawson Road
Little Rock, AR 72210
ENGINEER:
Delton Brown Land Surveying
2421 County Line Road
Little Rock, AR 72210
AREA: 1.97 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: C-1, Neighborhood Commercial District and
R-2, Single-family District
ALLOWED USES: Limited retail development adjacent to neighborhoods
and Single-family
PROPOSED ZONING: PD-C and R-2
PROPOSED USE: Used car automobile dealership and Single-family
Variance/Waivers:
1. A five year deferral of the required Master Street Plan improvements to Lawson
Road.
BACKGROUND:
Ordinance No. 18,063 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on July 20, 1999,
rezoned the north 180-feet of the site from R-2, Single-family to C-1, Neighborhood
Commercial and left the remainder of the site zoned R-2, Single-family District. A
Conditional Use Permit was also approved for the site to allow a furniture repair
business to operate on the site. An older singlewide manufactured home was located
on the southern half of the tract, which remained zoned R-2, Single-family. The
applicant proposed the construction of a new 40-foot by 80-foot metal building on the
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6683-A
2
north one half of the site. Signage was to be limited to signage allowed in offices zones
or six feet in height and sixty-four square feet in area.
Deed Document No. 2000024890 indicates a dedication of right-of-way to the City of
Little Rock 20 of additional feet from the south right-of-way line of Lawson Road.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes the rezoning of the portion of this 1.97-acre parcel
previously zoned from C-1, Neighborhood Commercial District (the north 180-
feet) to PD-C to allow the sale of used automobiles from the site. The remainder
of the property will remain zoned R-2, Single-family District. The property is
located outside the City Limits but within the Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction.
The applicant has indicated the existing building will be used for vehicle
maintenance. The applicant’s cover letter indicates vehicle maintenance will
include repair or replacement of worn parts and damaged body parts. The site
plan also indicates 36 parking spaces for the display automobile inventory.
The proposed site plan includes two areas for building expansion. The site plan
includes the placement of a 30-foot by 40-foot addition to the west side of the
building and the addition of a 60-foot by 30-foot area to the rear of the building.
The applicant has indicated these expansion areas for potential growth should
the need arise in the future. The applicant has indicated employee parking will
be located in the rear of the building.
The site plan indicates paved areas will be constructed of ground asphalt
compacted to a minimum of four inches. The material will then be sealed to
maintain the hard surface.
The applicant is requesting a five (5) year deferral of the required street
improvements to Lawson Road.
The applicant has indicated there is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for this
parcel of property.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The property is located outside the City limits but within the City’s Extraterritorial
Planning Jurisdiction. The area is very rural in nature with the predominate land
uses being single-family homes on large tracts and large tracts of undeveloped
property. A small commercial node is located just east of this site, at the
intersection of Lawson and Sullivan Roads. Several small businesses are
located at that intersection. There is a local volunteer fire department and a
small commercial business located adjacent to the site.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6683-A
3
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area
resident concerning the proposed use of the property. All residents who could be
identified 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. There is not an
active neighborhood association located in the area.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Lawson Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A
dedication of right-of-way 45-feet from centerline will be required.
2. With future construction, provide design of street conforming to the Master
Street Plan for a five lane arterial. Construct one-half street improvement to
the street with the planned development or obtain a Board of Directors
deferral of street construction.
3. The site is outside of the existing corporate limits. No storm water detention
or grading permits are required.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Outside the service boundary. No comment.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or
additional water meter(s) are required. The Fire Department having jurisdiction
needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private
fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will
be installed at the Developer's expense.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: A 40-foot building line is required along all property lines that
adjoin residential properties. Indicate owners and uses of all adjoining parcels on
the site plan.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6683-A
4
Indicate the actual right-of-way line. The County will not allow a cable fence to
be installed less than 20-feet from centerline of Lawson Road, it is neither legal
nor safe.
All driveways accessing County roads require permitting from Pulaski County
Road and Bridge (501) 340-6800.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Crystal Valley Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has
applied for a Planned Commercial Development -PCD for a used car lot featuring
30-40 vehicles. Vehicle maintenance and repair will be done in an existing
building on site.
A land use plan amendment for a change to Commercial is a separate item on
this agenda (File No. LU04-17-02 – Item #7).
Master Street Plan: Lawson Road and Sullivan Road are shown as Minor
Arterials on the Master Street Plan. The purpose of a Minor Arterial is to provide
connections to and through an urban area. Lawson Road may require dedication
of right-of-way and may require street improvements.
Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of
the development.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not
located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood
action plan.
Landscape: The plan submitted does not allow for the 28-foot wide on-site
street buffer required along Lawson Road. 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 of the site.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 28, 2004)
Mr. Kenny Loux 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 Mr. Loux provide
details of the proposed vehicle maintenance to be performed on the site. Mr.
Loux stated limited bodywork would be preformed on automobiles but no parts
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6683-A
5
would be stored on the site. Staff also requested a detailed parking plan. Mr.
Loux stated automobiles would be placed along the western perimeter and along
the roadway frontage of Lawson Road.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the required right-of-way
dedication would be 45-feet from centerline. Mr. Loux questioned the required
right-of-way to meet County standard. Pulaski County Planning staff stated 25-
feet. Mr. Loux questioned if the dedication could meet the County standard and
not City standard. Staff stated not without a waiver from the Little Rock Board of
Directors concerning the Master Street Plan requirements. (It was later
determined the right-of-way is currently in place at 45-feet from the centerline.)
Mr. Loux also stated to install the street improvements at this time would be a
hardship. Staff stated he could seek a deferral from the Little Rock Board of
Directors concerning the required improvements.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed site plan did
not meet the minimum ordinance requirement of 28-feet. Staff stated at a
minimum a landscape strip of nine feet would be required along Lawson Road to
meet the City Beautiful Commission requirement. Staff stated less than nine feet
would require the applicant to make application to the City Beautiful Commission
for relief.
County Planning comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed gate
would not be allowed in the location indicated. Staff stated the location was not
legal and created a safety concern.
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 October 28, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant
has indicated a detailed parking plan for the site. The applicant has also
indicated only minor engine repair and minor body repair will be conducted on
the site. The applicant has indicated there will be no storage of parts or materials
on the site other than automobiles display. The applicant is requesting the
placement of automobiles within the existing right-of-way and the placement of a
cable fence within the existing right-of-way.
The applicant has indicated the hours of operation will be from 7:00 am to 8:00
pm six days per week. The applicant has indicated there will not be a dumpster
located on the site. The applicant is not requesting any ground signage as a part
of the development. The site plan includes the placement of signage on the
awning located on the front of the building. The applicant has indicated there will
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6683-A
6
be four employees of the business. The applicant has also indicated site lighting
will be low level and directional, directed inward away from residentially zoned
properties.
The applicant has indicated two expansion areas. One expansion area is located
to the west of the building and is located approximately 35-feet from the Lawson
Road property line and approximately 15.3 feet from the western property line.
The second expansion area is located to the rear of the existing building. The
applicant has indicated these expansion areas are to allow for future growth.
The expansion areas are estimated at 1200 square feet and 1800 square feet.
Employee parking has been designated adjacent to the rear expansion area.
The applicant has indicated display parking on the proposed site plan. The
applicant has indicated 14 parking spaces fronting Lawson Road within the
existing right-of-way. The applicant has also indicated 22 parking spaces along
the western property line. The total available display parking indicated is 36
parking spaces. The applicant has indicated parking will be constructed of
reclaimed asphalt grindings compacted with 6-inches to 8-inches of material,
rolled and seal coated within one year.
The existing manufactured home on the site is to remain. The home is used as a
residence and is not proposed as any alternative uses. Access to the home is
located along the eastern property line by a single drive shared by the proposed
automobile dealership.
The applicant is requesting a waiver of the required landscaping on the site.
The typical minimum ordinance requirement for a site of this depth would be a
28-foot wide on-site street buffer along Lawson Road and 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 of the site. The site
plan does not include any areas identified for landscape or land use buffers.
Staff is not supportive of the proposed request. The indicated site plan does not
comply with current city ordinances and county ordinances with regard to building
setbacks and landscaping. Per the current County Ordinances, all buildings
should be set a minimum of 40-feet from all property lines. The building with
expansion is indicated at approximately 35-feet from the front property line and
15.3 feet from the western property line. To be allowed the expansion areas a
variance from Pulaski County Planning Board would have to be approved. Staff
does not feel approving a site plan that does not meet current County
requirements is appropriate without the County Planning Board first approving
the variances.
The site was zoned C-1, Neighborhood Commercial District with a Conditional
Use Permit to allow furniture repair on the site. Staff feels the requested use as
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 7.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6683-A
7
a automobile dealership with automobile body repair (which is typically allowed in
C-4, Open Display District) is too intense for the site. In addition, staff is not
supportive of the placement of the indicated cable fence within the existing right-
of-way. The placement of the cable within the right-of-way creates a safety
concern as well as a liability concern for the County. Staff is also not supportive
of the applicant’s request to display vehicles within the existing right-of-way. The
applicant has indicated the additional area is needed to allow the use of the site
as an automobile dealership. Staff feels the applicant may be trying to do too
much on the site if this 20-feet is required to make the project work.
Staff feels the site should utilize the existing neighborhood commercial uses as
was previously approved. Staff feels the open display district is too intense for
the area.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a letter requesting the item
be deferred to the January 20, 2005 public hearing. Staff stated the request would
require a waiver of the By-laws for the late deferral request. A motion was made to
waive the By-laws for the later deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes,
0 noes and 2 absent.
There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to place the item on
the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: Z-7025-B
NAME: Creekwood Plaza Revised Long-form PCD
LOCATION: located on the Northeast corner of Kanis Road and Bowman Road
DEVELOPER:
Creekwood Plaza LLC
c/o Davis Properties
P.O. Box 241025
Little Rock, AR 72223
ENGINEER:
Terry Burruss Architects
1202 Main Street
Little Rock, AR 72202
AREA: 6.41 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: PCD
ALLOWED USES: Office/Warehouse/Commercial
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD
PROPOSED USE: Office/Warehouse/Commercial – allowance for outdoor
dining and a change in allowed uses.
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
The Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 18,515 on July 3, 2001, establishing
West Park Office Centre – Long-form PCD. The applicant proposed to construct eight
(8) buildings to be used as a mixed office warehouse development. The proposed use
mix was as follows:
Buildings A – D 60% Commercial (C-3 permitted uses) 40% General /Professional Office
Building E General/Professional Office
Buildings F - H Office/Office-Warehouse, with a maximum of 70% warehouse space
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7025-B
2
The proposed development was to have approximately 28,830 square feet of
commercial space, 45,830 square feet of office space and 25,410 square feet of
warehouse space. The development was proposed to have 233 parking spaces.
There were to be two access points; one driveway from Kanis Road and one driveway
from Bowman Road. The proposed site plan included a monument-type ground-
mounted sign near the southwest corner of the property. The applicant indicated the
sign would have a maximum height of eight (8) feet and maximum area of 160 square
feet.
The development was to be developed in two (2) phases. Phase I was to include
Buildings A – C, associated parking areas and a single access point from Bowman
Road. The Bowman Road improvements and a portion of the Kanis Road
improvements were to be made during Phase I construction. The applicant indicated
the remainder of the site was to remain undisturbed until Phase II construction began.
The applicant also indicated building elevations and description of the proposed
buildings as a part of the previous PCD. The applicant proposed the hours of operation
to be 6:00 am to 9:30 pm Monday – Saturday.
The Planning Commission reviewed a request at their August 8, 2002, Planning
Commission Public Hearing to amend the previously approved PCD to remove the
percentage mix placed on Buildings A – D and to extend the hours of operation for the
site. The applicant proposed the hours of operation as 6:00 am to 12:00 am seven days
a week. The applicant indicated, due to leasing constraints, his desire was to no longer
have a 60% Commercial and 40% Office limit placed on the buildings facing Bowman
and Kanis Roads. The application included a marketing plan for the units as 100%
commercial (or office) uses with C-3 uses being the allowable uses requested. The
applicant indicated Buildings E – H would remain as previously approved; Office/Office
Warehouse with a maximum of 70% Warehouse. Parking remained as previously
approved, 233 parking spaces. The applicant amended the request prior to the August
8, 2002, Planning Commission hearing to only revise the hours of operation and
eliminate the requested to market the site as a 100 percent commercial development.
On September 3, 2003, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance
No. 18,740, revising the PCD to allow the hours of operation to be extended to include
6:00 am to 12:00 am seven days per week. The use mix was not changed.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is now proposing to revise the allowable uses to the site in
Buildings F and G. The applicant is requesting to be allowed warehouse storage
separate from office uses in these two building to give the owner flexibility in
renting the spaces. Currently the PCD allows for office/warehouse activities in
these two indicated buildings. The applicant has indicated the desire to be
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7025-B
3
allowed to rent to a warehouse user who does not require office space or an
office user who does not require warehouse space.
In addition, the applicant is proposing to add areas for outdoor dining. There
have been five areas identified for outdoor dining. The applicant has indicated
each of the areas will have various size tables and seating capacities. The
applicant has indicated three - four person tables, two - two person tables, six -
four person tables and eight - four person tables to be located along the existing
sidewalk but still allow sufficient area to meet minimum ADA requirements.
The applicant has also indicated additional parking on the site. The applicant
has indicated parking will be added to the rears of Buildings B, C, D and G. The
applicant estimates eight to twelve new parking spaces will be added in these
areas.
The applicant has indicated there is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for this
parcel of property.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is being developed as an office/commercial center with the development
complete and the front buildings occupied. There is a plant nursery which is
being demolished across Bowman Road to the west, a plumbing contractor’s
business and office use immediately east, a commercial development to the
north along the east side of Bowman Road and the Wal-Mart/Sam’s development
across Bowman Road to the northwest. South of the site, across Kanis Road,
are commercial uses and zoning. Uses include a strip retail center a liquor store
and a vacant lot zoned O-3.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents
concerning the proposed use of the property. All residents who could be
identified located within 300-feet of the site, the John Barrow Neighborhood
Association, the Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood
Association and all owners of property located within 200-feet of the site were
notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works: No comment regarding proposed use change.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7025-B
4
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Any food preparation facilities will require installation of a grease
trap. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 688-1414 for additional details.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: No objection to allowing storage by individuals in this
complex.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: No comment.
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 Revised Long Form Planned Commercial Development -PCD to
add the option of warehouse in portions of two of the buildings that are currently
shown as office showroom warehouse. Since the two structures are built, not
visible from Kanis or Bowman Roads, and the use change is a minor change in
comparison to the overall PCD, a land use plan amendment is not required.
Signage should be limited to the standards defined in the existing PCD.
Master Street Plan: Kanis and Bowman Roads are shown as a Minor Arterials
on the Master Street Plan. The purpose of a Minor Arterial is to provide
connections to and through an urban area. Half street improvements have been
made to Kanis and Bowman Roads adjacent to this property.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the
area covered by the Walnut Valley Neighborhood Action Plan. The Community
Redevelopment (Land Use) Goal states, “Maintain and reinvigorate existing retail
areas to provide active retail for local residents.” This application does not reuse
a vacated structure, but introduces new use possibility to new and vacant
construction. Filling vacant space at the rear of the development could
strengthen the retail uses in the area.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7025-B
5
Landscape: Areas indicated as outdoor dining must not intrude into the required
building landscaping or the required perimeter landscaping.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 28, 2004)
Mr. Terry Burruss was present representing the applicant. Staff stated the
proposed request was to amend an existing PCD to allow for the placement of
outdoor seating areas on the site and to allow portions of existing buildings to be
utilized as warehouse storage separate from an office user. Mr. Burruss stated
the developer was having difficulty leasing the space and was requesting the
option to allow individual warehouse users or office warehouse users.
Staff requested Mr. Burruss provide details of any additional signage proposed.
Staff also requested Mr. Burruss provide the location of any additional parking
proposed. Mr. Burruss stated no new signage was being proposed but additional
parking was being proposed. He stated he would locate the new parking on the
site plan for staff’s review.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff questioned if the indicated
outdoor dining was intruding into the required landscape strip or building
landscaping. Mr. Burruss stated he did not feel this was the case but he would
detail the areas for staff to alleviate their concerns.
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 a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the October 28, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant
has indicated there will be no change in signage as a part of the revision to the
PCD. The applicant has also indicated the proposed new parking on the site
plan. The applicant has indicated the development of eight to twelve new
parking spaces to the rears of Buildings B, C, D and G.
The applicant has also indicated the development of outdoor dining areas on the
proposed site plan. The applicant has indicated five areas identified for outdoor
dining. The applicant has indicated each of the areas will have various size
tables and seating capacities. The applicant has indicated three - four person
tables, two - two person tables, six - four person tables and eight - four person
tables to be located along the existing sidewalk but still allow sufficient area to
meet minimum ADA requirement. Three of the indicated outdoor dining areas
are designated in front of existing restaurants. The other two locations allow for
future restaurant locations, which would have the option of outdoor seating.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7025-B
6
Per section 36-298(8), areas of outdoor dining shall not be located in the public
right-of-way nor shall it obstruct pedestrian movement, fire lanes, access to any
business or areas designated for access by the physically impaired. In addition,
the number of seats must not exceed fifty percent of the number of seats within
the eating place and on-site parking shall be provided for the area of outdoor
dining based on the parking space per square foot required for restaurants
established in Section 36-502. Staff is supportive of the placement of outdoor
dining areas, which do not effect the required landscaping or decrease the
available parking. Staff has concerns with the number of tables proposed with
regard to landscaping and parking. Staff is continuing to work with the applicant
on a detailed table location plan to ensure all required landscaping is maintained
and with regard to the number of tables proposed with relation to the available
parking.
The applicant is also requesting to revise the PCD to allow the addition of
warehousing to the site independent of an office user. The applicant has
indicated the desire to market the site to an office user independent of
warehousing activities or a warehouse user independent of an office use. Staff is
supportive of this request.
Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request to amend the PCD to allow for a
change in the uses designation to allow warehousing activities independent of
office use and vise versa for Buildings F and G, the additional parking and
outdoor dining areas provided all previously approved technical requirements are
still adhered to with regard to parking and landscaping. As previously stated staff
will continue to work with the applicant with regard to the placement of additional
parking and the outdoor dining. Staff feels the proposed warehousing activity
should have no impact on the development if approved as proposed.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the request to allow warehousing on the site
independent of an office user and office uses independent of a warehouse user
for Buildings F and G and to add eight to twelve parking spaces on the site
subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of
the above report.
Staff recommends approval of the request to add outdoor dining on the proposed
site provided the dining areas do not intrude into the required landscaped areas
and the proposed addition seating meets the minimum parking required per the
existing Zoning Ordinance.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7025-B
7
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
Mr. Terry Burruss was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the
request to allow warehousing on the site independent of an office user and office uses
independent of a warehouse user for Buildings F and G and to add eight to twelve
parking spaces on the site 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 request to add outdoor dining
on the proposed site provided the dining areas did not intrude into the required
landscaped areas and the proposed addition seating met the minimum parking required
per the existing Zoning Ordinance.
There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to place the item on
the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: 9 FILE NO.: Z-7346-A
NAME: Grandpa’s Catfish Revised Short-form PCD
LOCATION: located at 9219 Stagecoach Road
DEVELOPER:
Grandpa’s Catfish
c/o BCC
2225 South Main Street
Little Rock, AR 72206
ENGINEER:
BCC
2225 South Main Street
Little Rock, AR 72206
AREA: 2.15 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: PCD
ALLOWED USES: Restaurant
PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PCD
PROPOSED USE: Restaurant – Revised dumpster location
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
The Little Rock Planning Commission denied a proposal to rezone the site located at
9219 Stagecoach Road from R-2, Single-family to PCD to allow the existing single-
family structure and allow a second structure (a 40-foot by 70-foot steel building) to act
as a restaurant on March 20, 2003. The applicant appealed the decision to the Board of
Directors and was heard at their May 20, 2003, Public Hearing. The Little Rock Board
of Directors voted to approve the request by the adoption of Ordinance No. 18,868.
The steel building was to be connected to the single-family structure with a breezeway.
The original structure was to be used as a waiting area for customers waiting to be
seated, three (3) party rooms for groups that need privacy, office space, and storage.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7346-A
2
The party rooms would each seat approximately 20-guests per room. The secondary
structure would house the kitchen, scullery and handicap accessible restrooms
(approximately 40% of the building) leaving approximately 1680 square feet for seating.
The applicant proposed the seating capacity of the secondary structure to be 150 to 160
patrons. The applicant proposed 57 parking spaces as a part of the development.
The applicant proposed a 5-foot by 10-foot double-sided painted steel sign to be located
in the front landscaped area.
The applicant estimated the number of employees to range from twelve (12) to fifteen
(15) and the operation hours from 4:30 pm to 9:30 pm Tuesday through Sunday. The
applicant indicated the restaurant would be closed on Mondays.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The original site plan for Grandpa’s Catfish included the placement of a dumpster
pad near the rear of the building. The plan also included one 4000 gallon grease
trap that was to be located close to the dumpster pad. The applicant has
indicated the State Department of Health required the design be modified from
one 4000 thousand gallon grease trap to two 2000 gallon grease traps to be
installed in-line. The new design resulted in the need for a change in location of
the dumpster and pad. The change would have required the dumpster to be
located in the parking area which was not acceptable to the owner since parking
would have been diminished.
The applicant relocated the dumpster to the front of the building without
consulting staff prior to the relocation. The applicant has indicated the error in
locating the dumpster without prior approval was not intentional; only a
miscommunication between all parties.
The applicant is requesting the site plan be revised to allow the placement of the
dumpster adjacent to the roadway. The applicant’s cover letter indicates the
solution for relocating the dumpster to the rear of the building will cost
approximately $20,000.
The applicant has indicated there is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for this
parcel of property.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains a newly completed restaurant with single-family homes located
to the north and south of the site. A home occupation (a beauty shop) is located
in the home to the north. The area to the east of the site is floodplain and
floodway.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7346-A
3
Across Stagecoach Road (to the west) is a mix of uses contained in the
Stagecoach Village Development. The Stagecoach Village Development
commercial and office uses front Stagecoach Road and the residential portion of
the development is located further west. There are single-family homes located
to the northwest of the site fronting Stagecoach Road.
Other uses in the area include two (2) churches, vacant O-1 zoned property, the
site of the Chapel Ridge Apartments and a major transmission power line.
Currently under construction is a Planned Residential Development located west
of Stagecoach Road, which includes attached and detached single-family homes.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents
concerning the proposed use of the property. All residents who could be
identified located within 300-feet of the site, the Otter Creek Homeowners
Association, Southwest Little Rock United for Progress and all owners of property
located within 200-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
Public Works: No comment regarding the proposed dumpster location.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: No comment regarding the placement of the dumpster.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: No objection to placement of dumpster.
Fire Department: No comment.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: No comment received.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7346-A
4
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Otter Creek Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Office for this property. The applicant has applied for
a revision to a PCD - Planned Commercial Development for location of a
screened dumpster. The applicant’s initial filing was heard at the February 6,
2003 Planning Commission Hearing with a land use plan amendment (LU03-16-
01) requesting a change to Commercial which was denied. The applicant
appealed the proposed rezoning request to the Board of Directors but did not
appeal the Land Use Plan amendment. At this time the addition of a dumpster is
of minimal change to the approved PCD. Since this is not a use change but a
design issue, a Land Use Plan Amendment is not needed for the requested
revision to the PCD.
Master Street Plan: Stagecoach Road is shown as a Minor Arterial that is built to
the Master Street Plan standards of a four-lane Minor Arterial with Bike Lanes. A
Class II Bikeway is shown on Stagecoach Road from Brodie Creek to County
Line Road.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the
area covered by the Otter Creek / Crystal Valley Neighborhood Action Plan. The
first objective recommends limiting commercial and office development in the
“heart” of the planning area (located on Stagecoach Road between Baseline and
Otter Creek Roads) to that which serves the neighborhood (C-1 uses). In
addition, the first objective supports placing the more intense uses on the
periphery of the study area. The second objective discourages construction of
large, warehouse type facilities, and those of large scale and/or high intensity
uses, within the “heart” of the planning area. This application is located at the
northern edge of the “heart” of the study area as described by the neighborhood
action plan.
Landscape: Staff recommends the dumpster enclosure be constructed of brick
or architectural block and its perimeter be softened with evergreen shrubs.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 28, 2004)
The applicant was not present. Staff presented an overview of the proposed
development indicating there were few outstanding issues associated with the
proposed request. Staff stated they would contact the applicant prior to the
public hearing to resolve any outstanding issues associated with the proposed
request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7346-A
5
H. ANALYSIS:
Staff has met with the applicant concerning the issues remaining from the
October 28, 2004, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated
the dumpster enclosure will be reconstructed of a more substantial material to
lessen the visual impact from Stagecoach Road.
The original site plan included the reuse of an existing single-family structure on
the site. The applicant later determined the reuse of the structure was not
feasible and removed the home and constructed a new building. Staff does not
feel this alteration to the original site plan is significant and is supportive of the
new construction.
Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request to relocate the proposed dumpster
from the original location near the rear of the building to the new location in front
of the building along Stagecoach Road. The Zoning Ordinance typically does not
allow dumpsters to be placed along the street side but with the enhanced
screening and the placement of landscaping around the enclosure, staff feels the
negative impacts will be mitigated. The applicant has agreed the dumpster
enclosure will be constructed of a brick or architectural block material to add
stability to the enclosure. The applicant has also agreed landscaping will be
added to soften the impact of the structure and enhance the visual appearance of
the enclosure. There is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for the property. To
staff’s knowledge there are no other 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.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff presented the item stating to their knowledge there were no
outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. 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. A motion was made to place the item on
the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: 10 FILE NO.: LU04-01-07
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - River Mountain Planning District
Location: Cantrell Road west of Pinnacle Valley Drive
Request: Transition and Suburban Office to Mixed Use
Source: Joe White, White Daters Engineering
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the River Mountain Planning District from Transition and
Suburban Office to Mixed Use. The Mixed Use category provides for a mixture of
residential, office and commercial uses to occur. A Planned Zoning District is required if
the use is entirely office or commercial, or if the use is a mixture of the three. The Land
Use Plan shows Suburban Office & Transition for this property. The applicant has
applied for a POD -Planned Office Development for a mixed use development. The
applicant has previously applied for a POD and a Land Use Plan Amendment from
Transition and Suburban Office to Mixed Use that was withdrawn without prejudice at
the June 3, 2004 Planning Commission hearing.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is a house built on a large lot and currently zoned R-2 Single Family and is
about 3.58 acres in size. The remainder of the expanded area includes a single family
home and an out building on a large lot and currently zoned R-2. The vacant land to the
north is zoned R-2 Single Family. The property to the east is zoned Planned
Commercial Development with a recently constructed Walgreen’s and a Catfish City
Restaurant under construction, both at the intersection of Cantrell and Taylor Loop
Roads. Further to the east is a development zoned C-3, General Commercial District,
anchored by a hardware store and other small offices and restaurants. The land to the
southeast is a Planned Commercial Development for the David Claiborne furniture store
and the Victorian Garden Restaurant. Further southeast is a POD, PDO-Planned
Development Office, and even farther southeast are areas zoned as R-2 and PCD -
Planned Commercial Development, for a bank, church, offices, hair salon, animal clinic
and single-family homes. The land to the south and southwest is mostly vacant land
zoned R-2 with a single family development backing onto Cantrell Road and PR for
parks and recreational use. The property to the west is zoned PDO with a Bank of the
Ozarks at the front of the lot and a two story office building at the rear. Further to the
west are several PODs consisting of homes converted into offices.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On April 6, 2004, a change was made from Transition to Commercial about a quarter
mile northeast of the applicant’s property at Cantrell Road and the east leg of Taylor
Loop Road, immediately northeast of the expanded area, to accommodate proposed
development.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-01-07
2
On August 19, 2003 a change was made from Transition to Commercial to about a half
mile to the northeast of the property on the north side of Cantrell Road just east of
Pinnacle Valley Drive to accommodate a proposed development.
On February 18, 2003 multiple changes were made within a 1 mile radius of the project
site recognize existing conditions. These include Transition to Suburban Office north of
the site, Transition to Single Family about quarter mile west of the site, Transition to
Commercial about a half mile east of the site and on the opposite side of Cantrell Road,
and Transition to Single family about one mile due east of the site
The applicant’s property is shown as Suburban Office and Transition on the Future
Land Use Plan. The neighboring land to the north is shown as Single Family. The
property to the east and southeast is shown as Commercial. The property south of the
amendment area is shown as Transition and Single Family. The property to the
southwest is shown as Single Family and Park / Open Space. The area to the west is
shown as Suburban Office.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial on the plan. Cantrell Road is built as a
five-lane road through that area. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve
through traffic and connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized
areas. Cantrell Road may require dedication of right-of-way and street improvements.
Since this property is located on a Principal Arterial, access to the site should be
minimized and should not impede through traffic.
Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the
development.
PARKS:
The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 shows the Taylor Loop Park
located a short distance to the southwest of the applicant’s property. Taylor Loop Park
is shown as a park of 35.0+ acres. Taylor Loop Park is listed as an undeveloped
Community Park intended to remain as a passive open space parcel of undeveloped
land and is designed to serve the open space needs of several neighborhoods.
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 Sustainable Natural Environment goal listed an objective of promoting
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-01-07
3
the vigorous enforcement of the Landscaping and Excavation Ordinance. This action
could result in the removal of trees in order to accommodate the development of uses
possible in the Commercial land use category.
ANALYSIS:
The application area is located in an area of the city characterized by an increase in
Office and Commercial uses. Suburban Office requires a Planned Zoning District and a
change to Mixed Use would continue the requirement of Planned Zoning Districts for
new non-residential developments. Although this amendment could increase the
amount of Commercial development along the north side of Cantrell Road, development
style could be limited to acceptable design standards through the site plan review
process.
The back part of the applicant’s property was the subject of a Land Use Plan
Amendment for a change from Transition to Suburban Office as part of a Future Land
Use review along Cantrell Road presented to the Planning Commission on January 9,
2003. The change to Suburban Office for the front part of the applicant’s property was
approved since it was felt that Office developments were more likely to take place
fronting Cantrell Road. It was also determined that the Transition land use category
should remain in some areas to allow for office development similar to the requirements
found in the Suburban Office category while also allowing residential development.
Within a half mile of this property is a total of about 52.01 + acres shown as Commercial
at two commercial nodes less than a half mile apart on Cantrell Road. These two nodes
are at the east leg of Taylor Loop Road and east of Pinnacle Valley Drive. Changing
this property to Mixed Use could result in an increase of 10 + acres of commercial uses,
a 20% area increase. Three recently approved PCDs are located either at the existing
Taylor Loop node or in between the two. The new pattern of PCDs indicates a trend of
infill at and between the two existing nodes. This amendment would expand potential
Commercial west, not following the present trend of infill at or between the existing
commercial nodes. Immediately west of this application land shown as Suburban
Office has recently developed with three PODs consistent with the Land Use Plan. If
the application area were to remain Suburban Office the possibility of similar office
development of the site could occur, which would limit westward expansion of the
Cantrell Road/Taylor Loop node and be consistent with the present office development
in the area.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Pleasant Valley Property
Owners Association, River Valley Property Owners Association, Pankey Community
Improvement Association, Piedmont Neighborhood Association, Pleasant Forest
Neighborhood Association, Secluded Hills Property Owners Association, Walton
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-01-07
4
Heights-Candlewood Neighborhood Association, Westbury Neighborhood Association,
Westchester/Heatherbrae Property Owners Association, Chenal Ridge Property, and
Charleston Heights/North Rahling Road Neighborhood Association. Staff has not
received any comments from Neighborhood Associations at this time.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is not appropriate. This amendment would further increase
the amount of Commercial along the north side of Cantrell Road while expanding the
existing Commercial node to the west.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the January 20, 2005
Planning Commission meeting. A motion was made to wavier 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 9 ayes, 0 noes, and 2 absent. A motion was made to approve
the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: 10.1 FILE NO.: Z-7603-A
NAME: PDC Companies HWY 10 Short-form POD
LOCATION: North of Cantrell Road approximately 0.1 miles West of Taylor Loop Road
DEVELOPER:
PCD Companies HWY #10
1501 North University Avenue, Suite 740
Little Rock, AR 72204
ENGINEER:
White-Daters and Associates
#24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, AR 72223
AREA: 3.58 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family
ALLOWED USES: Single-family Residential
PROPOSED ZONING: POD
PROPOSED USE: 65 percent office 35 percent commercial
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Plat Variance – The creation of a lot without
public street frontage.
BACKGROUND:
A request to rezone this site from R-2, Single-family to POD was filed and withdrawn
from consideration prior to the June 3, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The
applicant proposed a development to include office and commercial activities on this
3.58 acre site. The previous request was identical to the application now being
considered.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting the development of this 3.6 acre parcel as a Planned
Office Development, POD to allow the development of the site with a
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-A
2
office/commercial facility and the creation of a two lot plat. There will be a single
building on each parcel. Lot 1 will have a drive-through restaurant containing
3000 square feet. Lot 2 will contain 21, 000 square feet of office space and 8200
square feet of commercial space. The overall percent for each use on the site is
sixty-five percent office and thirty-five percent commercial.
The applicant has indicated there is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for this
parcel of property.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an occupied single-family home. To the east of the site is also
an occupied single-family home with the Wal-Greens development located
further east. The area to the north is vacant and undeveloped; currently zoned
R-2, Single-family. To the west of the site is a newly constructed branch bank
adjacent to Cantrell Road and a dentist office located in the rear of the site on a
separate lot. To the south of the site are vacant properties zoned R-2, Single-
family.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from an area resident
concerning the proposed use of the property. All residents who could be
identified located within 300-feet of the site, the Westbury Neighborhood
Association, the Westchester Heatherbrae Neighborhood Association, the
Secluded Hills Neighborhood Association and all owners of property located
within 200-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. The standard conditions shown on the plans as “Public Works Notes” apply to
the project.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is
required for the project to serve Lot 2. Contact Little Rock Wastewater at 688-
1414 for additional details.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-A
3
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). The facilities on-site
will be private. When meters are planned off private lines, private facilities shall
be installed to Central Arkansas Water's material and construction specifications
and installation will be inspected by an engineer, licensed to practice in the State
of Arkansas. Execution of Customer Owned Line Agreement is required. A
Capital Investment Charge based on the size of 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.
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 Suburban Office & Transition for this property.
The applicant has applied for a Planned Office Development for office and
commercial development.
The applicant has previously applied for a POD and a Land Use Plan
amendment from Transition and Suburban Office to Mixed Use that was
withdrawn without prejudice at the June 3, 2004 Planning Commission hearing.
A land use plan amendment for a change to Mixed Use is a separate item on this
agenda (Item #10 – File No. LU04-01-07).
Master Street Plan: Cantrell Road is shown as a Principal Arterial on the plan.
Cantrell Road is built as a five-lane road through this area. The primary function
of a Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and connect major traffic
generators or activity centers within urbanized areas. Cantrell Road may require
dedication of right-of-way and street improvements. Since this property is
located on a Principal Arterial access to the site should be minimized and should
not impede through traffic.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-A
4
Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of
the development.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the
area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan. The Sustainable
Natural Environment goal listed an objective of promoting the vigorous
enforcement of the Landscaping & Excavation Ordinance. This action could
result in the removal of trees in order to accommodate the development of uses
possible in the Commercial land use category.
Landscape: Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with ordinance
requirements. A six foot high screen, either a wooden fence with its face side
directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required where
adjacent to residentially zoned properties to the north.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 28, 2004)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. Staff stated the applicant
was requesting a POD to allow the development of an office/commercial
development. Staff stated the percentages requested were consistent with those
allowed for a Planned Office Development. Staff stated there were additional
items necessary to complete the review process.
Staff requested Mr. White provide details concerning the proposed uses of the
development. Staff also requested the total building coverage be provided in the
general notes section of the site plan. Staff stated the proposed building on Lot 1
was indicated at 80-feet and the typical required setback on Highway 10 was
100-feet.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the conditions noted in the
general notes section would apply to the proposed development.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff noted the areas set aside for
buffers appeared to meet minimum ordinance requirements. Staff also noted
screening would be required to the north where adjacent to single-family zoned
properties.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-A
5
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues
raised at the October 28, 2004 Subdivision Committee Meeting. The applicant
has indicated the dumpster location for proposed Lot 2 on the site plan and
included a note concerning screening. The applicant has indicated screening will
be placed as required by the zoning ordinance or at a minimum on three sides at
least two feet above the finished grade of the container.
The applicant is requesting the creation of a two lot plat through the planned
development process. The requested subdivision will require a variance from the
Subdivision Ordinance to allow the creation of a lot without public street frontage.
The proposed lot will be served by a sixty foot access and utility easement
through Lot 1.
The applicant has indicated a development sign will be located near the front
drive. The applicant has indicated the sign will be a ground mounted monument
style no more than ten feet in height and one hundred square feet in area. The
proposed signage is consistent with signage allowed in the Highway 10 Design
Overlay District. The applicant has also indicated a tenant ground mounted sign,
maximum allowed by ordinance, near the western property line. Staff is not
supportive of the requested signage. Staff feels the placement of two signs on
this single development is not consistent with the Highway 10 Design Overlay
District.
The applicant has indicated Lot 1 will develop with a restaurant and Lot 2 will
develop with an office/commercial development. The applicant has indicated the
proposed uses for Lot 2 are those listed in the O-3, General Office Zoning District
along with the Conditional Uses and the Accessory Uses with no limit on the
percentages allowed. Typically, an O-3 development is allowed ten percent of
the gross square footage to develop with the listed accessory uses. The listed
Conditional Uses requires approval from the Commission. The site plan includes
the total building coverage for each lot. The total building coverage for proposed
Lot 1 is 5.69 percent and for proposed Lot 2 is 28.3 percent.
The applicant has indicated the development of Lot 1 as a restaurant with 3,000
square feet of building space and 50 parking spaces. The total lot area contains
1.21 acres. The proposed lot area is more than adequate to meet the minimum
required lot size for a commercially zoned site but not in compliance with
minimum lot sizes typically required under the Highway 10 Design Overlay
District or 2 acre minimum lot sizes. The proposed parking is also adequate to
meet the typical minimum parking demand for a restaurant. The typical minimum
parking required for a restaurant would be 30 parking spaces.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-A
6
The applicant has indicated an office development on Lot 2 consisting of 21,000
square feet of office space and 8,200 square feet of commercial space. The
applicant has indicated 116 parking spaces to serve Lot 2. The typical minimum
parking required for the site would be 93 parking spaces based on one space per
225 square feet of gross floor area. The proposed parking is more than
adequate to meet the typical minimum demand.
The applicant has indicated a reduced building line adjacent to Cantrell Road and
a reduced landscape buffer along Cantrell Road. The applicant has indicated an
80-foot building setback (100-foot typically required by the Highway 10 Design
Overlay District) and a 35-foot landscape buffer (typically 40-feet by the Highway
10 Design Overlay District). Staff is not supportive of the reduced request. Other
sites, which have redeveloped in the area have typically maintained the integrity
of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. Staff feels the developer is
requesting to overbuild the site and the proposed site plan does not maintain the
integrity of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District with regard to landscaping
and front building line placement.
The applicant has requested a Planned Office Development to develop the site
with the indicated uses. The percentage of office and commercial use is
consistent with percentages allowed in the Zoning Ordinance for a Planned
Office Development. Staff does not feel however, the proposed development is
appropriate to the site. With the placement of a restaurant on the lot abutting
Cantrell Road and the office building located to the rear of the site the overall
development will be commercial in character and is not consistent with the City’s
Future Land Use Plan. A Land Use Plan for this site has been filed on this
agenda as a separate item (Item # 10 – File No. LU04-01-07). Staff feels the
proposed request is inconsistent with the adopted plan and feels the change to
the plan is inappropriate. With the development of this site as a “commercial
development” staff feels this will expand the previously identified commercial
node at Taylor Loop thus “stripping out Cantrell Road”. Since the zoning request
is inconsistent with the City’s Land Use Plan and the development will have a
commercial character, staff is not supportive of the request.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
Mr. Joe White was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a letter requesting the item
be deferred to the January 20, 2005 public hearing. Staff stated the request would
require a waiver of the By-laws for the late deferral request. A motion was made to
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 10.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7603-A
7
waive the By-laws for the later deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes,
0 noes and 2 absent.
There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to place the item on
the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: LU04-29-01
Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Barrett Planning District
Location: Highway 10 at Goodson Road
Request: Single Family and Neighborhood Commercial to
Commercial and Suburban Office
Source: Michael Johnston, Carter Burgess
PROPOSAL / REQUEST:
Land Use Plan Amendment in the Barrett Planning District from Single Family and
Neighborhood Commercial to Commercial and Suburban Office. The Commercial
category includes a broad range of retail and wholesale sales of products, personal and
professional services, and general business activities. The applicant would like to utilize
existing and new buildings, and the property for Commercial activities including a
computer sales/repair shop, offices, auto repair, boat / RV / trailer storage, and gift
shop.
Prompted by this Land Use Amendment request, the Planning Staff expanded the area
of review to include the entirety of the Neighborhood Commercial on the north side of
Highway 10 as well as the entirety of Single Family shown between the existing area
shown as Park / Open Space and Neighborhood Commercial. The area from the
eastern boundary of the original application and the area west and south of the existing
Park Open Space, including both Neighborhood Commercial and Single Family, is
proposed to be changed to Commercial. The area east of the original application and
south of the existing Park Open Space and east to the existing Single Family at the
west, including both Neighborhood Commercial and Single Family, is proposed to be
changed to Suburban Office. It is thought that the additional area would make the
boundaries more logical.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The applicant’s property is primarily surrounded by land shown as R-Single Family
District with the exception of the C-1 immediately west of the property. North and
northeast of the application land zoned R-2 and AF -Agriculture and Forestry District
mostly wooded and undeveloped. Additional land zoned AF exists southeast of the
property. Immediately east of the property is land zoned R-2 occupied by three single
family homes, one vacant. Further east is land zoned R-2 facilitating a recreational use,
a golf driving range and pro shop. Southeast of the property is land zoned R-2 with a
business specializing in stonework and stone sales. Immediately south of the property
is zoned R-2 with a single family home and a vacant restaurant.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-29-01
2
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
The applicant’s property is located in a Neighborhood Commercial node at Goodson
Road and Highway 10 and is surrounded by land shown as Single Family. A little
further north and northwest of the property is an area shown as Park / Open Space to
recognize Nowlin Creek and its floodway.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Highway 10 is shown as a Principal Arterial on the plan and is built as a rural two-lane
highway through that area. The primary function of a Principal Arterial is to serve
through traffic and connect major traffic generators or activity centers within urbanized
areas. Highway 10 may require dedication of right-of-way and street improvements.
Since this property is located on a Principal Arterial access to the site should be
minimized and should not impede through traffic.
Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of the
development.
PARKS:
The property under review is not located in a recognized Park Planning District and
does not show any existing or proposed parks in the immediate area, however, the
Parks and Recreation Plan does recognize a proposed “Regional Park 2000” on
Garrison Road near Ridgefield Road, just over a mile south of the site. The proposed
regional park is 617 acres ± in size, zoned for Parks and Recreation, and presently
undeveloped. The Master Parks Plan identifies a lack of public parks in the west Little
Rock area and recognizes private neighborhood parks and recreation facilities as
parkland in the west Little Rock area. With the golf driving range less than a quarter
mile from the site and the proposed regional park in the area, recreational opportunities
are sufficient.
HISTORIC DISTRICTS:
There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this amendment.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock
recognized neighborhood action plan.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-29-01
3
ANALYSIS:
This section of Highway 10 lies in a rural area of Pulaski County that was added to the
City’s Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction in 2002. The present Neighborhood
Commercial was established to represent a small commercial node at Highway 10
intersection with Goodson Road and the Goodson and Mathew Roads intersection.
Typically Neighborhood Commercial areas are limited to approximately five acres. At
the time of expansion staff showed the area as Neighborhood Commercial even with
the applicant’s more intense uses making this a non-conforming use in the
Neighborhood Commercial area.
Changing this area to Commercial from Neighborhood Commercial could increase the
use intensity shown in the area. Amending the Neighborhood Commercial and Single
Family in the expanded area east of the site to Suburban Office will create a buffer to
the Single Family to the east. A buffer is already in place on the north and west side of
the application from an existing Park / Open Space area representing the Nowlin Creek
floodway. The Suburban Office area allows for low intensity office uses and also
requires a PZD -Planned Zoning District process, which would ensure that uses are
compatible with the adjacent Single Family area.
Presently Neighborhood Commercial represents 10 acres ± at the intersection of
Goodson Road and Highway 10. With the proposed changes it would be decreased by
about 65% to 3.2 acres ±. The areas changed to Commercial and Suburban Office will
equally replace the existing Neighborhood Commercial and expand the variety and
scale of uses in the area. The changes would result in 6.3 acres ± of Suburban Office
and 5.4 acres ± of Commercial. The majority of the land shown as Commercial will
recognize the applicant’s existing and proposed uses and will also incorporate an
additional 1.5 acres ± of undeveloped land to the west. The land west of the applicant’s
property and shown as Neighborhood Commercial is approximately one acre. This
application will expand the area’s commercial uses by 50% and allow an increase in use
intensity.
Since this area is rural in nature it is recommended that uses of intensity greater than
C-1 develop utilizing a PZD to protect the area from unnecessary speculation and
premature zoning. Recommending a PZD process for the area shown as Commercial
could positively affect commercial development in the area by providing balanced and
defined commercial activity on a property. Showing this area as Commercial can result
in more intense uses in the area, which can cater towards rural and single family
residents of the area. Recognizing that this is a rural area, adding Commercial at this
location would better identify the large market area, as compared to the Neighborhood
Commercial intent to draw customers from a small market area.
On January 20, 2004 Ordinance No. 19,041 was passed extending the Highway 10
Scenic Corridor Design Overlay District west from Highway 300 to the western
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU04-29-01
4
boundary of the Planning Boundary. The extension of the overlay includes the
amendment area and will be subject to the overlay requirements including strict
landscaping requirements, building setbacks, and to limit curb cuts on Highway 10 so
the roadway will function at an efficient level of service.
Along Highway 10 Commercial areas exist one to one and a half miles away from each
other. Changing the Neighborhood Commercial area to Commercial and Suburban
Office is consistent with existing Commercial node spacing on Highway 10, and the
Suburban Office area will buffer the Commercial intensity uses from adjacent Single
Family.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
There are no Neighborhood Associations located in the Barrett Planning District or
within one mile of this application. Staff has received one positive comment from an
area resident.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is appropriate with a Planned Zoning District Requirement
because it recognizes existing activities, is consistently spaced with the existing
Commercial nodes on Highway 10, and provides for a step-down in intensity with the
Suburban Office to the east. Staff also recommends a PZD requirement for future
development in this Commercial area to prevent premature or speculative zoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. A motion was made to
approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: 11.1 FILE NO.: Z-7737
NAME: Presley Long-form PCD
LOCATION: located at 25914 Cantrell Road
DEVELOPER:
John and Melba Presley
20920 Presley Drive
Roland, AR 72135
ENGINEER:
Carter Burgess Engineers
Mike Johnston
10816 Executive Center, Suite 300
Little Rock, AR 72211
AREA: 6.653 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: R-2, Single-family – non-conforming
ALLOWED USES: Single-family and existing non-conforming commercial
and office uses
PROPOSED ZONING: PCD
PROPOSED USE: Recognize existing uses and C-1, Neighborhood
Commercial District uses
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A five year deferral of the required street
improvements to Highway 10.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The site is located outside the City limits of the City of Little Rock but within the
City’s Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction. The applicant is proposing to rezone
the site from R-2, Single-family with a non-conforming status to PCD to recognize
existing uses and is requesting C-1 uses as alternate uses for the site. The site
contains a number of structures; a warehouse building, three manufactured
homes and miscellaneous storage buildings. The applicant has indicated the
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7737
2
current uses on the property include boat and RV storage, construction
equipment storage, general and professional office, office/warehouse, residential
and commercial building supplies, contractors storage, equipment storage,
computer sales and service, a construction company, outdoor sales and display
of boats, automobiles, motorcycles and utility trailers (limit of 10).
The immediate plans include an addition to the existing warehouse building on
the east side by 30 feet (1500 square feet) and to continue with the existing uses
currently being conducted on the property.
The applicant has indicated the hours of operation will be from 7:00 am to 8:00
pm seven days per week. The applicant has also indicated construction of a
second warehouse building totaling 4500 square feet.
The applicant has indicated there is not a Bill of Assurance in effect for this
parcel of property.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains several non-conforming structures ranging from manufactured
homes and accessory buildings to a metal warehouse building. The area to the
west is vacant currently zoned C-1, Neighborhood Commercial District and the
area to the southwest is zoned AF, Agriculture and Forestry. There are single-
family homes located to the east of the site and a golf driving range located
further east. To the south of the site, at the intersection of Goodson Road and
Highway 10, there is a restaurant. The land use in the area is primarily single-
family
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents
concerning the proposed use of the property. All residents who could be
identified 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. There is not an
active neighborhood association located in the area.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. The existing right-of-way for Highway 10 meets Master Street Plan
requirements for a principal arterial.
2. With future construction, provide design of street conforming to the Master
Street Plan for a five lane arterial. Construct one-half street improvement to
the street including 5-foot sidewalk with the planned development or obtain
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7737
3
Board of Directors approval of a deferral of street improvements.
3. This site is outside the existing corporate limits. Storm water detention
facilities and grading permits are not required.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Outside the service boundary. No comment.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: Approval of the City of Little Rock will be required for
additional water service. Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or
additional water meter(s) are required. A Capital Investment Charge based on
the size of the meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal
charges. 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. The West Pulaski Fire
Department District (contact Tom Cayton at 501-821-3104) needs to evaluate
this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will
be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the
Developer's expense.
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional information.
County Planning:
1. The side yard building setback is 40-feet when adjoining non-commercial
property. Any variances from this requirement should be approved by the
Pulaski County Planning Board.
2. Provide Pulaski County Planning a copy of the approval from the Arkansas
Department of Health concerning the wastewater collection and treatment
method.
3. A floodplain determination must be made and professionally certified. Any
floodplain or floodway boundary will be indicated on the proposed site plan.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7737
4
In addition, note the finished floor elevation for all proposed buildings.
Describe and note the elevation of the benchmark used.
4. Indicate owners of all adjoining property.
5. Provide a legal description of the proposed development site.
6. Indicate contour lines heavier, as they are very hard to see.
7. Calculate and note influent and effluent drainage for the site. Also, provide
hydraulic calculations to support pipe sizing.
8. Erosion control should be incorporated with the plans. Provide notes/details.
Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality should be contacted to obtain
a clearing permit, (501) 682-0627.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Barrett Planning District. The
Land Use Plan shows Neighborhood Commercial for this property. The applicant
has applied for a Long Form Planned Commercial Development - PCD for
computer sales and repair; a construction company; auto, boat, and utility sales;
tractor-trailer, boat, and recreational vehicle storage; and residential and
commercial supplies storage.
A land use plan amendment for a change to Commercial is a separate item on
this agenda (Item #11 – File No. LU04-29-01).
Master Street Plan: Highway 10 is shown as a Principal Arterial on the plan and
is built as a rural two-lane highway through that area. The primary function of a
Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and connect major traffic generators or
activity centers within urbanized areas. Highway 10 may require dedication of
right-of-way and street improvements. Since this property is located on a
Principal Arterial access to the site should be minimized and should not impede
through traffic.
Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of
the development.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not
located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood
action plan.
Landscape: A landscaping upgrade toward compliance with the Landscape
Ordinance equal to the expansion proposed will be required. Additionally, new
paved areas will also be required to be landscaped according to ordinance
standards.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7737
5
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 with the development of Phase II.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 28, 2004)
Mr. Mike Johnston of Carter Burgess Engineers was present representing the
request. Staff presented an overview of the proposed development indicating the
request was to rezone an existing non-conforming site and to request additional
alternative uses for the future. Staff stated there were items necessary to
complete the review process. Staff requested the applicant provide a future
paving plan. Staff also requested the applicant provide details of any existing or
proposed fencing. Staff stated the indicated storage area would require
screening and requested the applicant provide details of the proposed screening
material. Staff questioned if the manufactured homes would be removed in the
future. Staff also questioned the existing uses of the manufactured homes.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the indicated right-of-way
was sufficient to meet the minimum Master Street Plan requirement. Staff noted
the site was located outside the corporate limits, therefore the storm water
detention ordinance and a grading permits were not enforceable.
County comments were addressed. County staff requested the applicant
provide a professionally certified floodplain determination. Staff stated any
floodplain or floodway boundary should be indicated on the proposed site plan
and a note concerning the finished floor elevation for all proposed buildings.
Staff requested the applicant describe and note the elevation of the benchmark
used.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated a landscaping upgrade
toward compliance with the Landscape Ordinance equal to the expansion
proposed would be required. Additionally, new paved areas would also be
required to be landscaped according to ordinance standards. Staff stated a six
foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed
outward, a wall or dense evergreen plantings would be required along the
eastern perimeter with the development of Phase II.
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 October 28, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant is
requesting a rezoning of the site from R-2, Single-family with a non-conforming
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7737
6
status to PCD to recognize existing uses and allow C-1 uses as alternative uses
for the site. The immediate plans include an addition to the existing warehouse
building on the east side by 30 feet (1500 square feet) and to continue with the
existing uses currently being conducted on the property. The applicant has
indicated landscaping will be added per the current City ordinance.
The applicant has indicated a future paving plan as requested by staff. The
applicant has indicated paving will be added in front of the building proposed for
Phase II of the development. The applicant has also indicated the existing gravel
area behind the existing building will remain as a gravel parking area. The site is
currently a storage area for boats, RV’s, contractor’s equipment and construction
material storage. The applicant has indicated no new activities will take place in
this area and is requesting the existing gravel parking area remain. Staff is
supportive of this request.
The applicant has also indicated the existing fencing will remain on the property.
The applicant has indicated the existing fencing is a six foot chain link fence and
will remain behind the building. The applicant has indicated a six foot opaque
chain link fence will be added around the storage area along the east, north and
west sides. The applicant once again is not proposing any changes to the site in
this area and is requesting the chain link fencing remain. The Zoning Ordinance
typically requires fencing used to screen outdoor storage areas to be constructed
of wood or metal. The ordinance further states visual screening, plastic or metal
slats woven into a chain link fence are prohibited. Staff is supportive of the
placement of the six foot fence but would recommend the construction material
be consistent with fencing material typically required to screen uses of the
development, i.e. outdoor storage, contractors storage yard, boat and RV
storage.
The applicant has indicated the hours of operation will be from 7:00 am to 8:00
pm seven days per week. The applicant has also indicated construction of a
second warehouse building in Phase II totaling 4500 square feet. The applicant
has indicated the existing manufactured homes will be removed when the
proposed building in Phase II is constructed.
The proposed building in Phase II is located 40-feet from all property lines per
the County Ordinance requirements. The building, however, is not set at the
100-foot front building setback per the Highway 10 Design Overlay District
requirement nor does the building comply with the 40-foot landscape buffer area.
The applicant has indicated the existing site is developed and to require the
Phase II Building to comply would not project a unified development pattern of
the site. The applicant has stated to set the new building approximately 40-feet
beyond the current building locations would cause confusion with the existing
drives and parking layout. Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The
original site was developed prior to the City exercising its Extraterritorial
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7737
7
Jurisdiction in this area and the Highway 10 Design Overlay requirements did not
apply. Staff feels to allow the site to continue to develop as was originally
designed will not have any adverse impact on the adjoining properties.
The applicant has indicated the current uses on the property include boat and
RV storage, construction equipment storage, general and professional office,
office/warehouse, residential and commercial building supplies, contractors
storage, equipment storage, computer sales and service, a construction
company, outdoor sales and display of boats, automobiles, motorcycles and
utility trailers (limit of 10).
Staff is supportive of this request. Staff feels the rezoning of the site to recognize
existing uses is appropriate and staff feels the addition of C-1, Neighborhood
Commercial uses as alternative uses for the site will have limited impact on the
adjoining properties.
Staff is supportive of the applicant’s request. The site is located outside the City
limits of the City of Little Rock but within the City’s Extraterritorial Planning
Jurisdiction. The applicant is proposing to rezone the site from R-2, Single-family
with a non-conforming status to PCD to recognize existing uses and is requesting
C-1 uses as alternate uses for the site. Staff feels this appropriate. The site to
the east is also zoned C-1, Neighborhood Commercial; thus creating a
neighborhood commercial node. In addition, there is a restaurant located to the
southeast of the site near the intersection with Goodson Road. Staff feels
allowing the requested uses and to recognize existing uses is not out of
character with the existing and potential development pattern 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.
Staff recommends approval of the applicant’s request for a five year deferral of
the required street improvements to Highway 10.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. Staff presented the item indicating to their knowledge there were no
outstanding issues associated with the proposed request. 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.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7737
8
Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the applicant’s request for a five-
year deferral of the required street improvements to Highway 10.
There was no further discussion of the item. A motion was made to place the item on
the Consent Agenda for Approval. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and
2 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: 12 FILE NO.: Z-7738
NAME: Albright Short-form PD-C
LOCATION: located at 19125 Kanis Road
DEVELOPER:
Holeman Construction Company
14 Piedmont Lane
Little Rock, AR 72223
ENGINEER:
Blaylock-Threet Engineers
1501 Markham Street
Little Rock, AR 72211
AREA: 1.09 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 and a photography studio
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A waiver of the required street improvements
to Kanis Road.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is proposing the rezoning of the site from R-2, Single-family to
PD-C to allow a photography studio to locate on the site. The applicant has
indicated the home will remain as a residence and a second structure will be
added to the rear of the site to be used as the photography studio. The
photography studio is proposed at 60-feet by 32-feet containing 1920 square
feet. The applicant has indicated the studio will be constructed in a wooded area
behind the existing single-family home and landscaped to soften the visual
impact of the new building. The site plan includes the placement of a parking
area to accommodate five vehicles near the new structure. The applicant has
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7738
2
also indicated screening will be placed along the property lines in the form of
evergreen plantings.
The site plan includes a single sign location near Kanis Road. The applicant is
requesting a two foot by three foot sign with a maximum height of thirty-inches.
The days and hours of operation are proposed as 9:00 am to 5:00 pm six days
per week. The applicant’s cover letter indicates the photography business itself
is low in volume. He states emphasis is placed on outdoor portraits within the
property or off-site at other locations. The applicant has indicated three to four
sessions will take place on an average workday. The applicant has indicated
there will be two employees with maximum of four employees in the future to
serve the business.
The applicant has indicated the majority of the trees on the site will be
maintained around the proposed structure to project a “studio in the woods”
appearance. The applicant has also indicated extensive landscaping will be
added to enhance the overall beauty of the property.
The applicant is requesting a waiver of the required Master Street Plan
improvements to Kanis Road.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains an existing single-family home located on acreage. The
predominate land use in the area is single-family homes located on acreage and
a scattering of non-conforming, non-residential uses. At the intersection of Kanis
Road and Denny Road there is commercially zoned property and commercial
uses. In addition the land use plan indicates Neighborhood Commercial for the
Kanis/Denny Roads intersection extending to Stewart Road. Kanis Road is a
narrow two lane roadway with open ditches for drainage.
A Conditional Use Permit was recently approved for a multi-sectional
manufactured home to the southwest of the site.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area
residents concerning the proposed use of the property. All residents who could
be identified 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. There is not an
active neighborhood association located in the area.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7738
3
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Kanis Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A
dedication of right-of-way 45-feet from centerline will be required.
2. Furnish signed and notarized dedications with final Board approval of the
rezoning request.
3. 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 or obtain a Board of Directors approval of a waiver or
deferral of street improvements.
4. This site is outside of the corporate limits. No grading permit or storm water
detention is required.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: Outside the service boundary. No comment.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Center-Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: Approval of the City of Little Rock will be required for
additional water service other than the domestic meter for which application has
been made. Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water
meter(s) are required. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of the
meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This
fee will apply to all meter connections including any metered connections off the
private fire system. 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. The West Pulaski Fire
Department District (contact Tom Cayton at 501-821-3104) needs to evaluate
this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will
be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the
Developer's expense.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7738
4
Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire
Department at 918-3752 for additional information.
County Planning: A 40-foot building setback is required along all property lines
that adjoin residential properties. Rotate the proposed building to conform to
Pulaski County building setbacks requirements, or request a variance from
Pulaski County Planning Board.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: The request is in the Burlingame Planning District. The Land
Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a
Short Form Planned Commercial Development -PCD for an additional building
behind an existing single family home for a photo studio. Photography will be
taken in the building and also outside of the building to capture the areas scenic
backdrop. Onsite parking will accommodate four to six vehicles. The single
family home will continue to be occupied by the applicant.
The proposal does not have a significant impact on the Land Use Plan, which
would necessitate a Plan Amendment.
Master Street Plan: Kanis Road is shown as a Minor Arterial on the Master
Street Plan. The purpose of a Minor Arterial is to provide connections to and
through an urban area. Kanis Road has a Special Design Standard from
Burlingame Road to Stewart Road adjacent to the applicant’s property. This
consists of a two-lane road with a twenty-two foot paved with and four-foot
shoulders in order to protect the area’s rural and scenic atmosphere. Kanis Road
may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements.
Existing or proposed Class I, II, or III bikeways are not in the immediate vicinity of
the development.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The property under review is not
located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood
action plan.
Landscape: The proposed driveway expansion must allow for the minimum 9-
foot wide land use buffer along the site’s eastern perimeter. The Landscape
Ordinance requires a minimum width of 6-feet 9-inches. Unless otherwise
provided for, a 6-foot high opaque screen is required to help screen this property
from the adjacent residential properties to the east, west and south. This
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7738
5
screening may be a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall or
dense evergreen plantings.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 28, 2004)
The applicant was not present. Staff presented an overview of the proposed
development indicating there were additional items necessary to complete the
review process. Staff stated they would contact the applicant prior to the Public
Hearing to resolve any outstanding issues associated with the proposed request.
There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant provided staff with a revised site plan addressing most of the
issues raised at the October 28, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The
applicant has indicated the proposed building will be turned to meet the minimum
40-foot building setback from all property lines per the County requirement. The
applicant has also indicated the drive will be relocated to allow a minimum
landscape strip of nine feet along the eastern property line.
The existing drive to serve the single-family home is constructed of asphalt. The
applicant has indicated the driveway extension and parking pad will be
constructed of SB2 gravel. The applicant is requesting a three year deferral of
the paving of the proposed driveway and parking pad. Typically staff is
supportive of the allowance of a deferral of the paving if the owner takes proper
measures to contain the gravel.
The applicant has indicated a single ground mounted sign will be used to identify
the proposed business. The applicant has indicated the sign will be two feet high
and three feet wide and a maximum of thirty inches in height. Signage typically
allowed in single-family zones is one square feet of sign area with a maximum
height of six feet.
The applicant has indicated there will not be a dumpster located on the site and
any additional site lighting will be low level in intensity and directed inward away
from residentially zoned properties. The proposed hours of operation are from
9:00 am to 5:00 pm six days per week with a maximum of four employees.
Staff is not supportive of the proposed development. Although the applicant has
indicated the business is a low volume business staff does not feel introducing a
commercial development into the area is appropriate. There are non-residential
uses located in the area, which were in place prior to the City exercising its
Extraterritorial Planning Jurisdiction. Historically staff has tried to recognize
existing commercial uses in an area when expanding the planning boundary and
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7738
6
established logical commercial nodes. There is a commercial node located near
the site at the intersection of Kanis, Stewart and Denny Roads. The proposed
request is inconsistent with the Land Use Plan, which recognizes the site as
Single Family. Staff feels with the construction of the proposed building as a
commercial facility this will open up the site for consideration of potential non-
residential uses which are not low volume traffic generators.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request as filed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
Mr. Cory Gilliam was present representing the request. There were registered objectors
present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. Staff stated the
applicant was requesting a secondary residence, general and professional office uses
as alternative uses for the site.
Mr. Cory Gilliam addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. He stated his
business was low in volume with three to four sessions per day. He stated the intent
was to enhance the property and the area and not cause any adverse impact to the
area. He stated the new building would be constructed residential in character and at
some point in the future the home could be sold or become an accessory dwelling.
Mr. Gilliam stated staff had indicated concern with the introduction of commercial into
the area. He stated his request was to allow a photography studio on the site and
should not be judged by what could happen in the future. He stated the new building
would not be visible from the roadway. He stated the main goal was to provide a setting
for backdrops for his business complete with extensive landscaping which would only
enhance the area and provide screening. He stated the building would not appear to be
a commercial building.
Mr. Clint Albright addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant. He stated he
currently owned the property and he and his wife built the home twenty plus years ago.
He stated the home was located approximately two miles outside the City limits. He
stated the business was not the first business to locate in the area. He stated there
were a number of businesses located along Kanis Road. He stated he had spoken to
the adjoining neighbors and most were not opposed to Mr. Gilliam’s request. He stated
the site would remain residential in character.
Mr. Don Holeman addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant. He provided
the Commission with an elevation of the proposed structure. He stated the proposed
development would enhance the neighborhood. He stated the design was similar to a
secondary residence and would not appear commercial in character.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7738
7
Ms. Lolie Honie addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She
stated the Staff and the Commission had worked hard to develop a future plan for the
area and the request was not in compliance with the City’s and the neighborhood’s plan.
She stated there were areas designated for commercial uses and the requested
location was not designated for a commercial activity. She stated she lived on Kanis
Road and sold real estate in the area. She stated many large companies would call her
when they were recruiting and tell her to sell the prospect on Little Rock. She stated
she would show the prospect the area and finish with the Kanis Road area. She stated
it was important to not allow ad hock development. She stated economic growth and
development was important but it was also important to maintain the City’s plan. She
stated the request was premature. She stated there were areas zoned and indicated on
the City’s plan for commercial development and felt these areas should be utilized
before expanding into single-family neighborhoods.
There was a general discussion concerning the proposed request. Commissioner
Rector questioned if the applicant was willing to allow the approval to only run with the
applicant’s ownership. Mr. Gilliam stated he was willing to amend his application to
place this requirement on his approval.
Commissioner Rector also questioned the requested signage. He stated a six-foot sign
seamed excessive and questioned if the applicant would consider signage allowed in
single-family zones. Mr. Gilliam stated he was not willing to compromise on the
requested signage. He stated Kanis Road was a rural roadway and he felt the indicated
signage was necessary to direct his customers to the site. He stated his business
would not generate a great deal of traffic. He requested the Commission consider his
request on its merits. It was stated each request was reviewed on its own merits.
Deputy City Attorney Cindy Dawson stated there were other factors, which weighed into
the Commission’s decision as well. She stated if the merits were the only consideration
given for approval, then this would be spot zoning.
Staff reminded the Commission the land use plan was review within the past six months
and the property in question was not recommended for a change.
A motion was made to approve the request to allow the placement of a photography
studio on the site, non-transferable, to be constructed similar to the provided elevation
with a two by three sign no more than thirty inches in height and a maximum of four
employees. The motion carried by a vote of 6 ayes, 1 no, 3 absent and 1 recuse
(Chairman Mizan Rahman).
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: 13 FILE NO.: Z-7739
NAME: Markham Bank Short-form PD-O
LOCATION: Located on the North side of West Markham Street between Jackson and
Monroe Streets
DEVELOPER:
HR Company c/o Tom Cole
900 South Shackleford Road, Suite 210
Little Rock, AR 72211
ENGINEER:
Development Consultants, Inc.
2200 North Rodney Parham Road, Suite 220
Little Rock, AR 72212
AREA: 0.57 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 (1 Zoning Lot) FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: O-3, General Office District
ALLOWED USES: Office General and Professional
PROPOSED ZONING: POD
PROPOSED USE: Branch Bank Facility
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from ordinances to allow a
reduction in the minimum driveway spacing criteria.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant is proposing the development of this 0.57 acre parcel as a branch
bank facility with two drive through lanes and one ATM location. The applicant is
requesting a waiver of the required driveway spacing criteria to allow two one-
way drive openings for the property. The applicant has indicated this will allow
one-way traffic flow to circulate around the building for drive-through teller and
ATM services. The applicant has indicated this scenario is similar to many other
small sites with drive-through services that have been allowed with separate one-
way drives. The applicant states in his cover letter many such sites have more
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7739
2
intense traffic generation, such as the case of restaurants. The applicant’s cover
letter states the site is unusable without the driveway waiver consideration.
The applicant has indicated fifteen on-site parking spaces on the proposed site
plan. The site plan also includes the placement of stacking sufficient to allow
stacking for five to six automobiles. The applicant has indicated they do not
anticipate the ATM use to be a substantial contributor to peak hour traffic flows.
The applicant has indicated screening will be added to the northern perimeter of
the site where abutting residentially zoned properties. The site plan includes the
placement of a six foot wood fence. The applicant has also indicated a portion of
the northern buffer will remain as undisturbed.
The applicant has indicated the trash dumpster on the proposed site plan. The
dumpster is located adjacent to the northern proposed parking area and
screened per code.
The applicant has indicated the drive through hours of operation will be from 7:30
am to 6:00 pm Monday through Friday and 9:00 am to 12:00 pm on Saturday.
The applicant has indicated the lobby hours will be from 9:00 am to 5:30 pm
Monday through Friday only. The applicant is also requesting O-3 uses as
alternative uses for the site.
The applicant has provided a copy of the Bill of Assurance dated April 15, 1941.
The proposed request does not appear to be in conflict with the provided Bill of
Assurance.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There are a variety of uses located in the area both residential and non-
residential in character. The residential uses include both single-family and
multi-family and the non-residential include both office and commercial uses.
There are State and City owned facilities located to the south of the site including
UAMS, the Arkansas Department of Health, War Memorial Park and the Zoo.
West Markham Street is a four lane roadway with a center turn lane in this area.
There are curb and gutters located adjacent to the site but due to previous
paving in the area the curb has been greatly reduced.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from an area resident
concerning the proposed use of the property. All residents who could be
identified located within 300-feet of the site, the Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7739
3
Association and all owners of property located within 200-feet of the site were
notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. During peak hours, there will not be sufficient driveway area to allow three
vehicles to queue up at each of the four drive through windows (12 vehicles
total), and still allow walk-in customers to park and exit. Vehicles will block
the through lanes of Markham waiting to enter. Contact Bill Henry Traffic
Engineering at (501) 379-1816.
2. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation
requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. Only a single driveway would be
allowed for 36-feet of frontage. The width of driveway must not exceed 36-
feet.
3. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
public right-of-way prior to occupancy. Sidewalks and ramps must meet
current ADA standards.
4. Storm water detention will not apply to the proposed development.
5. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be
required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site
grading and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to
the start of construction.
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. 3/4-inch is the largest meter size
available off the existing water main. 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.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7739
4
County Planning: No comment.
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 Office for this property. The applicant has
applied for a Planned Office Development -POD for construction of a bank.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
Master Street Plan: Markham Street, Fair Park Boulevard, and Van Buren
Street are shown as Minor Arterials on the Master Street. The purpose of a
Minor Arterial is to provide connections to and through an urban area. Markham
Street may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street
improvements. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative
effects of traffic and pedestrians on Markham Street.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant’s property lies in the
area covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Action Plan. The Zoning and Land
Use Goal category has multiple goals. One is to ”Create a different set of
guidelines with which to govern the development of Hillcrest,” with one particular
action statement relevant to the case: “More mixed-use opportunities should be
provided within the commercial areas, including parts of Kavanaugh, Markham
Street, and Stifft Station.” The second is “Develop concepts for commercial
corridors for parts of Markham Street,” consisting of one action statement:
“Discontinue the current commercial structures that are not appropriate for
Markham. Markham has become degraded by the development of a current
pattern of suburban development leading to disagreements about appropriate
design of structures, use, scale, image, and hours of operation.” Both of these
development goals are relevant to this case because the neighborhood action
plan discourages suburban strip development. The neighborhood action plan
encourages development to be appropriate in scale and design to surrounding
uses. In this case special attention should be spent on the building’s design,
relationship to Markham Street and buildings, and accessibility.
Landscape: Areas set aside for buffer and landscaping meet with ordinance
requirements. A six-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 north.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7739
5
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 28, 2004)
Mr. Robert Brown was present representing the request. Staff stated the site
was currently zoned O-3, General Office District which would allow for a bank
facility to be constructed. Staff stated the site plan included two driveway
locations, which would require a variance from the minimum driveway spacing
criteria. Staff stated the developer had elected to file a rezoning to POD to allow
the development to be constructed as proposed including the driveway locations.
Staff stated O-3, General Office District uses were being requested as alternative
uses for the site.
Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the grade of the drive was
a critical issue. Staff also stated even though the site did not require detention,
water could not be released on West Markham Street. Staff stated underground
detention would be required. Staff stated in this area of West Markham Street
there was a problem with icing in cold weather.
Staff also noted the proposed drives did not meet the minimum spacing
requirement. Mr. Brown stated the site was not developable with the proposed
use and the placement of drives that met the current ordinance requirement.
Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the areas set aside for
buffer and landscaping appeared to meet with ordinance requirements. Staff
stated screening would be required where adjacent to residential properties.
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 October 28, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant
has indicated screening along the northern perimeter of the site adjacent to the
residentially zoned properties. The applicant has indicated a six foot wood fence
will be placed in this area and a large area of existing vegetation will be
maintained to add additional screening.
The applicant has indicated the drive through hours of operation will be from 7:30
am to 6:00 pm Monday through Friday and 9:00 am to 12:00 pm on Saturday.
The applicant has indicated the lobby hours will be from 9:00 am to 5:30 pm
Monday through Friday only. The applicant is also requesting O-3 uses as
alternative uses for the site.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7739
6
The applicant has indicated the trash dumpster on the proposed site plan. The
dumpster is located adjacent to the northern proposed parking area adjacent to
residentially zoned properties. The site plan also includes a note concerning the
required screening stating screening will be placed per code or a minimum of two
feet above the finished container height. Staff is not supportive of the dumpster
placement. Staff feels the placement of the dumpster adjacent to the residential
properties will have a negative impact with regard to servicing the dumpster.
The applicant has indicated they will work with staff concerning the grade of the
drive and the detention. Although detention is typically not required on sites less
than one acre there is a clause in the ordinance, which allows for detention
where there is concern with downstream flooding or safety concerns. Staff will
work with the applicant to resolve this issue prior to a building permit being
issued if the development is approved.
The applicant is requesting a waiver of the required driveway spacing criteria to
allow two one-way drive openings on the property. The applicant has indicated
this will allow one-way traffic flow to circulate around the building for drive-
through teller and ATM services. The applicant has also indicated fifteen on-site
parking spaces on the proposed site plan. The site plan includes the placement
of stacking for five to six automobiles resulting in 21 parking spaces. The
ordinance typically requires drive through facilities to provide not less than three
holding or stacking spaces for each window. The site plan includes the
placement of three drive-through facilities which would typically require nine
holding spaces. Although the applicant has indicated they do not anticipate the
ATM use to be a substantial contributor to peak hour traffic flows, the ordinance
typically does not distinguish between peak and non-peak usage. Based on the
applicant’s design, when cars are stacked for the drive-through lanes, the lobby
parking will be rendered unusable due to customers being unable to enter the
spaces or exit the spaces upon completion of their transaction. This creates a
safety concern and the possibility of cars trying to exit the site against the flow of
traffic. Staff feels the site is being overbuilt and the proposed development
should be redesigned to allow for sufficient stacking and/or adequate parking to
serve the site.
Staff is not supportive of the proposed development. Staff recommends denial of
the proposed request as filed.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7739
7
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
Mr. Robert Brown was present representing the request. There were no registered
objectors present. The Chair stated there were currently eight Commissioners present.
The Chair stated in the past when there were only eight Commissioners present the
applicant was offered a deferral. Mr. Brown stated his client would like to defer his
request to the December 16, 2004 public hearing.
A motion was made to approve the deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of
8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: 14 MIDTOWN REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT EXPANSION
SUBJECT: Midtown Redevelopment District No. 1
REQUEST: Add area along University
LOCATION: East side of University from Lee to Evergreen
STAFF REPORT:
After further review staff has determined that no action is necessary.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Withdrawal
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for withdrawal. By a vote of 9 for
0 against and 2 abstain the consent agenda was approved.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: 15 FILE NO.: NOV #0226
Name: Rees Development / Pinnacle Point,
Appeal Land Alteration Violation, Chap
29-166
Location: 14602 Cantrell Road in Little Rock,
Pulaski County, Arkansas
Owner/Applicant: Mr. John Rees
Request: Appeal of Notice of Violation #0226 for
cutting and clearing trees without a
grading permit.
STAFF REVIEW:
1. Master Street Plan
This portion of Cantrell Road is a principal arterial.
2. Development Potential and Land Use
This 8.93 acre property with Isom Creek running along the northern and
eastern portions of the property was approved as a PCD on April 22,
2004. A strip retail center is located to the west of the site and a
restaurant is located to the east of the site. North of Isom Creek are single
family homes accessed by Pinnacle Valley Road.
Office uses and small scale commercial uses are located to the south of
the site(across Cantrell Road) along with a small church.
3. Neighborhood Position
Public Works has not received any inquiries or complaints.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Staff noticed trees being cleared on the subject property. Knowing the site had
not yet been permitted for clearing and grading, staff issued Notice of Violation
#0226 (“NOV”) and Stop Work Order to Rees Development, Inc. on the morning
of September 9, 2004. Staff was told clearing began on September 7, 2004.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: NOV #0226
2
A grading plan was submitted to Public Works for review on the afternoon of
September 9, 2004 as a result of the NOV. Public Works could not approve the
grading plan because clearing was proposed on 7.13 acres of the 9 acres
property with construction only occurring on the front 2 acres. Per Section 29-
186(b), no land alteration shall be permitted until all necessary city approvals of
all plans and permits, except building permit, have been issued and construction
is imminent.
Staff and applicant agreed to allow clearing and grading on the southern 4.5
acres. Staff was told clearing had not occurred beyond the approved area.
Grading permit #2004C-113 was issued on September 14, 2004 to allow the
approved clearing and grading. The permit stated that its issuance does not
release the contractor from his responsibilities as required by the previously
issued NOV.
After grading permit issuance, staff learned that clearing had occurred beyond
the approved grading plan. Upon further inspection, it was verified clearing had
occurred on an additional 1.5 acres.
Mr. Rees is appealing the NOV because he states the clearing of the entire area
will alleviate safety hazards and future problems from truck traffic near his new
retail store and neighboring shopping areas fronting Cantrell Road. Public Works
requests the NOV for clearing without a grading permit be upheld. Staff believes
this violation is especially egregious because Mr. Rees was given written notice
of the grading permit requirement during the recent PCD review process. In
addition, when a permit was finally issued, the permittee exceeded the agreed to
limits of clearing as shown on the approved erosion control plan.
Staff believes there are two issues that need to be decided by the Commission.
For the first issue, staff requests that the Planning Commission uphold the
determination that there was sufficient cause to issue the notice of violation and
allow the case to proceed to environmental court for clearing and grading without
a permit. Fines up to $500 per tree can be accessed by the court, as well as
requiring full restoration.
The second issue is that Mr. Rees requests approval to clear the remaining
1 acre of the 7.13 disturbed acres of the property. Staff does not support this
request because it does not comply with Section 29-186(b) of the land alteration
regulations.
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: NOV #0226
3
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
Ms. Cindy Dawson, Deputy City Attorney, stated the item was no longer before
the Commission since the applicant failed to perfect his appeal. She stated there
were specific guidelines outlined in the Code one of which was notification of
property owners. She stated the applicant did not notify the property owners thus
failing to perfect his appeal. She stated no action of the Commission was
necessary.