Loading...
pc_09 19 2002subLITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION SUBDIVISION HEARING SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD SEPTEMBER 19,2002 4:00 P.M. I.Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present being eleven (11)in number. II.Members Present:Judith Faust Craig Berry Bob Lowry Robert Stebbins Norm Floyd Mizan Rahman Bill Rector Rohn Muse Obray Nunnley,Jr. Fred Allen,Jr. Jerry Meyer Members Absent:None City Attorney:Stephen Giles III.Approval of the Minutes of the August 8,2002 Meeting of the Little Rock Planning Commission.The Minutes were approved as presented. LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION SUBDIVISION AGENDA SEPTEMBER 19,2002 4:00 P.M. I.DEFERRED ITEMS: A.LU02-18-01 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Ellis Mountain Planning District from Single Family to Multi-family located northeast of the intersection of Nix Road and Laurel Oaks Drive A.1.American Dream Builders Short-form PD-R (Z-7211),Located northeast of the intersection of Nix Road and Laurel Oaks Drive B.Ibsen Enterprises Revised Short-form PCD (Z-4973-C),Located at 3021 Cantrell Road C.LU02-08-03 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Central City Planning District from Single Family to Mixed Use,Located north of West 12'"Street and west of Thayer Street C.1.Union Rescue Mission Short-form POD (Z-6763-A),Located adjacent to the Union Pacific Railroad;north of West 11'"Street and west of Thayer Street D.Z-7264 Gilliam Car Wash —Conditional Use Permit 4700 West 12'"Street E.Z-7269 P.A.R.K.—Conditional Use Permit 5900 Browning Road 11.NEW ITEMS: 1.Overlook Park Revised Preliminary Plat (S-46-X),located on Vantage Point Drive 2.Riverdale Addition Replat and Site Plan Review (S-57-LL),located on Riverfront Drive at Morgan Keegan Drive 3.Villages of Wellington Phase X Preliminary Plat (S-1042-S),located on the Northwest Corner of Wellington Village Road and Loyola Drive 4.Boen 430 Subdivision Preliminary Plat (S-943-A),located on the Northeast Corner of 1-430 and Colonel Glenn Road Agenda,Page Two 5.Whiffield Addition Preliminary Plat (S-1352),located on Asher Avenue at Whiffield Street 6.Whitfield Addition (Lot 1)Subdivision Site Plan Review (S-1352-A),located onAsherAvenueatWhitfieldStreet 7.Whiffield Addition (Lot 2)Subdivision Site Plan Review (S-1352-B),located onAsherAvenueatWhiffieldStreet 8.Rush Engine Revised PCD (Z-4452-C),Northwest Corner of Asher Avenue andElmStreet 9.Harvest Foods Revised PCD (Z-5139-B),located on Cantrell Road at Taylor Loop 10.Garden Ridge Revised PCD (Z-5645-A),located at 11801 Chenal Parkway 11.Centre at Chenal Revised POD (Z-6051-H),located on the Northeast Corner ofChenalParkwayatTechnologyDrive 12.The Villages at Rahling Road (Lot 10A)Revised PCD (Z-6232-D),located on Rahling Circle 13.Kincade's Short-form PD-R (Z-7256-A),located on the Northwest Corner of Kavanaugh Boulevard and Midland Street 14.A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Central City Planning District at 2812 RingoStreetfromSingleFamilytoMultiFamily. 14.1.White Short-form PD-R (Z-7280),located at 2812 Ringo Street 15 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Ellis Mountain Planning District at 12800 Arthur Lane from Single Family to Low Density Residential. 15.1.Threadgill Short-form PD-R (Z-7281),located at 12800 Arthur Lane 16 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Boyle Park Planning District in the 2700 blockofWalkerStreetfromSinglefamilytoMulti-family. 16.1.Griffin Short-form PD-R (Z-7282),located at 2701 —2723 Walker Street 17.Chenal Commercial Park (Lot 3R)Short-form PD-C —Time Extension,located ontheNorthwestCornerofChenalParkwayandWellingtonVillageRoad 18.Land Alteration Permit -Notice of Violation Appeal,located at 11210 Sardis Road September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:A FILE NO.:LU02-18-01 Name:Land Use Plan Amendment -Ellis Mountain Planning District Location:North of the intersection of Nix Road and Coleman Street. Receuest:Single Family to Multi-Family Source:Rebecca Chandler,American Dream Investments PROPOSAL I REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the Ellis Mountain Planning District from Single Family to Multi-Family.The Multi-Family category accommodates residential development of (10)to thirty-six (36)dwelling units per acre.This application results from the applicant's wishes to build four duplexes. Prompted by this Land Use Plan Amendment request,the Planning Staff expanded the area of review southward from the applicant's property toward Kanis Road to the existing Low Density Residential. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The applicant's property is vacant land currently zoned R-2 Single Family and is approximately 0.64+acres in size.In the expanded area,zoned R-2,a house sits immediately to the south of the applicant's property while the remainder of the expanded area is vacant.The R-2 property to the north and east is vacant land zoned R-2.The property to the south consists of houses on large lots zoned R-2.The property to the west is developed with single-family houses and is zoned R-2 Single Family.A church located on a lot to the southwest of the applicant's property is zoned R-2 Single Family with a Conditional Use Permit for a church and is the subject of another item on this agenda. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: On July 3,2001 changes were made from Low Density Residential, Neighborhood Commercial,and Mixed Office Commercial in an area bounded by Bowman Road,Panther Creek,Cooper Orbit Road,and Brodie Creek starting about '/~of a mile southwest of the applicant's property. On February 15,2000 a change was made form Single Family to Low Density Residential at Westglen Drive and Gamble Road about "/4 of a mile southeast of the application area. On March 2,1999 multiple changes were made from Transition,Neighborhood Commercial,Multi-Family,Low Density Residential,Suburban Office,and Mixed September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:A Cont.FILE NO.:LU02-18-01 Office Commercial to Single Family,Low Density Residential,Suburban Office, Mixed Office Commercial,Park/Open Space,Service Trades District, Commercial,and Community Shopping along Kanis Road within a 1 mile radius of the property in question. The applicant's property,as well as all of the rest of the expanded area,is shown as Single Family on the Future Land Use Plan.The properties to the west,north, and east are shown as Single Family,while the property to the south is shown as Low Density Residential. MASTER STREET PLAN: Nix Road is a Residential Street with open drainage and is not built to standard. Laurel Oaks Drive is a Residential Street built to standard.Half street improvements may be required to upgrade Nix Road to a Residential Street through the installation of curb and gutters.Two platted undeveloped street right-of-ways are adjacent to the applicant's property.Coleman Street and Farris streets are un-built residential streets.Both streets will be subject to improvements unless the right-of-way for either,or both,streets is abandoned. There are no bikeways shown on the Master Street Plan that would be affected by this amendment. PARKS: The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 shows that the applicant's property is located in a service deficit area.Park facilities would need to be developed to provide adequate park and open space areas to serve the area covered by this amendment and surrounding areas. HISTORIC DISTRICTS: There are not any historic districts near-by that would be affected by this amendment. Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan.The Residential Development goal listed an action statement of requiring that city staff ensure both single-family and multi-family uses in newly developing areas,while allowing the multi-family to act as a buffer between single family and office.The Office and Commercial Development Goal contained an objective of encouraging the adoption of a plan for Kanis Road.An action statement recommended the aggressive use of Planned Zoning Districts to insure that new developments would be compatible with the existing 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:A Cont.FILE NO.:LU02-18-01 neighborhood.The Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan is due for an update study. ANALYSIS: The applicant's property lies in an area that is characterized by mostly vacant property located between Nix and Gamble Road.A few houses are located on Nix Road.Most of the developed property is located in the Parkway Place subdivision and is not oriented towards Nix Road. The current land use pattern in the area places the more intense land uses at the edge of the neighborhood along Kanis Road,W.Markham Street,and Chenal Parkway.The higher density residential areas serve as a buffer between the Single Family and non-residential uses to the north.Most of the Multi-family area is built out to capacity at the Shadow Lakes Apartments.In contrast,most of the land shown as Low-Density Residential remains vacant.Extra land shown as Multi-family could allow for the development of more housing at Multi-Family densities at the expense of land shown as Single Family.This amendment would not effect the availability of exiting Low-Density Residential land,nor would it increase the availability of land for housing that is not Multi-Family or Single Family.However,even though this amendment would reduce the amount of land shown as Single Family,there will still be land shown as Single Family available for development north of the applicant's property and east of Gamble Road. Approval of Multi-Family will place a small area,less than two-thirds of an acre, of Multi-Family in a location that is surrounded by a large area shown as Single Family. The applicant's property is also located in the area that was covered by the Kanis Road Study.The current land uses along Kanis Road are the result of recommendations made in that study.The current pattern of development places the more intense Multi-Family and Low Density Residential uses at locations accessed by Collector and Minor Arterial Streets.This application would introduce an area shown as Multi-Family accessed solely from a Residential Street.Depending on the resolution of right-of-way abandonment issues,this application could introduce an area shown as Multi-Family accessed solely from one Residential Street.Regardless of the outcome of the abandonment issues,all of the access to the property will be from Residential streets. The issues concerning the construction,or abandonment,of Coleman and Farris Streets could also effect not only the development of the applicant's property,but also the future development of neighboring properties.If future development takes place on property located between Nix and Gamble Roads,adequate 3 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:A Cont.FILE NO.:LU02-18-01 access would need to be provided to those properties.Coleman and Farris streets could provide access to future developments,or else future streets will need to be developed to provide access to potential developments. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:Gibraltar/Pt. West/Timber Ridge,Parkway Place Property Owners Association,and Spring Valley Manor Property Owners Association.Staff has received two comments from area residents.None are in support,both were neutral. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes that the change to Multi-Family is not appropriate at this time.With an impending review of a City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan,this change would be premature. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(May 9,2002) The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the June 20,2002 Planning Commission meeting.A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes and 1 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(June 20,2002) The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the August 8,2002 Planning Commission meeting.A motion to approve the consent agenda was made and approved.The item was deferred with a vote of 7 ayes,0 noes, 3 absent,and 1 open position. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(August 8,2002) The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the September 19, 2002 Planning Commission meeting.A motion was made to waive the by-laws for a five-day notice to defer prior to the Planning Commission meeting,That motion to waive the bylaws was made and approved with a vote of 7 ayes, 2 noes,1 absent,and 1 open position.A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 9 ayes,0 noes,1 absent, and 1 open position. 4 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:A Cont.FILE NO.:LU02-18-01 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) Brian Minyard,City Staff,made a brief presentation to the Commission.Donna James made a presentation of item A.1 so the discussion could coincide with the discussion for item A.See item A.1 for a complete discussion concerning the Short Form Planned Development-.Residential. Ms.Rebecca Chandler,applicant,made a presentation to the Commission concerning census information about the area,prices of current homes in the market,projected costs of the units she wishes to develop,availability of housing in the area,and shortages of townhouse/condos in the area.She continued to state that she was trying to promote an alternate living ownership arrangement for less money than single family detached housing. Commissioner Rahman stated that he was uncomfortable with the abandonments on both the Land Use Plan and the zoning item. A motion was made to defer both items 16 and 16.1 until the time in which the abandonments are heard.The item was deferred with a vote of 10 ayes,1 no, and 0 absent. 5 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:A 1 FILE NO.:Z-7211 NAME:American Dream Builder's Short-form PD-R LOCATION:Northeast of the intersection of Laurel Oaks Drive and Nix Road DEVELOPER:ENGINEER: American Dream Builders,Inc.Carter Burgess 18 Misty Court 10809 Executive Center Little Rock,AR Suite 204 Little Rock,AR 72211 AREA:0.64 Acre NUMBER OF LOTS:4 FT.NEW STREET:0 CURRENT ZONING R-2,Single-family ALLOWED USES:Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING:PD-R (6-units detached single-family housing) PROPOSED USE:Detached Single-family housing (6.25 units per acre) VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:Waiver of street improvements to Farris Street and to Coleman Street. A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to place six units of detached housing on this four lot site.The applicant proposes the units to be two story units and each will have an attached garage.The future sale of these units will be under a horizontal property regime.Each of the units will contain between 1400 —1526 square feet and be 3 bedroom,2.5 baths and a two car garage. September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:A.1 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7211 The applicant is proposing 5-foot set backs between the buildings and the side property lines and a 20-foot access and utility easement to serve the development as a single access from Nix Road. The applicant proposes to replat the four lots into one lot as a part of this process.Also included in the application is the request for right-of-way abandonment of the alley dght-of-way between Lots 7 and 8 and Lots 9 and 10. B.EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a vacant tree covered site with a slope falling to the south and west. Nix Road is an unimproved narrow roadway with deep ditches.The site is currently zoned R-2 as is the majority of the property around the site. C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing,staff has received numerous phone calls in opposition to the proposed development.The Parkway Place Property Owners Association and the Gibralter/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Associations along with all residents within 300 feet of the site,who could be identified,and all property owners within 200 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1.Nix Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a residential street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 2.Unless closure of the platted but undeveloped Coleman and Farris Streets is accomplished,dedication of right-of-way and construction to Master Street Plan standards will be required. 3.Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"(Master Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvement to these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned development. 4.All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. 5.Appropriate handicap ramps will be required per current ADA standards. 6.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 7,A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan will be required per Section 29-186 (e). 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO A1 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7211 E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater:Sewer available and not adversely affected. AP &L:No comment received. ARKLA:Need a better copy of the plat showing cross streets. Southwestern Bell:Easements on both sides of the drive are needed to provide telephone access.Contact Southwestern Bell at 373-5112 for additional details. Water:A water main extension may be required to serve this property.An acreage charge of $600 per acre currently applies to this property in addition to normal charges in this area.Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details. ~Fire De artmenk Place fire hydrants per code.Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional details. CountoPlanntng'o comment received. CATA:The site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on bus radius,turnout and route. F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: ~ptanntn Division:This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District.The Land Use Plan indicates Single Family for the site.The applicant has applied for a Planned Residential Development to build six units to be sold under a horizontal property regime.A Land Use Plan amendment for a change to Multi Family is a separate item on this agenda (LU02-18-01), Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan.The Residential Development goal is supported by an objective of encouraging lower density development in the area.Action Statements include using multi-family housing to act as a buffer between office and single-family uses and limiting the density and square footage of multi-family developments. ~bandana e The plan submitted does not aflow for the required nine fgt foot wide land use buffers to the north and east.A six (6)foot high opaque screen is required to the north and east unless there are to be no windows or doors (except those required by the city)on the north and east sides. 3 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:A.1 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7211 BBuildini Codes:No comment received. G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(August 29,2002) The applicant was not present.Staff stated the applicant had tried unsuccessfully to close the roadways adjacent to the site and now wished to pursue the item with only the closure of the alleyway between the lots.Staff stated the applicant should contact the utility companies and Public Works to obtain comments with regard to the alley closure.Staff stated they would work with the applicant to resolve the technical issues prior to the Commission meeting. There being no further issues to discuss,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 by Staff.The applicant has included a six (6)foot wooden fence on the north and south property lines and has indicated a fence could be placed along the undeveloped Farris Street if necessary.The applicant has indicated a five (5)foot side yard setback along the north and south property lines.The typical required land use buffer is nine (9)feet.Staff is not supportive of the requested reduction in landscaped area.The development abuts single-family to the north and the minimum typical buffer should be put in place.In addition,with the dedication of right-of-way on the south side of the development (Coleman Street) there will be a zero side yard setback. The applicant has indicated there will not be any signage as a part of the development.The applicant has also indicted the development will be constructed in one phase.As stated in the proposal section the applicant proposes the units to be for sale through a horizontal property regime and ownership and maintenance of common areas will be handled through a property owners association. The applicant is requesting a waiver of street improvements to Coleman Street and to Farris Street.The roadways have not developed in the area and the applicant feels the construction of the streets is unjustified at this time. Staff is not supportive of the development as proposed.The density of the development is not consistent with the development pattern in the area.With the placement of this number of units on these four 50-foot by 150-foot lots there is not sufficient room for side yard setbacks.Should the applicant be unsuccessful in the abandonment of the alleyway the development will not work. 4 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:A.1 Cont.FILE NO '-7211 Similar densities have developed in the area but each of these were closer to West Markham Street,shown for multi-family on the Future Land Use Plan and were adjacent to existing multi-family developments.Staff feels the neighborhood would be better served if the lots developed as single-family units. I.STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the proposed Planned Residential Development as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) Ms.Rebecca Chandler was present representing the application.There were no objectors present.The land use plan amendment and the rezoning were discussed simultaneously.Staff presented each item with a recommendation of denial for each. Commissioner Berry questioned the number of units,which could be constructed on the site today.Staff stated four (4)and increase of four (4)units since the proposal included eight (8)units.Staff stated the applicant was requesting a waiver of right-of- way dedication and street construction to Coleman Street and Farris Street.Staff stated the applicant was also requesting the roadway be abandoned and the alleyway within the development be abandoned. Ms.Chandler stated her occupation was a real estate appraiser.She stated recently she had determined there was a shortage of homes in the $85,000 to $95,000 range. She stated this became an issue when looking for a home for her widowed mother.She stated most of the homes in the area were $100,000+.Ms.Chandler gave the Commission statistical data from the Census related to homeownership,occupancy, ages and number of units in the area.She also gave the Commission a MSL listing of data indicating the market and the pertinent data related to home sales. Commissioner Berry questioned if the design was directly tied to the closure of the streets.Ms.Chandler stated she had reduced the size of the development to comply with the requirements of staff.Staff stated once the dedication of the right-of-way there would be a zero side yard setback on Coleman Street.Commissioner Berry stated the project was hinged on the closing of the street. There was a lengthy discussion concerning the street abandonment and the impact of abandonment of streets in areas,which had not yet developed. Staff stated the area was a very old plat and they had not heard from all the property owners within the affected area. Commissioner Berry made a motion to defer the item until the street issues could be resolved.The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes and 1 absent. 5 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:B FILE NO '-4973-C NAME:IBSEN Enterprises Revised Short-form PCD LOCATION:3021 Cantrell Road DEVELOPER:ENGINEER: IBSEN Enterprises,Inc.White-Daters and Associates P.O.Box 250565 ff24 Rahling Circle Little Rock,AR Little Rock,AR 72223 AREA;0.894Acres NUMBEROF LOTS:1 FT.NEWSTREET:0 CURRENT ZONING:PCD ALLOWED USES:Auto sales and display PROPOSED ZONING:Revised PCD PROPOSED USE:Retail (C-3 uses) VARIANCESNVAIVERS REQUESTED:17-foot retaining wall. BACKGROUND: On August 14,1990,the Planning Commission recommended approval of a PCD for "boat sales and display"for Red River Marine;the request at that time included a request for approval of all other by right uses in the C-3 zoning district,and this request was included in the approval.The Board of Directors established the PCD on September 12,1990 in Ordinance No.15,932. September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:B Cont.FILE NO.:Z-4973-C On May 17,1994 the Planning Commission reviewed a revision to the PCD to allow IBSEN Imports,an automotive dealership,to operate on the site.The request was also made at the time for all C-3 uses as alternative uses for the site.The Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No.16,689 on June 7,1994 to allow the revision of the PCD for IBSEN Imports and all other C-3 uses. There were conditions attached to the PCD which included the landscaping be reinstalled along Cantrell Road and thereafter,maintained,and should IBSEN Imports vacate the site,the fence which was approved (to be located on the front building line of the property)be removed. A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to demolish an existing commercial building and construct a new 9270 square foot strip retail center.The applicant has requested C-3 uses be allowable uses for the site.The proposed development will contain 45 parking spaces 39 of which are adjacent to Cantrell Road.The applicant is proposing a loading zone in the rear of the building along with six (6)parking spaces and the dumpster.There is an existing AP &L easement (34-feet)on the west property line in which the applicant proposes the placement of a portion of two (2)parking spaces.The applicant proposes the placement of a single ground mounted sign but has identified two locations.The sign is to be located near the east driveway entrance with the alternative location the west driveway. The applicant has indicated a possibility of nine (9)bays within the development eight (8)of which are estimated at 1808 square feet with the last bay estimated at 630 square feet.The walls will be temporary wall capable of being moved to accommodate larger or smaller uses. The applicant has indicated the street will be constructed to Master Street Plan standards including a five (5)foot sidewalk.A portion of the front landscaping will be located in the street right-of-way and will require franchising from the City and approval by the City Beautiful Commission. The applicant is requesting a 17-foot retaining wall to be located in the rear of the building.The wall will abut the AP 8 L easement and extend to the north and east falling to zero near Cantrell Road and to a few feet behind the building. B.EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is the current location of IBSEN Imports,an automobile dealership.In the past the site has been home to Red River Marine,the use,which originally established the PCD and Brown's Carpets and Custom Rugs the use,which 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:B Cont.FILE NO.:Z-4973-C entered the site after Red River Marine vacated.Brown's Carpets and Custom Rugs was an allowable use under the original PCD since all C-3 permitted uses were also approved. The zoning in the area includes 1-2,0-2,C-3 and R-2.The uses in the area include a mix of office and commercial type uses including,an antique store, restaurant sites,both large scale office developments and single use office development and an automobile service center.To the south,on the bluff overlooking Cantrell Road,is R-2 zoning which is developed as single family. C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing,staff has received several informational phone calls concerning the proposed application and uses of the site.The Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood Association,the Cedar Hill Terrace and the Capitol View Neighborhood Associations,along with all residents within 300 feet of the site, who could be identified,and all property owners within 200 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1.Cantrell Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial. A dedication of right-of-way to 45 feet from centerline will be required. (90'otal right-of-way minimum). 2.Public Works will support a franchise agreement for landscaping in the right- of-way. 3.Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"(Master Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvement to these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned development. 4.Because of the volume of traffic on this arterial,a 28'riveway width is recommended. 5.All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. 6.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 7.Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from AHTD,District Vl. 8.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.(Note:Estimated lot size 1.2 acres) 9.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities are required. 10.A Grading Permit will be required per Sec.29-186 (c)8 (d). 11.Street Improvement plans shall include signage and striping.Traffic Engineering must approve completed plans prior to construction. 3 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:B Cont.FILE NO.:Z-4973-C E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater:Sewer available and not adversely affected. AP 8 L:No comment received. ARKLA;No comment received. Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted. Water:The existing 1-inch water meter that serves this property is the largest size available off the existing water main.A water main extension will be required if additional fire protection is required.Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details. ~Fire Oe artment:Place fire hydrants per code.Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional details. C~ount Plannin:No comment received. CATA:Site is located on Bus Route ¹21and has no effect on bus radius,turnout and route. F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Plannin Division:This request is located in the Heights /Hillcrest Planning District.The Land Use Plan shows Commercial for this property.The applicant has applied for a revision of an existing Planned Commercial Development for a new neighborhood shopping development. Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. ~hendeca e:The Zoning Ordinance does not allow for utility easements to be located within the required land use buffer when adjacent to single family zones or uses.The proposed land use buffer width of twelve (12)feet is required along the western perimeter.At no point should this buffer drop below a width of 6.7 feet.The requirements listed take into account the reductions allowed within the designated "mature area". Since the proposed landscaping perimeter strip along Cantrell Road will be located within the public right-of-way City Beautiful Commission and City franchise approval will be required, 4 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:B Cont.FILE NO '-4973-C BBuildin B Codes:No comment received. G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:August 29,2002 Mr.Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the application.Staff briefly described the proposed development noting additions, which were needed on the proposed site plan,(days and hours of operation, listing of proposed uses,dumpster location,building height).Staff stated the proposed site plan indicated the use of the AP 8 L easement as the landscape buffer,which was not allowable.Staff stated the Zoning Ordinance did not allow for utility easements to be located within the required land use buffer when adjacent to single family zones.Staff stated the proposed development had to maintain a minimum width of twelve (12)feet along the western perimeter and at no point can the buffer drop below a width of 6.7 feet. Staff also stated the proposed development would require franchise approval from the City and the City Beautiful Commission with regard to parking and landscaping in the right-of-way. Public Works comments were addressed.Staff stated the applicant would be required to install street improvements along Cantrell Road.Mr.White questioned if an in-lieu contribution would be an acceptable alternative.Staff stated the request would be considered. After the discussion,the Committee then forwarded the Revised PCD to the full Commission for final action. H.ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised by Staff and the Subdivision Committee.The applicant has indicated Cantrell Road will be constructed to Master Street Plan standard including a five (5)foot sidewalk.The proposed landscaping is located in the right-of-way and will require a franchise from the City and approval by the City Beautiful Commission.Staff is supportive of this request. The applicant proposes the days and hours of operation to be from 6:00 am to 10:00 pm seven days per week.The applicant has indicated the maximum building height will be 35-feet.The applicant has also indicated on the site plan the dumpster to be located behind the building and screened on three sides with an 8-foot opaque fence. The applicant has indicated a sign will be located near the east driveway entrance and will be a maximum of 36-feet in height and 160 square feet in area, 5 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:B Cont.FILE NO.:Z-4973-C The applicant has indicated an alternative location near the west driveway entrance and has also indicated,if constructed,the sign area would not be any larger than allowed by the zoning ordinance for commercially zoned property (a maximum of 36-feet in height and 160 square feet in area). The applicant has indicated the proposed retaining wall located adjacent to the AP&L easement near the southern portion of the site will be 17-feet in height gradually falling as the wall extends to the north and the east.Staff is supportive of the request.Per the current ordinance the applicant would be allow a 15-foot single retaining wall and Staff does not feel the additional two (2)feet would cause any adverse impact on the area. The applicant is proposing the placement of 45 parking spaces.The typical required parking for a development of this type would be 41 spaces based on shopping center development criteria of one (1)space per 225 square feet of gross leaseable space.The proposed parking is sufficient to meet the typical parking demand of the development. The applicant proposes the use of the AP&L easement as a portion of the land use buffer and the placement of two (2)of the front parking spaces in the easement.The typical land use buffer along the western perimeter should maintain an average of 12-feet and at any point not fall below 6.7 feet excluding the easement.Staff would require,prior to a building permit being issued,the applicant furnish written approval from AP &L to use that portion of the easement for parking. Staff has some general concern with the mechanical equipment,which is proposed to be located on the roof.There are single-family homes located on the ridge top overlooking the site.Staff would propose the applicant screen the mechanical equipment and place some form of deflector to send the sound to the north of the site. In general staff is supportive of the proposed development as filed.If the applicant works to mitigate the noise from the mechanical equipment the development should have minimal adverse impact on the surrounding residents. I.STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed revision to the Planned Commercial Development to allow a new commercial building to be constructed on the site and allow C-3 uses as the allowed uses for the site subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in Paragraphs D,E,F and H of this report. 6 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:B Cont.FILE NO.:Z-4973-C PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) Mr.Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the application. There were no objectors present.Staff stated they were unaware of any unresolved issues associated with the proposed modification to the PCD.Staff presented the item with a positive recommendation of the proposed revision to the Planned Commercial Development to allow a new commercial building to be constructed on the site and allow C-3 uses as alternative uses for the site subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the "Staff Recommendation"above, There was no further discussion.The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for Approval and approved,as recommended by Staff,by a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. 7 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:C FILE NO.:LU02-08-03 Name:Land Use Plan Amendment -Central City Planning District Location:An area north and west of 12th and Thayer Streets. Receuest:Light Industrial,Industrial,Park /Open Space and Commercial to Mixed Use Source:William Willis,Union Rescue Mission PROPOSAL /REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the Central City Planning District from Light Industrial,Industrial,Park /Open Space and Commercial 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 uses are entirely office or commercial or if the use is a mixture of the three.The applicant has submitted an application to develop the property to provide temporary lodging,offices,and social services. Prompted by this Land Use Amendment request,the Planning Staff expanded the area of review to include the area between the Union Pacific tracks and Thayer Street extending south to 11'"Street.The boundary continues west on 11'"Street to the alley between Thayer and Jones Street continuing south to the area shown as Commercial along 12"Street then west to the railroad tracks.The railroad tracks serve as the western boundary for the expanded area. With these changes,the entire area of Park /Open Space between 10'"and 11'treetswestofThayerStreetwillalsobeeliminated.The area was expanded to 1)remove a remnant of industrial that would be between Single Family and Light Industrial,2)recognize existing commercial zoning that was shown as Light Industrial and Industrial,3)and remove Park /Open Space that was placed as a buffer between Industrial and Single Family. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The expanded area consists of vacant land,houses,and commercial building on 12'"Street currently zoned I-2 Light Industrial,R-4 Two Family Residential,and C-3 General Commercial and is approximately 9.54+acres in size.A bus barn and a print shop are located in an I-2 zone to the west.A warehouse,junkyard and vacant property are located in the I-2 zone to the north.The property lying to the east of the expanded area is zoned R-4 and R-3 Single Family and is occupied by single-family residences.The property to the south of the expanded area is 1-2,C-3,R-3,and R-4 occupied by residential and commercial structures September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:C Cont.FILE NO.:LU02-08-03 FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: On March 19,2002,multiple changes were made from Single Family,Mixed Office Commercial,Public Institutional,and Mixed Use to Public Institutional and Multi-Family about "/4 of a mile to the east of the applicant's property in the vicinity,and including,the campus of the Arkansas Children's Hospital. On July 17,2001,a change was made from Single Family to Park /Open Space at Stephens Park about 9/10 of a mile southwest of the amendment area. On September 19,2000,multiple changes were made from Service Trades District to Park /Open Space,Public Institutional and Mixed Use in the 1100 block of Cantrell Road about '/4 of a mile northeast of the expanded area. On March 7,2000,multiple changes were made from Mixed Use,Office, Commercial,Mixed Office Commercial,Service Trades District,and Public Institutional to Public Institutional and Mixed Use Urban covering most of the Downtown Planning District starting east of Woodlane Street about '/4 of a mile northeast of the study area. The area is shown on the Future Land Use Plan as Light Industrial,Industrial, Park /Open Space and Single Family.Industrial is shown on the Land Use Plan to the north of the area while Light Industrial is shown to the west.Single Family is shown to the east of the area while Commercial is shown to the south. This property was the subject of a previous Land Use Plan amendment heard and approved by the Planning Commission on November 11,1999.The amendment was forwarded to the February 15,2000 Board of Directors meeting and was tabled.The current land uses shown for the area have remained unchanged.The current application is similar to,but slightly smaller than,the original application heard by the Planning Commission. MASTER STREET PLAN: 12'"Street is shown on the Master Street Plan as a Collector Street and is built to standard.10'",11'",Jones,and Thayer Streets are standard residential streets in need of repair.There are no Bikeways shown on the plan that would be affected by this amendment. PARKS: The nearest park shown on the Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 is Fletcher Park located at 1-630 and Woodrow Street west of the railroad tracks.Fletcher Park is listed as a mini-park of less than five acres equipped with a playground,basketball pad,a practice /active recreation area,and two picnic tables.This park is designed to serve the recreational needs of the 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:C Cont.FILE NO.:LU02-08-03 neighborhood this application area is located in.The main disadvantage of the park is the partial barrier created by the railroad tracks located at 10'"and 11'" Streets.The railroad may be crossed at 12'"Street. HISTORIC DISTRICTS; The south boundary of the expanded area of review is located one block north of the north boundary of the Little Rock Central High School National Historic District.Since the historic district in a national district and not a local district, development within the amendment area hopefully will respect the character of the surrounding neighborhood.However,this amendment should not affect the area inside the historic district. CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Stephens Area Neighborhood Action Plan.The Housing goal recommends the removal of substandard houses and lots with an objective of providing a safer living environment.Action statements support the removal of burnt and unsafe buildings while cleaning vacant weed lots and alleys.Since a large portion of the property in the area is vacant this amendment would provide for infill development that would minimize the occurrence of weed lots.Most of the neighborhood's burnt and unsafe structures are located to the east outside of the study area. ANALYSIS: At an earlier time,industrial enterprises located along this section of the railroad tracks for the obvious transportation reasons.Other industrial buildings lie along these tracks,but no notable development has occurred in the recent past.As market forces change,this site has become less desirable for industrial infill, even though it is zoned 1-2.Mixed Use would also provide a transition between the remaining area shown as Light Industrial west of the Railroad Tracks and the residential uses to the east.The use of Planned Zoning Districts in the area shown,as Mixed Use would protect the character of the residential areas to the east and the area adjacent to Central High by providing a mechanism for design review of future developments located in this area.Mixed Use would provide for redevelopment in an area where the conforming industrial development would likely not happen. Outside the application a mixture of industrial,institutional,commercial and residential uses characterizes area the neighborhood.Most of the neighborhood to the east is residential in character.The northern edge of the neighborhood, next to 1-630,is a marginal residential area with a junkyard and machine shop located at the railroad and freeway.The Dorcus House located at the southeast 3 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO C Cont FILE NO LU02-08-03 corner of 1-630 and Park Street serves as a mixture of both residential and institutional activities.The Children's Hospital located at Martin Luther King is a large Public Institutional use that serves as the eastern boundary of the residential area.The Future Land Use for the properties to the east of Schiller Street shows Public Institutional,which will limit the possibility of new residential development.In addition to the Future land Use plan,the Children's Hospital Campus Long Range Plan shows that the hospital plans to extend its campus to Schiller Street north of 11'"Street which would limit the long term viability of residential uses in that area.12'"Street east of Thayer consists mainly of residential uses while west of Thayer storefront churches and small commercial businesses with a day care center located at the railroad tracks.The businesses on 12'"at the railroad consist of a commercial building on the south side of the street and a building on the north side that is a warehouse and office building. The neighborhood to the south of 12'"Street is strictly residential in character. About two block of housing separate the Central High School Historic Site from the study area.Based on the general development pattern of the area,small retail business,small offices,quasi-public institutions,and affordable historic residences would be compatible with the current development pattern of the neighborhood. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:Capitol Hill Neighborhood Association,Central High Neighborhood Association,East of Broadway Neighborhood Association,Meadowbrook Neighborhood Association, MLK Neighborhood Association,South End Neighborhood Association,South End Neighborhood Developers,Wright Avenue Neighborhood Association, Capitol View Stifft Station Neighborhood Association,and Pine to Woodrow Neighborhood Association.Staff has received one neutral comment from area residents. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is appropriate.The change to Mixed Use should provide flexibility for,and review of,future development in the area. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(June 20,2002) The applicant was notified that less than 8 Commissioners were present and that a minimum of 6 votes would be needed for the item to pass.The applicant was given the option to defer the item to the August 8'"Planning Commission meeting.The applicant requested the deferral.A motion to defer item 15 to the August 8'"meeting and was approved with a vote of 7 ayes,0 noes,3 absent and 1 open position. 4 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:C Cont.FILE NO.:LU02-08-03 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(AUGUST 8,2002) The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the September 19, 2002 Planning Commission meeting.A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 9 ayes,0 noes,1 absent, and 1 open position. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) Brian Minyard,City Staff,made a brief presentation to the Commission.Donna James made a presentation of item C.1 so the discussion could coincide with the discussion for item C.See item C.1 for a complete discussion concerning the Short Form Planned Office Development. William Willis,the applicant,made a presentation to the commission about the Union Rescue's mission to serve the homeless.He spoke of crime records for the area,the Consolidated Housing Plan and the support of contributors throughout the city. Commissioner Nunnley stated that he did not agree last time and he is still opposed to the application. Commissioner Faust asked if Ms Ambrose was opposed to the Land Use Plan Amendment.Ms.Ambrose stated that she would not oppose it,Susan Leslie stated that she could not say. It was noted that Commissioner Bill Rector has recused and had left the room at the beginning of the discussion. A motion was made to approve the item as presented.The item was approved with a vote of 10 ayes,0 no,0 absent,and 1 recusal. 5 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:C.1 FILE NO.:Z-6763-A NAME:Union Rescue Mission Short-form POD LOCATION:Adjacent to the Union Pacific Railroad;North of West 11'"Street and West of Thayer Street DEVELOPER:ENGINEER: Union Rescue Mission Lewis,Elliott and Studer 3001 Confederate Blvd.11225 Huron Lane,Suite 104 Little Rock,AR 72206 Little Rock,AR 72211 AREA:2.43 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0 CURRENT ZONING:1-2 ALLOWED USES:Light Industrial PROPOSED ZONING:POD PROPOSED USE:Union Rescue Mission facilities VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of a proposed rezoning request for the Union Rescue Mission from 1-2 to POD on November 11,1999.The Board of Directors at their January 20,2001 meeting denied the request.The applicant proposed to rezone the 2.43-acre site from 1-2 to POD to allow for the development of the Union Rescue Mission facility.The project was to house administrative offices, temporary living quarters,food preparation and dining areas,and educational space.A Future Land Use Plan amendment was also filed and later denied by the Board of Directors. September 1u,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:C.1 FILE NO Z-6763-A The applicant proposed to construct a 29,000 square foot,single story building along the south side of West 10'"Street,west of Thayer Street.The applicant also proposed to construct a small area of parking (21 spaces)along the north side of West 10'"Street and a small area of parking (19 spaces)along the north side of West 11"Street. The proposed building was to be one story with a 30-foot ridge height.The facade was to be a split face block and brick,with a colored raised seam metal roof.One wall- mounted sign was proposed which would have an area of approximately 25 square feet. The applicant proposed to abandon the portion of West 10'"Street between the railroad right-of-way and Thayer Street,the alley right-of-way within Block 9,Roots and Coy Subdivision (block bounded by Thayer Street,West 10'"Street,West 11'"Street,and the railroad right-of-way),and the portion of West 11'"Street between Jones Street and the railroad right-of-way. The applicant noted the facility would include the following uses: 1.Temporary living quarters —180 to 200 beds 2.Office space —5,800 square feet 3.Educational space —4,000 square feet 4.Kitchen and dining areas A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant has filed exactly the same application as was previously approved by the Planning Commission and denied by the Board of Directors. The applicant proposes to construct a 29,000 square foot,single story building along the south side of West 10'"Street and west of Thayer Street.The applicant also proposes to construct a small area of parking (21 spaces)along the north side of West 10'"Street and a small area of parking (19 spaces)along the north side of West 11'"Street. The proposed building is to be one story with a 30-foot ridge height.The facade will be a split face block and brick,with a colored raised seam metal roof.One wall-mounted sign is proposed which will have an area of approximately 25 square feet and signage is proposed on the "bell-tower". The applicant proposes to abandon a portion of West 10'"Street between the railroad right-of-way and Thayer Street,the alley right-of-way within Block 9, Roots and Coy Subdivision (block bounded by Thayer Street,West 10'"Street, West 11'"Street,and the railroad right-of-way),and the portion of West 11" Street between Jones Street and the railroad right-of-way. 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:C.1 FILE NO '-6763-A The applicant notes the facility will include the following uses: ~Temporary living quarters —180 to 200 beds ~Office space —5,800 square feet ~Educational space -4,000 square feet ~Kitchen and dining areas A Future Land Use Plan amendment has also been filed in association with the proposed development (Item ¹15 File No.LU02-08-03). B.EXISTING CONDITIONS: The portion of the site along the north side of West 10"Street is vacant,grass- covered and fenced.There are no trees on this portion of the site.The area on the south side of West 10'"Street is also vacant and grass-covered,with a scattering of trees.This portion of the site is where single family homes once existed,and is 9 to 8 feet above the existing grade of West 20'"Street. There is railroad right-of-way along the west boundary of the site,with industrial buildings and single-family residences further west.There are two industrial buildings and a monopole tower to the north,between this site and 1-630.There is an auto salvage yard to the northeast at the southeast corner of Maryland and Thayer Streets.There are four (4)single-family residences immediately east of the proposed building,within the same block,with additional single family residences further south across West 11'"Street and east across Thayer Street. C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received several phone calls from persons requesting information on this application.The Capital Hill,the Central High,the Capitol View,the Downtown,the Pine to Woodrow and the Stephen Neighborhood Associations were notified of the Public Hearing as well as residents within 300 feet of the site who could be identified and all property owners within 200 feet of the site. D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1.A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the corner of West 10'"and Thayer Streets. 2.Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"(Master Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvement to the street including 5-foot sidewalks with planned development.Applicant may petition to abandon West 10"Street. Improvements are required on West 11'"Street and on Thayer Street where they abut the property. 3 September 1LF,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:C.1 FILE NO.:Z-6763-A 3.Submit petition to close alley. 4.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 5.Obtain permits prior to doing any street cuts or curb cuts.Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way.Contact Traffic Engineering at 501-340-4854 (Derrick Bergfield)for more information. 6.All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. 7.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. 8.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities are required. 9.A Grading Permit will be required per Sec.29-186 (c)8 (d). E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected. ENTERGY:Approved as submitted. ARKLA:Approved as submitted. Southwestern Bell:No comment received. Water:A '/Rn is the maximum meter size available off existing water mains.The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine if 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. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details. ~Fire Ce artment:Place fire hydrants per code.Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for additional details at 918-3752. ~Count Plannin:No comment received. CATA:Site is located on Bus Route /f3 and has no effect on bus radius,turnout and route. F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Plannin Division:This request is located in the Central City Planning District The Land Use Plan shows Light Industrial,Industrial,Park /Open Space and Commercial for this property.The applicant has applied for a Planned Office Development to provide temporary lodging,offices,and social services. A Land Use Plan amendment for a change to Mixed Use is a separate item on this agenda (LU02-08-03). 4 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:C.1 FILE NO.:Z-6763-A Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Stephens Area Neighborhood Action Plan.The Housing goal recommends the removal of substandard houses and lots,with an objective of providing a safer living environment.Actions statements support the removal of burnt and unsafe buildings while cleaning vacant weed lots and alleys. ~hendeca e:A total of six fdt percent of the interior of the vehicular use area must be landscaped with interior islands.This takes into account the reduction allowed within the designated "mature area".Curb and gutter or another approved border will be required to protect landscaped areas from vehicular traffic. ~Buitdin Codes:No comment received. G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:May 30,2002 The applicant was present representing the application.Staff briefly described the proposed request noting the proposal was exactly the same as the proposal reviewed by the Commission at their November 1999 Public Hearing.Staff stated there were additions needed on the site plan,(building heights,dumpster location,building dimensions,building setbacks).Staff also stated they would need the days and hours of operation,the number of employees and the details of any fencing. Public Works comments were addressed.The applicant was told to either make street improvements to West 10rh Street or petition the City for closure.Staff stated a 20-foot radial dedication would be required at the corner of West 11rB Street and Thayer Street,but the intersection would not be reconstructed at this time. Mr.Lawson stated the applicant should try to meet with the neighborhoods prior to the Commission meeting.He stated his staff would contact all the persons involved in the original application,both for and against,and invite them to a community meeting. After the discussion,the Committee then forwarded the proposed rezoning to Planned Office Development,to the full Commission for final action. H.ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee.The applicant has noted that the Public Works comments will be complied with. 5 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:C.1 FILE NO.:2-6763-A The applicant proposes a six (6)foot high wood-screening fence adjacent to the residential uses.The applicant is also proposing a 7.5-foot buffer along the east property line (east of proposed building and east of parking area accessed from West 11'"Street). As noted in the Background Section and in Paragraph A of this report,the applicant is requesting abandonment of three (3)pieces of right-of-way as part of the development plan.By endorsing the proposed site development plan,the Commission can recommend approval of the abandonment requests.The applicant will need to file additional paperwork with Public Works and the City Clerk prior to the application being forwarded to the Board of Directors. Otherwise,to staff's knowledge,there are no outstanding issues associated with this application.Staff feels that the proposed development will have no adverse effect on the general area. I.STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed POD zoning subject to the following conditions: 1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs D,E and F of this report. 2.Staff recommends approval of the following abandonment's: a.West 10'"Street,between Thayer Street and the railroad right-of-way b.West 11'"Street,between Jones Street and the railroad right-of-way c.Alley right-of-way within Block 9,Roots and Coy Subdivision PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JUNE 20,2002) Mr.William Willis was present representing the application.There were several objectors present.There were eight (8)Commissioners present.The Chairman stated it was Planning Commission policy to offer a deferral to the applicant when fewer than nine (9)Commissioners were present.The applicant requested a deferral to the August 8,2002 Public Hearing. The Commission voted to defer the application by a vote of 7 ayes,0 noes,3 absent and 1 vacant position. 6 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:C.1 FILE NO.:Z-6763-A STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted a letter requesting this item be deferred to the September 19, 2002 Planning Commission Public Hearing.Staff is supportive of this request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(AUGUST 8,2002) The applicant was not present representing the application.There were objectors present.Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request to defer the item to the September 19,2002 Public Hearing. Chairman Lowry asked if the persons in opposition were opposed to the item being deferred.They stated they were not in opposition of the deferral. There was no further discussion.The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral.The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes,0 noes,1 absent and 1 vacant position. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) Mr.William Willis was present representing the application.There were numerous objectors present.The Land Use Plan amendment Item ¹Cand the rezoning request were discussed simultaneously.Staff presented each item and made a recommendation of approval for each. Mr.William Willis,General Manager of the Union Rescue Mission,was present representing the application.He stated due to the Riverfront development the homeless population had begun to move to the west.He stated the Union Rescue Mission had made the request to locate at this site previously and was requesting endorsement once again.He stated the Union Rescue had searched to find an alternative location but had been unsuccessful.He stated the Union Rescue had looked at nine (9)alternative locations,none of which were suitable for various reasons. He stated the Commission had been given the crime rate for the areas in which the Union Rescue Mission operated and the area,which the Union Rescue Mission wished to locate.He stated the data indicated the crime rate was lower in areas where the Mission was currently operating. He stated the 1990 estimates of homelessness were 280 homeless and in 2000 the number was closer to 1000.He stated the Mission felt the number was more near 7 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:C.1 F ILE NO Z-6763-A 2000.He stated additional beds would be needed since the Salvation Army was closing its facility and the City of North Little Rock had bought the land of the current Mission site. He stated there were numerous businesses,homes and churches that support the Mission and their efforts.He stated the Union Rescue was trying to fill a need with a new facility.He stated the Mission was trying to fill a need,which was growing in the direction of the central city already. Mr.Henry Barton,President of the Capitol Hill Neighborhood Association,spoke in opposition of the development.He stated the size of the facility was too big for the neighborhood.He stated the fear of the residents were those who would be released into the neighborhood with out supervision.He stated there were 400+signatures in opposition of the development.He stated to many unpredictable people visited the Mission.He stated people who had been turned away because of drugs and alcohol would have no place to go but into the neighborhoods.He stated the site selected was not the site to place a Mission of this size. Ms.Ethel Ambrose,President of the Central High Neighborhood Association,spoke in opposition of the proposed development.She stated it was not good practice to place a Mission of this size in a fragile neighborhood.She stated there were currently 20 million plus in restoration dollars being spent in the neighborhood.She stated businesses in the area have expressed concerns with security.Ms.Ambrose stated,the area currently houses 20+treatment facilities.She stated if there was nothing wrong with a Mission then why did other residents not want the Mission in their neighborhood. Mr.Larry Rogers spoke in opposition to the proposed development.He stated he would like to call City staff on their endorsement of the proposal.He stated staff had stated homelessness would not have a negative impact on the neighborhood.He stated he would disagree and so would the businesses downtown. Mr.Rogers stated the Westside Jr.High School had recently been purchased and was being renovated.He stated the Arkansas Children's Hospital was investing millions in the neighborhood.He commented on various other projects currently under design or construction within the neighborhood.He requested the Commission not put the neighborhood back by approving the facility. Ms.Susan Leslie,Capitol View Stifft Station Neighborhood Association President, spoke in opposition of the proposed application.She stated the Union Rescue never called to discuss the proposed project prior to receiving notification from the city,She stated the group had document how the residents felt through the 400+signatures on the petitions.She stated 70'lo of the beds would be transient beds and the holders would be put into the neighborhoods daily.She stated the Mission in North Little Rock currently had 30 beds.She stated this was a much easier number to control than 200 8 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:C.1 FILE NO.:Z-6763-A beds.She stated the proposed development was in conflict with the neighborhoods action plan.She stated the eastern area of the neighborhood was proposed as a park area with walking trails that were proposed to connect to the Millennium Trail. She stated the Salvation Army site was located on the railroad and faced away from residential neighborhoods.She stated the Thrift Store was the same distance from the Salvation Army site as was the Thayer Street location. Ms.Nettie Lawson spoke in opposition of the application.She stated she and her husband had lived in the area for 38 years.She stated she and her husband had retired and this was their retirement.She stated in the neighborhood everyone knew each other and felt safe.She stated a neighborhood was not the place for a Mission. She stated the Mission would serve 2000 people,which was to many people to bring into a neighborhood. PD Legoyet spoke in opposition of the proposal.He stated he had recently graduated from college and was returning home.He stated he had plans to buy a home in the area,as did some of his friends.He stated the area had significantly improved.He stated there was a time when the area was riddled with gang activity and a high crime rate.He stated the placement of the Mission would not help property values in the area. Mr.Willis stated he would like to clear up a few comments.He stated Mayor Hayes of North Little Rock was very supportive of the mission.He stated there were more than 25 beds in North Little Rock.He stated there was a great need for the Mission and regardless of the location someone would oppose the location. Commissioner Rahman questioned Mr.Willis on how clients found the mission.Mr. Willis stated from various agencies such as the VA and from the network of homeless persons giving the location. Phil Hill,Director of the Men's program for the Mission,stated there were 30 to 40 people at the Mission on any given night.He stated the Mission had had as many as 200 people in one night but it was an extremely cold night.He stated if a client was suspect then drug and alcohol testing was performed.He stated if a person tested positive then their privileges were taken away leaving them no reason to be in the neighborhood. Commissioner Allen asked if there was a screening process.Mr.Hill stated there was not a background check performed.He stated the person was required to have an id and be drug and alcohol free. Commissioner Berry stated he had attended the three (3)neighborhood meetings conducted and nothing had changed.He asked why the Mission wanted to pursue this location.Mr.Hill stated the other locations were not suitable for various reasons,size, 9 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:C.1 FILE NO.:Z-6763-A location,and cost.He stated it was important to have a location that did have access not through the neighborhood. Commissioner Berry stated the land was zoned 1-2 and listed uses which could locate on the site without a hearing.He asked Ms.Ambrose how the neighborhood felt about the possibility of these uses locating on the site.Ms.Ambrose stated the three neighborhoods were in the process of developing a Design Overlay District for the area and they were willing to take a chance. Commissioner Faust questioned how small would the mission have to be to be acceptable.Mr.Barton stated it was the use and the population that would be attracted by the Mission was the neighborhood's concern. Commissioner Nunnley stated the mission was a viable part of the city but not in a residential neighborhood.He stated there was a vagrancy problem on 12'"and Woodrow Streets.He stated a residential neighborhood was not the place for a Mission and adding the Mission to this neighborhood was not a good alternative. Commissioner Faust asked if neighborhoods were opposed to the Land Use Plan amendment.Ms.Ambrose stated they were not opposed to the Land Use Plan amendment.Susan Leslie stated Capitol View did not take a stand on the Land Use Plan. After a discussion as to if the two items were tied together and it was determined they were not a motion was made to approve the Land Use Plan amendment.The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes,0 absent and 1 recuse. A motion was made to approve the rezoning of the site as requested by the applicant. The motion failed by a vote of 2 ayes,8 noes,0 absent and 1 recuse. Commission Rector stated he had left the room during the discussion due to a possible conflict of interest.He stated he did have an economic interest in the area with a piece of property he recently acquired. 10 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:D FILE NO '-7264 NAME:Gilliam Car Wash —Conditional Use Permit LOCATION:4700 West 12'"Street OWNER/APPLICANT:James Gilliam PROPOSAL:A conditional use permit is requested to permit a car wash on this C-3 zoned property. ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS: 1.SITE LOCATION: The property is located on the northwest corner of West 12'"and Jefferson Streets. 2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: This car wash is fairly unique in that the vehicle washing is to take place within the first floor of a two-story commercial structure.No additional buildings or expansions are proposed.The large,Madison Heights housing development is located to the south of this site.A variety of nonresidential,office and commercial uses are located along 12~Street. Single family residences are located across the alley,to the north.With appropriate screening and constraints on the operation,this proposed use should be compatible with the neighborhood. All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300 feet who could be identified and the Forest Hills,War Memorial, Hope and Oak Forest Neighborhood Associations were notified of this action. 3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: Sufficient parking space is located on the paved lot adjacent to the west of the building.Portions of the parking area are unpaved.The unpaved area must be brought up to the code with required paving,landscaping and screening. The car washing takes place within the building which is accessed by garage doors on both the east and west sides. September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:D FILE NO '-7264 4,SCREENING AND BUFFERS: Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances will be required with the paving of the parking lot. 5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: No comments.Provided change in use of property involves no new construction. 6.UTILITY FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS: Wastewater:Contact utility for approval of sandtrap. Entergy:No Comments received. Reliant:No Comments received. Southwestern Bell:Locateallutilities beforeexcavating.SWBT has a buried plat in the west right-of-way of Jefferson Street. Water:Due to the nature of the processes used in this facility,installation of an approved reduced pressure zone backflow preventer assembly will be required on the domestic water service prior to any outlet. Fire Department:Approved as submitted. ~Count Plannin:No Comments. CATA:No Comments received. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(AUGUST 1,2002) The applicant was not present.Staff presented the item and noted that additional information was needed regarding signage,days and hours of operation,number of employees per shift,fencing and trash pick-up.Staff noted that it appeared some washing of vehicles was occurring outside of the building and a portion of the parking lot had not been paved.Staff stated more details on the operation itself were needed. 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:D FILE NO.:Z-7264 Public Works and Landscaping Comments were noted. Staff stated they would contact the applicant to advise him of the issues. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission. STAFF ANALYSIS: The C-3 zoned property located at 4700 West 12'"Street is occupied by a two- story,faux rock and stucco building.Garage doors have been placed on the east and west sides of the ground floor.The applicant proposes to operate a car wash on the site.Vehicles will be vacuumed on a concrete drive area behind the building.Vehicles will then be driven into the building where washing will take place.The applicant has contacted wastewater utility and Central Arkansas Water regarding proper installation of a sand trap and a backflow preventer.The applicant also owns the C-3 zoned parking lot adjacent to the west which will be used for customer and employee parking.Portions of this adjacent lot are not paved.The applicant has stated that lot will be properly paved and landscaped by January 1,2003.The business is proposed to have 5 full-time employees, with more employees to be added,as needed.The applicant proposes wall mounted signs facing Jefferson and West 12'"Streets and a single ground mounted sign (18 square feet)in front of the business.The car wash will operate 6 days a week,from 8:00 a.m.—6:00 p.m.,Monday through Saturday, Staff is supportive of the request.With appropriate constraints on the operation, it should be compatible with uses in the area.All vehicle washing must be limited to within the enclosed building.Vacuuming should be limited to the concrete area behind the building.The adjacent parking lot (Lot 5)is to be limited to employee and customer parking.It is not to be used for vehicle service. Staff supports allowing a deferral until January 1,2003 to complete the paving, screening and landscaping of the adjacent parking lot. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit subject to compliance with the following conditions: 1.Compliance with staff comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4,5 and 6 of this report. 2.All vehicle washing must be limited to within the enclosed building. 3 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:D FILE NO.:Z-7264 3.Vehicle vacuuming must be limited to the concrete area directly behind (north)the building or within the building. 4.The adjacent parking lot (Lot 5)is to be limited to employee and customer parking only.No vehicle service (washing,waxing,etc.)is to take place on this lot. 5.Staff supports a deferral of the paving,screening and landscaping requirement for the remainder of the adjacent lot (Lot 5)until January 1, 2003. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(AUGUST 22,2002) The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had only mailed the notice of public hearing two days prior to the hearing,not 15 days as required by the Commission's Bylaws. Staff stated the applicant had failed to use the correct notice form.The Commission,after a discussion in the agenda session,informed the applicant that the item needed to be deferred.There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the September 19, 2002 meeting.The vote was 10 ayes,0 noes,0 absent and 1 open position. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval,subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the "Staff Recommendation"above.There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff.The vote was 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. 4 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:E FILE NO.:Z-7269 NAME:P.A.R.K.—Conditional Use Permit LOCATION:5900 Browning Road OWNER/APPLICANT:P.A.R.K./McGetrick and McGetrick PROPOSAL:A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the expansion of the P.A.R.K.recreational facility onto this R-2 zoned property. ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS: 1.SITE LOCATION: The property is located on the north side of Browning Road,one lot east of Geyer Springs Road. 2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: This lot is adjacent to and directly south of the P.A.R.K.facility.Vacant,R-2 and C-3 zoned tracts are located to the west and southwest.Office uses are adjacent to the northwest.The single family residence adjacent to the east is owned by P.A.R.K.Additional single family homes are located further to the east.This outdoor recreation area will be enclosed by a privacy fence and will be accessed only through the P.A.R.K.Facility.This proposed use,which really is more of a park-like development,is compatible with uses in the area, All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site,all residents within 300 feet who could be identified and the Wakefield and SWLRUP Neighborhood Associations were notified of this action. 3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: No parking or drives are proposed.All parking takes place on the existing P.A.R.K.property adjacent to the north. 4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS: The face side of the proposed wood fence must be directed outward.A water source within 75 feet of all landscaped areas will be required. September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:E FILE NO.:Z-7269 5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1.Browning Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street.Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 2.Provide design of street conforming to nMSPu (Master Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvement to these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned development.(Note:half street width would be 15.5 feet to back of curb.) 3.All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. 4.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 5.It appears that Stormwater Detention Ordinance will not apply to the improvements. 6.UTILITY FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS: Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected. Entergy:Approved as submitted. Reliant:No Comments received. Southwestern Bell:No Comments received. Water:The Little Rock Fire Department 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.An acreage charge of $150/acre currently applies in addition to the normal connection charge for this parcel. Fire Department:Approved as submitted. ~Count Ptennin:No Comments. CATA:No Comments received. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(AUGUST 1,2002) The applicant was present.Staff presented the item and noted that additional information was needed regarding days and hours of operation,typical activities on the playing field and utilizing the pavilion and signage.Staff asked if other groups would be able to use the park area or if it would be solely used by P.A.R.K.The need for a 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:E FILE NO.:Z-7269 fence height vaffance was discussed.At the suggestion of the Committee,the applicant indicated the proposed 8 foot fence would be reduced to 6 feet. Public Works Comments were presented.It was suggested that Browning Road could be improved to residential standard rather than commercial standard due to the nature of this development and the adjacent neighborhood. The applicant stated he would provide all needed information to staff.He was advised to submit all information no later than noon,Wednesday August 1,2002.The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission. STAFF ANALYSIS: The P.A.R.K.(Positive Attitude Reaches Kids)program occupies the large building located on the l-2 zoned property at 6915 Geyer Springs Road.P.A.R.K.has acquired the R-2 zoned property adjacent to the south,between the P.A.R.K.Facility and Browning Road.This R-2 property consists of two lots;one containing a single family residence and the other being vacant.P.A.R.K.proposes to develop the vacant lot for outdoor recreational activities.The site will be developed with walkways,a pavilion,restrooms,picnic tables and a playing field.The area will be used primarily until 8:00 p.m.or dark,Monday through Friday,with some weekend usage.The area will not be lighted other than for the pavilion.Activities planned for the playing field include flag football,soccer,softball,etc.The entire site will be enclosed by a 6 foot tall fence.On the south,east and southern 150 feet of the west perimeter,the fence will be solid wood with the finished side facing outward.The remainder of the fence on the west perimeter will be vinyl coated chain-link.The fence on the north perimeter will be wrought iron.Access to the area will be from the north,through the P.A.R.K. Facility.A service gate will be located on the south,off of Browning Road.Use of this outdoor area will be limited to representatives of P.A.R.K.It will not be available to outside groups.An architectural element consisting of 6 foot tall letters reading "P.A.R.K."located in a landscaped bed will be located near the pavilion.This element will be visible only from the P.A.R.K.Facility and is to be used as a backdrop for photo opportunities and presentations. On August 7,2002,the applicant submitted an addendum to his cover letter, addressing those issues raised at Subdivision Committee and summarized above. Staff is supportive of the proposed use.Allowing development of this outdoor recreation area in conjunction with the P.A.R.K.program should be compatible with uses in the area. 3 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:E FILE NO.:Z-7269 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit subject to compliance with the description in the applicant's cover letters and compliance with the staff comments outlined in Sections 4,5,and 6 of this report. Staff recommends that Browning Street be constructed to residential standard rather than commercial standard. Staff recommends approval of a variance to allow the proposed 6 foot tall fence within the setback adjacent to Browning Road. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(AUGUST 22,2002) The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Letters of support had been submitted by the Southwest Little Rock United for Progress and Wakefield Neighborhood Associations.Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had failed to complete the required notification.There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the September 19,2002 meeting.The vote was 10 ayes,0 noes,0 absent and 1 open position. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the "Staff Recommendation"above.There was no further discussion. The item,including the variances,was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff.The vote was 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. 4 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:1 FILE NO.:6-46-X NAME:Overlook Park Revised Preliminary Plat LOCATION:Vantage Point Drive DEVELOPER:ENGINEER: Pfeifer Development Company White-Daters and Associates P.O.Box 99 ¹24Rahling Circle N.Little Rock,AR 72115 Little Rock,AR 72223 AREA:2.3 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:3 FT.NEW STREET:0 CURRENT ZONING:R-2,Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT:3-West Little Rock CENSUS TRACT:22.01 VARIANCESNVAIVERS REQUESTED:15-foot platted front building line. Lot depth to width ratio for Lots 116A and 117. A.PROPOSAL: The area was preliminary platted in the mid-1960's with the majority of the lots having been developed with the exception of a few dozen lots on the southern portion of the plat.A revision to the preliminary plat was submitted in 1987, which increased the number of lots by two in this area. The applicant now proposes to replat two (2)previously approved lots into three (3)single family lots.The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a 15-foot platted building line on all three (3)lots and a variance from the lot depth to width ratio for Lots 116A and 117. B.EXISTING CONDITIONS: The lots are extremely steep falling from the road with topography ranging in elevation from 475-feet to 525-feet.Single-family homes have developed in the area in similar conditions.The site is wooded with a ravine running along the September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:1 Cont.FILE NO.:S-46-X south and west.Foxcroft has developed to the south of the site across the ravine.Single-family homes are located north of the site abutting the river. C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has not received any comment from area residents.All property owners abutting the site along with the Robinwood and Overlook Property Owners Associations were notified of the Public Hearing. D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works:No comment. E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater:Existing sewer main located on site.Show existing easement with new lot configuration to assure service can be provided to all three new lots. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for additional details at 376-2903. AP &L:No comment received. ARKLA:No comment received. Southwestern Bell:No comment received. Water:No objection. ~pire De artment:Place fire hydrants per code.Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional details. CountOPlanning:No comment received. CATA:The site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on the bus radius,turnout and route. F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Plannin Division:No comment. ~hendeca e:No comment. G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(August 29,2002) Mr.Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the application.Staff introduced the item noting additions needed on the proposed plat.Staff stated there was one if not two variances from the Subdivision 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:1 Cont.FILE NO.:6-46-X Ordinance.Staff stated two of the three lots would require a depth to width ratio variance (Lots 116 and 117).Staff stated if the lots would have a 15-foot front platted building line this would also require a variance. Wastewater and the Fire Department comments were also noted.There being no further issues to discuss the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H.ANALYSIS; The applicant submitted a revised plat to staff including the additional information requested by staff and the Subdivision Committee.The applicant has requested the appropriate variances from the Subdivision Ordinance to allow the plat to develop in the manner desired.The applicant has indicated a 15-foot front platted building line and a variance for the depth to width ratio for Lots 116A and 117.The applicant has indicated the three (3)lots will be accessed by individual driveways extending from Vantage Point Drive. Staff is not supportive of the requested replat.The site is extremely steep sloping downward into a ravine.The homes in this area have developed in similar situations but are located on larger lots and the terrain does not appear to be as steep.The average size of the existing lots ranges from 34,000 square feet to 45,000 square feet.The proposed lots will range from approximately 21,240 square feet to 43,700 square feet.The proposed lot size is slightly smaller than other lots in this general area. Staff is not supportive of the requested variance to allow the 15-foot front platted building line.The previously approved plat for the area was final platted with a 25-foot front building line and for the most part lots in the general area have developed with a 25-foot building line. Staff is not supportive of the requested variance for the Lot Depth to Width Ratio Variance request for Lots 116A and 117.The remainder of the Subdivision has developed without this variance.These lots were previously preliminary platted without requesting any variances and these lots should develop a previously proposed. I.STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the proposed replat of Lots 116 and 117 into three single-family residential lots and the requested variances associated with the proposed replat. 3 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:1 Cont.FILE NO.:S-46-X PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) Mr.Joe White was present representing the application.There was one objector present. Mr.White stated the objector had questions concerning the Bill of Assurance and requested the item be deferred to the October 3,2002 Public Hearing. Staff stated the deferral would require a waiver of the By-Laws.A motion was made to waiver the By-Laws.The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. There was no further discussion.The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for Deferral to the October 3,2002 Public Hearing.The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. 4 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:2 FILE NO.:S-57-LL NAME:Riverdale Addition Replat and Site Plan Review LOCATION:Riverfront Drive at Morgan Keegan Drive DEVELOPER:ENGINEER: Irwin &Saviers McClelland Consulting Engineers 1701 Centerview Drive,Suite 201 900 West Markham Little Rock,AR 72211 Little Rock,AR 72201 AREA:7.55 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:3 FT.NEW STREET:0 CURRENT ZONING:PCD and 0-2 PLANNING DISTRICT:4 —Heights/Hillcrest CENSUS TRACT:15 VARIANCESNVAIVERS REQUESTED:Increased sign area (120 square feet). A.PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing a three (3)lot subdivision and a zoning site plan review.A portion of the site was Final Platted in February of 2001 (Tract RH-5 a 2.87 acre site).The applicant is proposing to combine unrecorded Tract 7 and Tract RH-5 to form three (3)non-residential lots.The lots are currently zoned 0-2 (Tract 7)and PCD (Tract RH-5).The proposed lots range in size from 2 acres to 2.22 acres.The applicant will be closing the existing central cul-de-sac to allow for full development of the middle two (2)acre lot (Lot RH-SB). The applicant also proposes a zoning site plan review for the southern lot (Lot RH-7A).The applicant has indicated the new office building will house the corporate office headquarters of Winrock Enterprises,which will employ approximately 65 professionals.The proposed building will be two (2)story and contain 22,000 square feet.The site will be landscaped and the building will be a "Green Building",incorporating elements of sustainable design,such as collection of rain water for reuse in landscape irrigation,natural daylighting,many September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:2 FILE NO S-57-LL features which reduce energy consumption,and use of recycled building materials.The applicant is also requesting a single ground mounted sign to be located near the southern driveway.The applicant proposes the sign area to be 120 square feet or 30-foot in length and 4-foot in height. There are limited parking spaces proposed in the front of the building adjacent to River Front Drive.A remote parking lot is planned at the north end of the property (Lot RH-5A).A parking agreement will be executed to allow a shared parking situation between the three (3)lots and Lot RH-SA,which will house the parking lot.There will also be a cross access walking trail to connect the three (3)lots and the parking lot on the northern lot. B.EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a vacant grass covered site with office buildings backing up to the Arkansas River to the east.Southwest of the site is a vacant field used by the Little Rock Soccer Association as game and practice fields.A residential subdivision,Canel Pointe,is located to the south of the site and a vacant lot (zoned PCD)is located to the north of the site.Other uses in the area include office and multi-family. C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing,staff has not received any comment from area residents.The Cedar Hill Terrace Property Owners Association and all property owners within 200-feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works:No comment. 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 for additional details at 376-2903. AP 8 L:No comment received. ARKLA:No comment received. Southwestern Bell:A 10-foot utility easements along new property lines is required (5-foot each side of lot line).Contact Southwestern Bell at 373-5112 for additional details. Water:8 inch water main will have to be relocated at the developer's expense, A water main extension will be required to serve Lots RH-5A and RH-5B. 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:2 FILE NO.:S-57-LL ~pire Ce artmenb Place fire hydrants per code.Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional details. ~Count Plannin:No comment received. CATA:The site is located on Bus Route 421 and has no effect on bus radius, turnout and route. F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Plannin Division:No comment. ~hendeca e:Interior landscape islands must be at least 7 N feet in width in order to count toward fulfilling the 8%interior landscaping requirement. Irrigation will be required to water landscaped areas. Prior to a building permit being issued,it will be necessary to submit an approved landscape plan with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(August 29,2002) Mr.Ron Tabor was present representing the application.Staff presented the item stating the application was a two part proposal.Staff stated first the item was a plat/replat combination.Staff stated a lot,which,had been previously final platted and an unrecorded tract,were proposed to be platted as three (3)lots of approximately 2 acres each and the second was an office site plan review of an office building for Winrock International on the southern lot,Lot RH-7 currently zoned 0-2. Staff stated there were easements,which needed to be included on the proposed plat along with driveway location and curb cuts clearly identified.Staff stated the parking area to the north would be required to be shown as a cross access parking agreement between the three lots on the plat. Landscaping comments were addressed along with the comments from the Water,Wastewater and Fire Department.Staff noted the comment from Southwestern Bell requesting easements be shown on the Final Plat. After the discussion,the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. 3 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:2 FILE NO.:S-57-LL H.ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted to staff a revised drawing indicating all driveway locations,the trail as a cross access easement and the parking lot located on Lot RH5-A as a cross access and parking easement. The applicant has indicated a single ground mounted sign to be located near the south driveway entrance.The sign will be approximately 30-foot long and 4-foot high (120 square feet in area)with 12-inch lettering on the west face.There will be ground lighting on the front of the sign for illumination.The permitted sign allowable under the Ordinance [Section 36-553 (a)(2)]is 64 square feet.Staff is supportive of the request to allow the increased sign area since the face side lettering would only be 30 square feet in area.The sign would act as a decorative wall in the landscaped area and not strictly a monument sign with lettering on the entire face of the wall. The applicant also proposes the building to be no more than 45-feet in height as required by 0-2 zoning district.The applicant proposes the building to be approximately 22,000 square feet in area.Minimum estimated parking required for a building would be 52 spaces or 95'/G of one space per 400 square feet of gross floor area.The applicant proposes the placement of 16 on-site parking spaces and a cross access easement with a parking area to the north containing 215 parking spaces.Although,the parking lot will be shared between all three lots in the preliminary plat there should not be any adverse impact with regard to parking and the proposed lot should be sufficient to meet the parking demands of the area. Staff is supportive of the proposed preliminary plat and the office site plan review. The proposal includes a variance to allow an increased sign area,which staff supports. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the proposed replat of Lots RH-5 and Tract —7 into three (3)non-residential lots and the zoning site plan review for Lot RH-7 subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in Paragraphs D,E and F of this report. Staff recommends approval of the requested sign variance,as proposed. 4 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:2 Cont.FILE NO.:S-57-LL PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) Mr.Ron Tabor was present representing the application.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the item stating Staff was unaware of any unresolved issues associated with the project.Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the proposed Replat of Lots RH-5 and Tract-7 into three non-residential lots and the zoning Site Plan Review for Lot RH-7 subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the "Staff Recommendation"above. Staff stated they also recommended approval of the requested sign variance as proposed. There was no further discussion.The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for Approval and approved,as recommended by Staff,by a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. 5 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:3 FILE NO.:S-1042-S NAME:Villages of Wellington Preliminary Plat Phase X LOCATION:Northwest corner of Wellington Village Road and Loyola Drive DEVELOPER:ENGINEER: Winrock Development Company White-Daters and Associaties 2222 Cottondale Lane ¹24Rahling Circle Little Rock,AR 72202 Little Rock,AR 72223 AREA:12.46 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:23 FT.NEW STREET:1750 CURREN'T ZONING:R-2,Single-family PLANNING DISTRICT:19 —Chenal CENSUS TRACT:42.07 VARIANCESNVAIVERS REQUESTED:Deferral of street improvements to Wellington Village Road adjacent to Lot 1,Block 16. Waiver of sight distance requirement in certain locations. Waiver to allow street grades of 10 k in certain locations. A.PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to subdivide this 12.46-acre tract into 23 single-family residential lots.The average lot size proposed is 115-feet wide by 150 feet deep. There is a single entrance serving the proposed development.The proposed street functions as a loop street with a short cul-de-sac extending to the southeast.The applicant is requesting the street be classified as a Minor Residential Street (50-foot right-of-way and 24-foot pavement width), The slope of the site ranges from 6/o to 20'/o with an average slope of 10'/o.The applicant is requesting a waiver of sight distance requirements at certain locations and a waiver to allow a 10'/o street grade at certain locations.The September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:3 FILE NO.:S-1042-S applicant is proposing a 25-foot front platted building line on all the proposed lots. The applicant has indicated the development will be developed in one phase. B.EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a vacant tree covered site with several grade changes.Immediately east of the site is the Property Owners Association Community Park,the Park at Wellington,complete with swimming pool and playground equipment.The proposed subdivision abuts the single family subdivisions of St.Charles and Villages of Wellington.The area to the north is vacant R-2 zoned property as is the area to the west.The area to the east remains undeveloped R-2 zoned property but was recently reviewed and approved by the Commission for a 115 lot single-family subdivision. C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has not received any comment from the area residents. The St.Charles Neighborhood Association and all abutting property owners were notified of the Public Hearing. D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.(The Plan indicates stormwater detention ordinance does not apply to this property.) 2.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code.Contact Traffic Engineering at 501-379-1813 (Steve Philpott)for more information regarding street light requirements. E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements if service is required for project.Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for additional details at 376-2903. AP 8 L:No comment received. ARKLA:No comment received. Southwestern Bell:No comment received. Water:A water main extension will be required in order to provide water service to this property.An acreage charge of $600.00 and $2500.00 per acre currently apply in addition to normal charges in this area.Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details. 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:3 FILE NO.:S-1042-S ~Fire De artment:Place fire hydrants per code.Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional details. ~Count Plannin:No comment received. CATA:The site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on bus radius,turnout and route. F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: ~ptannrn Division:No comment. ~Landsca e:No comment. G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(August 29,2002) Mr.Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the application.Staff presented the item to the Committee noting the requested waivers and variances were related to street design.Staff stated the applicant was requesting a 24-foot back of curb to back of curb minor residential street, which was supported by Public Works,as a part of the development.Staff requested a phasing plan from the applicant. Comments from Public Works were addressed.Staff stated the stormwater detention ordinance did apply to the site.Staff also requested a letter of pending development with regard to streetlights. Comments from Wastewater,Water and the Fire Department were noted.There being no further issues to discuss,the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H.ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff on September 4,2002 addressing most of the issues raised by Staff and the Subdivision Committee.The applicant has indicated stormwater detention has been addressed for the entire subdivision through a previously approved drainage plan. The applicant is requesting a sign to be located at the entrance to the subdivision.The applicant is requesting entry walls (a maximum of six feet in height)to be located on each corner of Wellington Colony Place adjacent to Lots 1 and 18 of Block 16 and lettering on one wall of the entrance.This complies with the Zoning Ordinance (Section 36-552 (a)(1)).The signs will be located in a sign easement within the 25-foot building line.The area will not exceed 3 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:3 FILE NO.:S-1042-S Ordinance standard or 32-square feet.Staff is supportive of the request to allow the subdivision to have one identification signs but the location is within the blind intersection and will require Public Works Traffic Engineering approval prior to construction. The applicant is requesting a deferral of street improvements to Wellington Village Road adjacent to Lot 1 Block 16 just short of the intersection with Wellington Place.The applicant has indicated the street improvements and street intersection design will be completed when the adjoining phase of Villages of Wellington Phase 9 (approved by the Commission at their August 8,2002 Public Hearing)is constructed.Staff is supportive of the requested deferral of street improvements on this roadway segment. Staff is supportive of the requested preliminary plat.The proposed preliminary plat meet the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance with regard to building line setback,minimum lot size,street design etc.and is similar to the development pattern of the area.The requested waivers and variances are related to street design and may be approved by the Commission.The proposed development should have no adverse impact on the surrounding neighborhood should the subdivision develop as proposed. I.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the proposed plat for the Villages of Wellington Phase X subject to compliance with the conditions outlined the Paragraphs D,E and F of this report. Staff recommends approval of the deferral of street improvements to Wellington Village Road adjacent to Lot 1,Block 16,as requested. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) Mr.Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the application. There were no objectors present.Staff presented the item with a positive recommendation subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the "Staff Recommendation"above. Staff also presented a positive recommendation of the deferral of street improvements to Wellington Village Road adjacent to Lot 1,Block 16,as requested by the applicant. Staff stated they recommended approval of the requested waiver of sight distance requirements in certain locations and approval of the requested waiver of street grade requirements in certain locations. 4 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:3 FILE NO.:S-1042-S There was no further discussion.The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for Approval and approved,as recommended by Staff.The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. 5 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:4 FILE NO.:S-943-A NAME:Boen 430 Subdivision Preliminary Plat LOCATION:Northeast corner of 1-430 and Colonel Glenn Road DEVELOPER:ENGINEER: Leonard Boen McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 10600 Colonel Glenn Road 319 President Clinton Avenuae Little Rock,AR 72204 Little Rock,AR 72201 AREA:4.23 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:3 FT.NEW STREET:0 CURRENT ZONING:C-3,General Commercial PLANNING DISTRICT:11 —1-430 CENSUS TRACT:24.05 VARIANCESANAIVERS REQUESTED;None requested. A.PROPOSAL: A preliminary plat was filed for the site and approved May 19,1992 for a four lot subdivision.As a part of the proposal a variance request was approved by the Board of Directors at their June 16,1992 meeting to allow a variance of the minimum pavement width and right-of-way width requirements (27-foot pavement width and 50-foot right-of-way).The lots were not Final Platted prior to expiration of the preliminary plat. The applicant now proposes a preliminary plat for a three lot subdivision with a 60-foot access easement with 36-feet of pavement.There are no additional curb cuts proposed for Lots 1 and 3.These lots will take access from the access easement. September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:4 Cont.FILE NO '-943-A B.EXISTING CONDITIONS: The land area has been modified with the removal of trees and natural growth. There is a grade on the site,which varies from the Colonel Glenn right-of-way to the north at which point there is a significant hill mass with a large water tank.To the east,is the Clear Channel Metroplex facility and to the west is 1-430.South of the site is vacant undeveloped C-3 and 0-3 property in which the developer is currently installing basic infrastructure. A portion of the street improvements have been made adjacent to the Clear Channel Development but are not in place adjacent to the site.The road is a two lane roadway with open ditches for drainage. C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing,Staff has not received any comment from area residents.The Stagecoach Dodd and the John Barrow Neighborhood Associations were notified of the Public Hearing along with all abutting property owners. D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1.Colonel Glenn Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial.A minimum dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline will be required. 2.Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"(Master Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvements to the street including 5-foot sidewalks with planned development. 3.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 4.Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from AHTD,District Vl. 5.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. 6.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities are required. 7.A Grading Permit will be required per Sec.29-186 (c)8 (d). 8.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code.Contact Traffic Engineering at 501-379-1813 (Steve Philpott)for more information regarding street light requirements. 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 for additional details at 376-2903. 2 September 1ct,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:4 Cont.FILE NO.:S-943-A AP 8 L:No comment received. ARKLA:No comment received. Southwestern Bell:No comment received. Water:A water main extension will be required in order to provide water service to this property.An acreage charge of $150.00 per acre currently applies in addition to normal charges in this area.Due to the operation and maintenance of the tank and pump station north of this site,the natural drainage across this site should not be obstructed. ~Fire De artment:Approved as sunm tted. CountOPlanninp'o comment race ved. CATA:Site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on bus radius,turnout and route. F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: ~ptannin Division:No comment. ~Landsca e:No comment. G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(August 29,2002) Mr.Pat McGetrick and Ms.Laura McGetrick of McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers were present representing the application.Staff introduced the item to the Commission stating a preliminary plat had previously been filed for the area but was never final platted.Staff stated the time for final platting had expired and the applicant was now requesting a similar preliminary plat.Staff stated the previously approved preliminary plat contained four (4)lots and a single access easement from Colonel Glenn Road where the current proposal included only three (3)lots. Staff stated there were items,which needed to be shown on the proposed preliminary plat (building setback lines,water and wastewater supply and disposal,zoning of abutting properties).Staff also stated the Water Department should be contacted regarding their comments. 3 f September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO 4 Cont.F ILE NO.:S-943-A Public Works comments were addressed in detail noting the road widening of Colonel Glenn Road adjacent to the applicant's property.There being no additional issues to discuss,the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H.ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat addressing most of the issues raised by Staff and the Subdivision Committee.The proposal includes the proposed source of water (Central Arkansas Water),the means of wastewater disposal (Little Rock Wastewater Utility),the minimum lot size and the average lot size and the front yard building setback shown on the plat.The proposal includes three lots with an average size of 1.40 acres.The lots are currently zoned C-3,General Commercial and the applicant has indicated a 35-foot platted building line adjacent to Colonel Glenn Road. The lots will be accessed by a private 60-foot right-of-way and 36-foot of pavement private roadway.Lots 1 and 3 are adjacent to Colonel Glenn and will have no access to Colonel Glenn Road.The proposed plat should show a 10- foot platted no access easement along Colonel Glenn for these two lots. Lot 2 is located at the rear of the site and has some terrain problems on the north and west sides of the lot.Central Arkansas Water also owns property located to the north of the site where a water tower is located.It is important the applicant note the comment from Central Arkansas Water with regard to blocking of the natural drainage way across the site. Otherwise,to Staff's knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed preliminary plat.The proposed preliminary plat complies with the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance and Staff is supportive of the proposed request. I.STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed preliminary plat for Boen Subdivision subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in Paragraphs D,E,F and H of this report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) Mr.Pat McGetrick of McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers was present representing the application.Staff presented the item with a positive recommendation subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D,E,F and H of the Staff report, 4 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISIGN ITEM NG.:4 Cont.FILE NG.;S-943-A The~e was no further discussion.Tlhe item was placed on the Consent Agenda for Approval and approved,as recommended by Staff,by a vote of 11 eyes,fI noes and 0 absent. 5 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:5 FILE NO S-1352 NAME:Whitfield Addition Preliminary Plat LOCATION:Asher Avenue at Whiffield Street DEVELOPER:ENGINEER: Al Hougland McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 1100 Brockington Road 319 President Clinton Avenue Sherwood,AR 72120 Little Rock,AR 72201 AREA:10.27 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:2 FT.NEW STREET:0 CURRENT ZONING:C-3 and MF-12 PLANNING DISTRICT:10 —Boyle Park CENSUS TRACT:24.06 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested. BACKGROUND: In May 2002,Public Works received a complaint that a number of large trees had beencutandfillhadbeenplacedatthesubjectproperty.Upon investigation,it was foundthatJCI,the owner of the property,was conducting the clearing and filling activities. Public Works'nvestigation further revealed that JCI was the general contractor for the ongoing Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department project to improve and widen Asher Avenue.According to JCI personnel,the company purchased the propertytostoreequipmentandplaceexcavatedmaterialfromtheprojectandplannedtosell itatcompletionoftheproject.JCI was given a notice for violating Section 29-186 (b)oftheLittleRockcodeforclearingoralteringlandwithouttherequiredpermitsandorderedtoremovethefillmaterialanddiscontinueworkuntildevelopmentplanshadbeensubmittedandapproved. September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:5 Cont.FILE NO.:S-1352 JCI requested a grading permit to continue operations and it was denied because no apparent construction was imminent.JCI was also issued a citation and stop work order. The case was heard in Environmental Court on July 25,2002.JCI pled guilty and agreed to submit a plan of development to the Commission no later than August 12, 2002 and appeal grading permit denial.The agreement further provided JCI would begin cleanup activities at the site. A.PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes a restoration plan and preliminary plat as the development plan.The applicant proposes to subdivide the site into a two lot subdivision.One of the lots will contain 4.08 acres and is zoned C-3 and the other lot will contain 6.09 acres and is zoned MF-12.The applicant has indicated his restoration plan will include Bermuda grass sown over the entire site with 43 water oak trees (2 —2.5 inch caliper,10 —12 feet tall planted around the exterior of the property.The plan also shows that 4 feet of fill will remain along the southeastern part of the site. The issues before the Planning Commission;whether JCI's plan (s)should be approved and a grading permit issued based on the preliminary plat or should the applicant also submit the proposed commercial and multi-family site plan or should the applicant even be allowed a grading permit and should the preliminary plat filed be approved for the subdivision of the site into two parcels. B.EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is currently a vacant cleared site with a large amount of spoil from the Asher Avenue widening project being dumped on the southern portion of the site. Prior to the clearing of the site,the site once contained a grassed meadow with a creek flowing north to south that was lined by mature hardwood trees. The site gently slopes from north to south (40"Street to Asher Avenue).There are a few trees remaining on the northern portion of the site near West 40'" Street.Whiffield Street is an unimproved roadway which dead ends prior to reaching Asher Avenue.The City is currently widening West 40'"Street as a part of a Community Development Block Grant Project. Other uses in the area include single-family to the north and east,a vacant MF-12 zoned site to the west bordering single-family further to the west and various non-residential uses to the south along Asher Avenue.The Borden Plant,now Oxford Printing is located adjacent to Asher on the western boundary of the site and a Hometown Grocery Store is located adjacent to Whitfield Street to the east.The Criminal Institute is located across Asher Avenue to the south. 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO 5 Cont.FILE NO.:S-1352 C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has received several phone calls from interested persons stating objection to the proposed development.The John Barrow,the Westwood and the Campus Place Neighborhood Associations and all property owners within 200-feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1.Whitfield Street and 40'"Street would be classified under this proposal on the Master Street Plan as a commercial streets.Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 2.A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required at Whiffield and West40'"and Whitfield and Asher. 3.Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"(Master Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvement to these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned development.Where Whiffield has not been constructed,pave to 2-lane width of 22'. 4.Obtain permits prior to doing any street cuts or curb cuts.Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way.Contact Traffic Engineering at 501-379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield)for more information. 5.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities are required. 6.Property depth is not great enough to have two driveways and meet driveway spacing requirement. E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater:Existing sewer main located on the site.Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for additional details at 376-2903. AP 8 L:No comment received. ARKLA:No comment received. Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted. Water:Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding water service to this development.The Little Rock Fire Department 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.Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details. 3 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO 'Cont FILE NO.'-1352 ~pire De artment:Place fire hydrants per code.Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 918-3752 for additional details. ~Count Plannin:No comment received. CATA:Site is located on bus route ¹14and has not effect on bus radius,turnout and route. F.ISSUES/TECHNICAUDESIGN: ~Plannin Division:No comment. ~hendeca e:No comment. G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(August 29,2002) Mr.Pat McGetrick of McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers was present representing the application.Staff presented the item and stated they needed guidance from the Committee.Staff stated the applicant was currently under enforcement for clearing a site without a land alteration permit.Staff stated the ordinance requires the applicant to submit a development plan but does not outline what a development plan is to contain.Staff stated the ordinance indicates two ways of appeal;one a grading permit and the second an appeal of the grading permit being denied. Staff stated the applicant had filed three applications.One was for a preliminary plat to subdivide the site into two lots and the other two consisted of a site plan review for Lot 1 a commercially zoned site,and a site plan review for Lot 2,a multi-family zoned site.Staff questioned if the two site plan reviews were necessary. After a discussion,the Committee determined the proposed plat did meet the intent of a development plan and the other two applications were not required unless the applicant did have intentions of developing the site,as submitted.Mr. McGetrick stated he would contact the owner and see if he wanted to proceed with the site plan review applications. Staff stated the additional information required for each item had been provided. Staff stated if there were any questions,to please contact staff for specific guidance. There being no further issues to discuss,the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. 4 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO 5 Cont.FILE NO.:S-1352 H.ANALYSIS: Preliminary Plat: The applicant submitted a revised plat to staff addressing most of the issues raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee.The applicant has indicated the proposed source of the water supplier,the means of wastewater disposal and the names of recorded subdivisions abutting the plat. Staff is supportive of the proposed preliminary plat.The proposed preliminary plat conforms to the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance.The platting along the zoning lines make logical sense for a future development pattern for the site.Otherwise,to Staff's knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed preliminary plat.The proposed plat should have no adverse impact on the area,if platted as proposed. Land Alteration Restoration Plan: JCI submitted plans for an apartment complex on the northern half of the property and an unidentified commercial development on the southern half.At the subdivision subcommittee meeting,the applicant's engineer advised that construction of neither project would likely be forthcoming.He was advised to submit a restoration plan instead. The submitted restoration plan shows bermuda grass sowed over the entire site with 43 water oak trees (2-2.5 in caliper,10-12 ft tall)planted around the exterior of the property.The plan also shows that 4 feet of fill will remain along the southeastern part of the site. Public Works has consistently taken the position that the site should be restored as required by the ordinance. The issue before the Planning Commission is whether JCI's plan(s)should be approved and a grading permit issued. I.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the proposed preliminary plat subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in Paragraphs D,E and F of this report, Staff recommends denial of the restoration plan. 5 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:5 Cont.FILE NO.:S-1352 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) Mr.Pat McGetrick of McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers was present representing the applicant.The applicant was also present.There were numerous objectors present. Staff introduced the item and stated there were several issues before the Commission. Staff stated a preliminary plat had been filed as a restoration plan.Staff questioned if the plat would suffice as a restoration plan.Another issue was should JCI be issued a grading permit based on the preliminary plat and the two (2)site plans submitted,which the applicant had not intentions of constructing.Staff stated they felt the restoration plan should include landscaping. Commissioner Faust stated the subdivision Committee members had reviewed the issues and felt that a restoration plan was more in order than an inventive development plan. Dottie Funk spoke in opposition of the development.She stated the land alteration task force was appointed four (4)years ago and two (2)years ago the ordinances were put in place.Ms.Funk stated her request was for the Commission to honor the ordinances. She stated as far as the litigation,since the site was cleared,instead of punishment a compromise would be more trees or more landscaping on the site.She stated the applicant should give 50%more than was required by the ordinance. Ms.Carolyn Hitman spoke in opposition of the proposals.She stated she was the secretary of the John Barrow Neighborhood Association and the Association had met with the developer.She stated the clearing of the site had resulted in the loss of a bird sanctuary and a buffer.She stated a majority of the trees were located on the south side of the property near the Borden Dairy property.She stated the neighborhood would like the application deferred until the developer could work with the neighborhood to develop a restoration plan. Mr.Troy Laha spoke in opposition of the development.He stated he would like to see the site restored as required by the ordinance. Mr.Pat McGetrick spoke on behalf of the applicant.He stated the restoration plan would include leveling the site,adding 2 inches of top soil and place 45 to 50 trees of 2 inch caliper or greater on the site.He stated the applicant would work with the neighborhood and staff with regard to placement on the site of the trees. Commissioner Rector questioned what the ordinance required. Mr.Jim Lawson,Director of Planning and Development,stated the restoration was to be made as practicable as possible.He stated staff did not recommend approval of the invented development plans. 6 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:5 Cont.FILE NO.:S-1352 Commissioner Allen questioned 50 trees.He stated if the 50 trees were not enough then what. Mr.Stephen Giles,Deputy City Attorney,stated the Commission was to determine what was enough. Mr.Lawson stated at some point in the future the site would develop.He stated it was important to not place the trees in areas,which would once again be removed. Commissioner Faust asked if anyone knew how many trees were on the site prior to the removal.Mr.McGetrick stated the exact number of trees was unknown. Commissioner Faust stated the application before the Commission was not a restoration plan.She stated the applicant should bring back a true restoration plan and not a plat for the site,which was not reflective of the restoration plan. There was a lengthy discussion concerning the restoration plan and what the plan should include and the punishment the applicant should received for the violation of the ordinance. Mr.Lawson stated the Planning Commission should see a plan on paper prior to a vote. Commissioner Lowery stated he strongly encouraged the applicant to work with the City Beautiful Commission and seek their participation. There was a motion to withdraw the building site plans and the plat and submit a restoration plan in their place.The restoration plan would be heard at the October 31, 2002 Public Hearing. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes and 1 absent. 7 September 19,2002 ITEM NO 6 FILE NO.:S-1352-A NAME:Whiffield Addition (Lot 1)Subdivision Site Plan Review LOCATION:Asher Avenue at Whitfield Street DEVELOPER:ENGINEER: Al Hougland McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 1100 Brockington Road 319 President Clinton Avenue Sherwood,AR 72120 Little Rock,AR 72201 AREA:4.08 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0 CURRENT ZONING:C-3,General Commercial PLANNING DISTRICT:10 —Boyle Park CENSUS TRACT:24.06 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested. The applicant has requested this item be deferred to the October 31,2002 Public Hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) Mr,Pat McGetrick of McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers was present representing the application.There were objectors present.Staff stated the applicant had requested the item be deferred to the October 31,2002 Public Hearing to determine the outcome of the preliminary plat/restoration plan,which was filed as a separate item on the agenda,Item ¹5(S-1352).Staff stated if the Commission accepted item ¹5as the development plan/restoration plan the applicant would then withdraw this request. September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:6 FILE NO.;S-1352-A There was no further discussion.The Chairman placed the item on the Consent Agenda for Deferral.The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. After subsequent discussion of Item ¹5(S-1352)the applicant requested this item be withdrawn.The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes and 1 absent. 2 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:7 FILE NO.'-1352-B NAME:Whiffield Addition (Lot 2)Subdivision Site Plan Review LOCATION:Asher Avenue at Whiffield Street DEVELOPER:ENGINEER: Al Hougland McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers 1100 Brockington Road 319 President Clinton Avenue Sherwood,AR 72120 Little Rock,AR 72201 AREA:6.19 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0 CURRENT ZONING:MF-12,Multi-family PLANNING DISTRICT:10 —Boyle Park CENSUS TRACT:24.06 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested. The applicant has requested this item be deferred to the October 31,2002 Public Hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) Mr.Pat McGetrick of McGetrick and McGetrick Engineers was present representing the application.There were objectors present,Staff stated the applicant had requested the item be deferred to the October 31,2002 Public Hearing to determine the outcome of the preliminary plat/restoration plan,which was filed as a separate item on the agenda,Item ¹5(S-1352).Staff stated if the Commission accepted Item ¹5as the development plan/restoration plan the applicant would then withdraw this request. September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:7 Cont.FILE NO.:S-1352-B There was no further discussion.The Chairman placed the item on the Consent Agenda for Deferral.The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. After subsequent discussion of Item ¹5(S-1352)the applicant requested this item be withdrawn.The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes,0 noes and 1 absent. 2 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:8 FILE NO.:Z-4452-C NAME:Rush Engine Revised PCD LOCATION:Northwest corner of Asher Avenue and Elm Street DEVELOPER:ENGINEER: Bill Rush Garver Engineers 4100 Asher Avenue 1010 Battery Street Little Rock,AR 72204 Little Rock,AR 72204 AREA:3Acres NUMBER OF LOTS:2 FT.NEW STREET:0 CURRENT ZONING:PCD ALLOWED USES:Mixture of Commercial and Industrial PROPOSED ZONING:Revised PCD PROPOSED USE:Mixture of Commercial and Industrial and the Addition of Motorcycle Sales and Display and Outdoor Storage VARIANCESNVAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested. BACKGROUND: On August 6,1995 the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No.14,925 which rezoned this property from C-3 to PCD for a mixed commercial/industrial development.The applicant later applied for a revision to the PCD which was approved by Ordinance No. 18,178 on January 4,2000 which subdivided the site into two lots and added a new commercial building on the site and an expansion to the Rush Engine Building. September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:8 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-4452-C The new building was proposed to be 7000 square feet in area and used for auto part sales.The building was to be located at the southeast corner of the property on the newly created Lot 1.Rush Engine proposed an addition (14,600 square feet)to their existing facility (currently 24,760).The development was to share a cross access easement along the common lot lines. The site contained a third building located on the southwest corner of the site in which C-3 permitted uses were requested and approved. The applicant proposed the following hours of operation for the three (3)buildings: Rush Engine -8:00 am —5:00 pm,Monday —Friday Commercial Building (southwest corner of the property) —10:00 am —7:00 pm,Tuesday —Saturday Advanced Auto Parts —8:00 am —9:00 pm,Daily A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant now proposes to revise the previously approved site plan to include the addition of motorcycle sales and display and an area to be dedicated to outside storage.The applicant is now displaying motorcycles outside the building along the building frontage and adjacent to Asher Avenue.The applicant has also added signage advertising the motorcycles,which was not approved as a part of the previous PCD.Located on the east property line,in the area labeled for future expansion on the attached site plan,the applicant has engine blocks stored along with several other items (old automobiles,boats,lighting)also not approved on the previous site plan.There is a six-foot chain link fence with razor wire along the east property line (Elm Street)and along the front of the storage area.A six-foot wood fence is along the rear of the property line the entirety of the site adjacent to the single-family. B.EXISTING CONDITIONS: As noted,there are three (3)existing commercial buildings on the site.A 24,760 square foot building is located within the north one-half of the property,with an 1810 square foot building near the southwest corner of the site being operated as a restaurant.Advanced Auto Part has constructed a new facility located on the southeast corner of the site.The site is concrete or paved from property line to property line. There is a mixture of commercial uses to the east and west along the north side of Asher Avenue and to the south across Asher Avenue.There is a church across Lewis Street to the west,with single-family residences further west. There are also single-family residences and a church to the north and east 2 September 1LF,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:8 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-4452-C across Elm Street. C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing,Staff has not received any comment from the area residents. The Love and Midway Neighborhood Associations,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:No comment. 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 376-2903 for additional details. AP 8 L:No comment received. ARKLA:No comment received. Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted. Water:No objection. ~Fire De artment:Place fire hydrants per code.Contact Little Rock Fire Department for additional details at 918-3752. ~Count Plannin:No comment received. CATA:Site is located on Bus Route ¹14and ¹16and has no effect on bus radius,turnout and route. F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: ~Plannin Division:This reauest is located in the 1-630 Planning District.The Land Use Plan shows Commercial for the site.The applicant has applied for a revision of an existing Planned Commercial Development to allow additional C-3 uses (motorcycle sales and display)and outside storage on the site. 3 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:8 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-4452-C Ci Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Oak Forest Neighborhood Action Plan.The Economic Development goal of creating a healthy economic climate in the neighborhood with the objective of strengthening neighborhood commercial locations is supported by an action statement calling for the promotion of Asher Avenue as a commercial and service oriented corridor. ~Lendsce e:No comment. ~Bcitdtn Codes:No comment received. G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(August 29,2002) The applicant was not present.Staff presented the item indicating there were items now present on the site which were not a part of the previous approval. Staff stated the applicant had begun the sale of motorcycles and displaying them outside adjacent to Asher Avenue and the applicant was also storing items (old automobiles,engine blocks)on the site in areas,which were not previously approved.Staff stated they would contact the applicant to address concerns with regard to the site plan. H.ANALYSIS: There are two issues associated with the proposed revision to the existing PCD for Rush Engine.One is the sale of motorcycles and the outdoor display.The second is the storage of excess inventory on the site.Staff is supportive of the addition of the sale of motorcycles to the site.Staff feels there should not be any additional signage added to the site and any additional signage to advertise the sale of the motorcycles should be added to the exiting signage.Staff also feels the display of the motorcycles adjacent to Asher Avenue should not be permitted. The applicant may however,display the motorcycles in close proximity to the building in the parking lot area. The second issue is the use of the future expansion area as outdoor storage. Staff feels this is not an appropriate use of the site.The storage area contains an excessive number of engine blocks along with old automobiles,boats and an array of other items,which is an neye sore"to the neighborhood.There are single family homes to the north of the site and churches and non-residential uses located east and west of the site.The applicant has installed a wood fence along the north property line (the rear)to screen the single family structures but along Elm Street and Lewis Street and the front adjoining the parking lot,the fence is a chain link fence which offers no screening. In summary,Staff recommends the applicant be allowed the sale of motorcycles with any signage advertising the sales be added to the existing signage of the 4 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:8 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-4452-C site.Staff also recommends the outside display of the motorcycles be allowed but not adjacent to Asher Avenue.The outside display should be located in an area in close proximity to the building.Staff recommends the outside storage of excess inventory (old automobiles,boats,engine blocks,and the array of other items)be removed immediately from the site. I.STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the requested revision to the existing Planned Commercial Development as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) Mr.Bill Rush was present representing the application.There were objectors present. Staff introduced the item stating the item was an enforcement issue.Staff stated there were two requests as a part of the application.One was to allow the sales of motorcycles and the outdoor display of motorcycles,and to allow additional signage to advertise the product.The second was to allow outdoor storage of inventory,engine blocks. Staff stated there were supportive of the request related to the motorcycle sales but not to add any additional signage only to allow advertising on the existing sign area but were not supportive of the request to add the additional storage of excess inventory to the site. Robert James of the Lewis Street Church of Christ spoke in opposition to the application.Mr.James stated the membership of the church was 600+on Sunday and 300+on Wednesday evenings.He stated he was working with a group of businesspersons to beautify the Asher Avenue Corridor.He stated what Mr.Rush was doing was degrading to the area.He questioned how the group could clean Asher Avenue when the outdoor storage was allowed.He stated Mr.Rush should be required to install a wooden fence to screen the area. Mr.Derek Moore spoke in opposition of the project.He stated the Commission should vote against the additional storage and vote to clean up or screen the area. Chairman Lowery questioned the opponents to their position of allowing the motorcycle sales.Mr.Moore stated the addition of motorcycle sales would add to the loudness and would also result in patrons working on the motorcycles in the parking lot, Reverend James stated the church had supported the addition of the auto parts store if there would not be any outside working on cars.He stated this had not been the case. He stated customers were constantly changing batteries,lights,etc.in the parking area. 5 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:8 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-4452-C Mr.Bill Rush spoke on behalf of the application.He stated he was not asking for additional storage only that the business be able to keep the existing storage.He stated his company was an industry that was going under tremendous changes as was the automobile manufacturing industry.He stated one of the results of the change was the additional of motorcycle sales to the business.He stated in January of this year his company had moved their entire operation to the Asher Avenue site.He stated he agreed the outdoor storage was unsightly at best.He requested the Commission assist him with a solution for the addition of the storage of raw materials on the site,which was a vital part of the business.He stated he was very supportive of the Asher Avenue Redevelopment Corridor Committee and their efforts.He stated he would assist the City in anyway possible but the raw materials were vital in the business since the business was in business to repair engines.He stated occasionally a customer would not retrieve their automobile after the work had been completed.He stated there was a time period the business had to retain the customer's automobile before it could be disposed of to collect the repair fees. Commissioner Nunnley stated the current zoning of the site was PCD,which was a result of compromise.He stated a Planned Development allowed something to go into an area that normally would not go into an area.He stated if Mr.Rush had requested these uses originally then his business would not have been allowed to go on this site. He questioned if Mr.Rush's business had reached a point that he should consider moving the business to a new location more suitable for the requested uses,He stated his original request did not allow service,which Mr.Rush had indicated he was shifting to,and one of the selling points of moving into the current site was that all the business would be conducted indoors. Mr.Rush stated the business did not work on autos on a daily basis.He stated the property was for sale and the business was looking to move to a new location.He stated he could move the major in fractions in a few months. Commissioner Nunnley questioned how long it would take to construct a wooden fence to screen the area.Mr.Rush stated the addition of a wooden fence would invite an element of crime.He stated a wooden fence would only invite crime on the site since the site would no longer be visible from the street. Commissioner Floyd stated Mr.Rush should build the "future area expansion"and put the inventory inside. There was a general discussion concerning the status of the enforcement action. Commissioner Mazan made a motion to approve the application as filed.There was a second. The vote failed 0 ayes,10 noes and 1 absent. 6 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:8 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-4452-C Commissioner Rector made a motion to allow the addition of motorcycle sales to the site.The outdoor display was to be adjacent to the building in the parking stalls,not stacked,and as many as the applicant could place in this area,not including the handicap stalls.There was a second. The motion passed 7 ayes,3 noes and 1 absent. 7 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:9 FILE NO.:Z-5139-B NAME:Harvest Foods Revised PCD LOCATION:Cantrell Road at Taylor Loop DEVELOPER;ENGINEER: Vogel Enterprises The Mehlburger Firm 11219 Financial Centre Parkway 201 South Izard Street Little Rock,AR 72211 Little Rock,AR 72201 AREA:5.994 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0 CURRENT ZONING:PCD ALLOWED USES:Food Store PROPOSED ZONING:Revised PCD PROPOSED USE:Selected C-3,General Commercial Uses VARIANCESNVAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested. BACKGROUND: The site contains a single story 47,675 square foot commercial building and 157 parking spaces.The site is an existing developed site,which met the intent of the Highway 10 Design Overlay District some years ago when developed. Ordinance No.15,718 dated August 1,1989 rezoned the site from R-2,Single-family to PCD to allow Safeway to open a grocery store on the site.The site operated as a grocery store until Affiliated Foods "down-sized"their operation closing several stores in the central Arkansas area.The site has been vacant since that time. September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:9 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-5139-B Certain criteria were placed on the development as conditions of approval.Those included:truck deliveries were to be coordinated from 8:00 am to 6:00 pm seven (7) days per week,all trash compacting was to be done inside the store,the dumpster pick- ups were to be made between 7:30 am and 9:30 am Monday through Saturday and the dumpster was to be located in a fenced area,there was to be nothing stored outside of the building and the parking area clean-up was to be conducted during regular business hours. A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to add selected C-3,General Commercial uses to be allowed as alternative uses for this existing site.The uses the applicant has indicated as uses for consideration are Bank or savings and loan office,book and stationary store,church,cigar/tobacco and candy store,clinic,clothing store, custom sewing and millinery,drugstore or pharmacy,duplication shop,eating place without drive-in service,florist shop,food store,furniture store, handicraft/ceramic sculpture or similar artwork,hardware or sporting goods, health studio or spa,hobby shop,jewelry store,lawn and garden center— enclosed,office (general and professional),office/showroom with warehouse (with retail sales),office equipment sales and service,optical shop,paint and wallpaper store,pet shop.The applicant desires that these uses listed as well as any combination of these uses be allowed if one tenant cannot occupy the entire space. B.EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a single-story vacant commercial building.The parking area is in tact with minimum chipping.Ingress and egress to the site are provided in two key locations.The site has access to Highway 10 near the west property line and to Taylor Loop Road via a stub-out extending east to the roadway.Adjacent to the site on a separate lot there is a vacant structure,formerly a framing studio, which is set to be removed and a bank constructed on the site in the near future. Uses adjacent to the site along Taylor Loop include single-family residences, office uses and a beauty shop. Uses along Highway 10 include a mixture of office and commercial uses. Directly across from the site are both occupied and vacant abandoned single- family structures.South of the site is the Westchester Subdivision and west of the site vacant R-2 zoned property which is shown as Transition on the Future Land Use Plan. 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:9 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-5139-B C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has not received any comment from the area residents. The Westchester/Heatherbrae Property Owners Association,the Charleston Heights/Rahling Road Neighborhood Association and the Westbury Neighborhood Association,all property owners within 200-feet of the site as well as all residents,who could be identified,within 300-feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works:No comment. E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater:Sewer available and not adversely affected. AP 8 L:No comment received. ARKLA:No comment received. Southwestern Bell:No comment received. Water:No objection. ~Fire De altment:App oved as submitted. CountOPlanninq:No comment received. CATA:The site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on bus radius,turnout and route. F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Plannin Division:The request is located in the River Mountain Planning District.The Land Use Plan shows Commercial for the site.The applicant has applied for a revision of an existing Planned Commercial Development to add additional commercial uses to the site. Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan.The Goals and Objectives listed do not address issues relevant to this case. ~bandana e:No comment. 3 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:9 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-5139-B ~Buildin Codes:No comment received. G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(August 29,2002) Mr.Frank Riggins of Mehlburger Engineering was present representing the application.Staff stated the site was a Planned Development approved for a grocery store only.Staff stated the applicant was requesting selected C-3, General Commercial uses as alternative uses for the site.Staff stated there were certain conditions placed on the site when originally approved with regard to site management.Staff stated as a part of their recommendation these conditions would continue to apply. Staff also stated the existing site did not meet the landscaping which was previously approved.The applicant indicated the landscaping would be "brought- up"to compliance with the original approved PCD. There being no further issues to discuss,the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H.ANALYSIS: The applicant indicated he would comply with the items requested at the Subdivision Committee meeting.The applicant has indicated there will be no additional ground mounted signage.Any additional building signage would comply with Section 36-355 with regard to facade area and will be low level lighting in intensity. The original PCD was approved with landscaping requirements,which were in place at the time of approval.(This is not the current landscaping requirement and the applicant will not be required to bring the site up to current code.)There was however a large native tree located near Highway 10,which has since died and several plantings which have since died.The applicant will be required to install additional landscaping in areas,which fall below the approved landscaping requirement at the time of approval in 1989. Additionally,as indicated in the Background Section,there were certain criteria put in place with regard to site management.Staff recommends these conditions be placed on this development as well.Should the site be broken into multiple uses additional doors would be required for fire exits.Staff feels the doors should not be any more than required by the fire marshal for safety. The trash pick-up should be made between the hours of 7:30 am and 9:30 am Monday —Saturday and all trash compacting is to be done inside the store.The 4 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:9 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-5139-B dumpster is required to be placed in a fenced area by the exiting ordinance.All truck deliveries are to be made between the hours of 8:00 am and 6:00 pm seven (7)days per week.Additionally,the parking area clean up is to be conducted during regular business hours and there is to be nothing stored outside. Staff is supportive of the request as filed.The proposed uses listed in Paragraph A should have no adverse impact on the site.The uses listed are for the most part neighborhood commercial uses with no outside storage allowed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request to allow the selected C-3 uses as listed in Paragraph A as alternative uses for the site subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in Paragraphs D,E,F and H of this report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19 2002) Mr.Frank Riggins of the Mehlburger Firm was present representing the application. There were no objectors present.Staff presented the item and recommended approval of the proposed request to allow the selected C-3 uses listed in Paragraph A of this report as alternative uses for the site subject to compliance with the Conditions outlined in the "Staff Recommendation"above. There was no further discussion.The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for Approval and approved,as recommended by Staff,by a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. 5 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:10 FILE NO.:Z-5654-A NAME:Garden Ridge Revised PCD LOCATION:11801 Chenal Parkway DEVELOPER:ENGINEER: South Square LLC Bartlett &West Engineers 2851 Lakewood Village Drive 1701 Centerview,Suite 210 North Little Rock,AR 72116 Little Rock,AR 72211 AREA:11.17Acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0 CURRENT ZONING:PCD ALLOWED USES:Home Quarters/Garden Ridge PROPOSED ZONING:Revised PCD PROPOSED USE:The addition of a second building on the site to be used as a restaurant. VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No.16,415 dated May 4,1993 established the Pilgrim Road Long-form PCD. The proposal included the placement of a Home Quarters facility on the site with 104,000 square feet of building and 30,000 square feet of garden center.The development also included the placement of 507 parking spaces with access provided off both Bowman Road and Hermitage Road.Two streets were closed as a part of the action,Alhambra Court and Pilgrim Road,both of which were streets bisecting the site. September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:10 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-5654-A A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is proposing to add a single-story 5,662 square foot restaurant building on the site in addition to the existing tenant Garden Ridge,which occupies 104,450 square feet of building space.The applicant proposes 491 parking spaces as a part of the development. There is a single ground mounted sign proposed as a part of the development located adjacent to Chenal Parkway.The sign is proposed to be a ground mounted monument style sign and 72 square feet or a maximum of 7'-1"x 9'-10" in area.In addition building signage will be utilized on the front and sides of the building. The applicant proposes the days and hours of operation to be seven days per week,Sunday —Thursday from 11:00 am to 11:00 pm and Friday from 11:00am to 12:00 pm.The applicant anticipates a maximum of 34 employees (not on the same shift)with a minimum of four (4)employees on duty at a time. B.EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a single building (Garden Ridge)and an abundance of hard surface parking.The land area has a slight elevation change from the Hermitage/Bowman area falling to the east toward the Parkway at Autumn Road, The area around the site is a major commercial node that has developed intensely with a mixture of uses.There is a new restaurant under construction on the corner adjacent to Hermitage/Autumn Road.Directly across Hermitage Road is a office/mini-warehouse development and a strip center faces Bowman Road. Wal-Mart and Sam's are across Bowman Road to the west of the site, C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing,staff has not received any comment from the area residents. The Birchwood and the Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Associations along with 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:No comment. 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:10 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-5654-A E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements if service is required forthe project.Grease Traps are required forrestaurants.Contact Little Rock Wastewater at 376-2903 for additional details. AP &L:No comment received. ARKLA:No comment received. Southwestern Bell:No comment received. Water:Any trees should be planted a minimum of 5-feet from the water main in Hermitage Road. ~pire De artment:Approved as submitted. ~Coun Plannin:No comment received. CATA:The site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on bus radius,turnout and route. F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Plannin Division:The request is located in the I-430 Planning District.The Land Use Plan shows commercial for this property.The applicant has applied for a revision of an existing Planned Commercial Development to add a restaurant building to this lot. Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:ANeighborhoodAction Planis under development. ~hendeca e:The street butler along Hermitage Road must not drop below a width of fourteen (14)feet.Irrigation will be required to water landscaped areas. Buildinrl Codes:No comment received. G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(August 29,2002) Mr.Gregg Muller was present representing the application.Staff stated the original proposal was for the Home Quarters,which had since vacated the site, and the Garden Ridge Hobby Shop was now occupying the building.Staff noted a second building was now proposed for the site;a restaurant.Staff stated wastewater had noted a grease trap would be required for the development. 3 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:10 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-5654-A Staff also noted there were additional questions,which needed to be answered for the development (outdoor seating,outdoor music,drive-thru window),etc. Staff also noted only one ground mounted sign would be supported by Staff. Landscaping comments were addressed along with the comment from the Water Department. After the discussion,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 by staff and the Subdivision Committee.The applicant has indicated there would be limited outdoor dining.The applicant has also indicated there will not be a drive-thru window as a part of the development.The dumpster has been shown behind the building,adjacent to Hermitage Road,with the required screening (three sides with an opaque screen at least two (2)feet above the top of the dumpster). The applicant has also indicated one monument style ground mounted sign.The applicant has indicted the size to be 72 square feet in area or 7'1"by 9'10".The sign area is consistent with the Chenal Design Overlay District requirement. The applicant is proposing the addition of a restaurant building on an existing site.The applicant has indicated the proposed building will be 5662 square feet in area.The applicant has indicated 57 parking spaces will be designated for the restaurant use.Typical parking requirements for a restaurant of this size would be 56 spaces or 1 space per 100 square foot of gross leaseable floor area. The applicant has indicated the street buffer along Hermitage Road will be maintained at a minimum of 14-feet and irrigation will be installed to water landscaped areas. Staff is supportive of the application.The proposed development,a restaurant, should have minimal to no adverse impact on the area.The area is developed primarily as non-residential uses and the addition of an additional non-residential use should go unnoticed.The proposed development has sufficient parking for both businesses.The applicant is proposing days and hours of operation to be consistent with the area businesses (seven days per week,Sunday —Thursday from 11:00 am to 11:00 pm and Friday from 11:00 am to 12:00 pm),The applicant anticipates a maximum of 34 employees (not on the same shift)with a minimum of four (4)employees on duty at a time.The applicant is not proposing any additional curb-cuts to Hermitage Road and the applicant has indicated required landscaping will be installed. 4 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:10 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-5654-A I.STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed request for Garden Ridge Revised PCD subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in Paragraphs D,E and F of the Staff Report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) Mr.Gregg Muller was present representing the application.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the item was a positive recommendation.Staff stated the proposed revision was to an existing PCD and was to allow a restaurant building to locate on the site.Staff stated they were supportive of the modification subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the "Staff Recommendation"above. There was no further discussion.The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for Approval and approved,as recommended by Staff,by a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. 5 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:11 FILE NO '-6051-H NAME:Centre at Chenal Revised POD LOCATION:11801 Chenal Parkway DEVELOPER:ENGINEER: Hank Kelley White-Daters and Associates Flake and Kelley Management ¹24Rahling Circle P.O.Box 990 Little Rock,AR 72223 Little Rock,AR 72203 AREA:11.0Acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEWSTREET:0 CURRENT ZONING:POD ALLOWED USES:Various retail and office at a mix of 75'/o retail. PROPOSED ZONING:Revised POD PROPOSED USE:Various retail and office at a mix of 80'/o retail. VARIANCESNVAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested. BACKGROUND: The tract was preliminary platted on July 18,1996 along with lots east and south.One lot out of the plat and a segment of street was final platted for a post office.The lots were platted for office uses and zoned office in accordance with the land use plan. Ordinance No.17,623 dated December 2,1997 rezoned the site from 0-2 to POD and established Arkansas Systems Long-form POD.The site was planned as a mixed office and retail development at 75'/o retail and 25'/o office.The buildings fronting the Parkway were to be marketed to office uses and the retail uses were to be located in the buildings facing the north and east of the development. September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:11 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-6051-H The applicant indicated the purpose of the development was to provide services to the surrounding neighborhoods.The applicant was granted specific office and commercial uses as follows:antique shop,beauty shop or barber,cigar (tobacco shop),clothing store,florist shop,dry cleaners pickup station,copy center,physical therapy clinic,car shop,restaurant (non drive through),art/music/speech/drama studio,bakery,book or stationary store,card store,drug store,hobby shop,art gallery,real estate/insurance, travel agency,gift shop,bank,camera shop,medical clinic,duplication shop,jewelry store,photography studio,catering (for commercial purposes)optical shop along with 0-2 District uses eliminating a lodge,mortuary or funeral home and nursing home or convalescent home. A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to revise the Planned Development to allow additional office and commercial uses to locate on the site,to not have a requirement of placement of office uses facing the Parkway (Building A)and to revise the percent mix requirement.The original approval included a 75%retail and 25% office mix on the site.The applicant is now requesting an 80%retail and 20% office use mix. In the original POD,Building A was to be marketed to a specified list of uses which were primarily office uses.The applicant now wishes this requirement be eliminated and to be given the flexibility to place tenants at will within the development. The applicant has requested the following office and commercial uses be considered as allowable uses for the site regardless of building location:antique shop (with repair),bakery or confectionary shop,bank or savings and loan office, barber or beauty shop,beverage shop,book or stationery store,butcher shop/meat market,camera shop,catering commercial,cigar/tobacco and candy store,clinic (medical,dental or optical),clothing store,college,university or seminary,commercial catering,community welfare or health center,consignment or 2"'and store,custom sewing or millinery,drugstore or pharmacy,dry cleaning drop station,duplication shop,establishment for a religious,charitable or philanthropic organization,florist shop,furniture store,handicraft,ceramic sculpture,printing or blueprinting,hardware or sporting goods store,health studio spa,hobby shop,jewelry store,laboratory,laundry mat and pickup,library,art gallery museum or similar public use,lodge or fraternal organization,medical appliance fittings and sales,office (general or professional)office equipment sales and service,optical shop,paint and wallpaper store,pet shop,photography studio,restaurant without drive-in but with a possible lounge as a part of the restaurant,school (business),school (public or denominational),shoe repair, studio broadcasting or recording,studio (art,music,speech,drama,dance or other artistic endeavors),tailor,travel bureau,video rental store (excluding adult 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:11 Cont.FILE NO.:2-6051-H entertainment),window blind or interior decorator shop. The applicant has indicated there are four building sections to the development containing 50,662 square feet.Section A contains 15,768 square feet,Section B-1 contains 17,298 square feet,Section B-2 contains 15,543 square feet and Section B-3 contains 12,053 square feet.There are 217 parking spaces within the development and the site has a cross access and parking agreement with the Euronet Building to the north. B.EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a developed office/commercial strip center with the majority of the bays occupied.The area to the east is developed as office uses including a bank on 0-2 property and a PD-0 for the Post Office.There is also a daycare center, Kidco,further to the east behind the Post Office.Northeast of the site is a large office building housing ARSYS.Directly north of the site is the Euronet Building an office use as well. C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has not received any comment from the area residents. The St.Charles and Parkway Place Neighborhood Associations,all residents within 300 feet of the site,who could be identified,and all property owners within 200 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works:No comment. E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.Grease Trap are required for food preparation facilities.Contact Little Rock Wastewater at 376-2903 for additional details. AP 8 L:No comment received. ARKLA:No comment received. Southwestern Bell:No comment received. Water:No objection. 3 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:11 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-6051-H ~Fire Ce artment:Approved as submitted. ~Count Piann n:No comment received. CATA:Site is not located on dedicated bus route and has no effect on bus radius,turnout and route. F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Plannin Division:The request is located in the Chenal Planning District.The Land Use Plan shows office for the site.The applicant has applied for a revision of an existing Planned Office Development to add additional uses to the site. Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. ~Landsca e:No comment. ~Buildin Codes:No comment received. G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(August 29,2002) Mr.Hank Kelly and Mr.Michael Mitcham were present representing the application.Staff presented the issue stating the applicant was requesting a revision to a previously approved POD to allow additional uses on the site and to not limit the retail uses away from the Parkway.Staff stated there were additional questions,which needed to be addressed with the regard to an outdoor deck,which had been mentioned but not indicated on the site plan.Staff also questioned if the deck would involve any outdoor music or entertainment. Staff noted the comment from the Wastewater Department regarding the addition of grease traps for food preparation uses. After the discussion,it was determined there were no additional issues for discussion and the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H.ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised cover letter indicating the additional items requested by Staff and the Subdivision Committee.The applicant has indicated the proposed deck addition will not be covered at this time but he would like the flexibility to cover the deck with a canopy at some point in the future.The only 4 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:11 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-6051-H flexibility to cover the deck with a canopy at some point in the future.The only music,which will be offered on the deck will be piped mood music and no outdoor live entertainment.The proposed deck will occupy one parking space of the existing development.A fence will be added to allow access control to the deck but will be constructed of an ornamental wrought iron.The deck should have no adverse impact on the development since the development has sufficient parking and a cross access easement for additional parking with the office building to the north. The applicant proposes additional uses to the site.The applicant has requested the use of the site for a lodge or a school.The applicant has indicated these uses would be self policing and Staff is somewhat agreeable.The applicant is requesting the use of the site for a school such as a satellite campus.Staff feels the current parking situation would regulate the usage of the site and is agreeable with the alternative uses listed for the development. The applicant has also requested the percentage mix of the development to be changed from a 75%commercial 25%office to a 80%commercial 20%office. The applicant is also requesting the retail uses be allowable in Building A,the building facing the Parkway.Staff is also agreeable to this request.The size of the development and the available square footage in Building A should not have a adverse impact on the area even if the Building were to develop totally as retail. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed request to allow the development to develop at an 80%commercial and 20%office use mix with no regard to building placement.Staff recommends approval of the requested uses listed in Paragraph A as alternative uses for the development subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in Paragraphs D,E and F of this report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19 2002) Mr.Hank Kelly and Mr.Michael Mitcham were present representing the application. There were no objectors present.Staff presented the item with a positive recommendation to allow uses listed in Paragraph A,of this report,as alternative uses for the development subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the "Staff Recommendation"above. Staff also recommended approval of the proposed request to allow the development to develop at an 80%commercial and 20%office use mix with no regard to building placement. 5 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:11 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-6051-H There was no further discussion.The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for Approval and approved,as recommended by Staff,by a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. 6 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:12 FILE NO.:Z-6232-D NAME:The Villages at Rahling Road (Lot 10A)Revised PCD LOCATION:Rahling Circle DEVELOPER:ENGINEER: Deltic Timber Corporation White-Daters and Associates¹7Chenal Circle ¹24Rahling Circle Little Rock,AR 72223 Little Rock,AR 72223 AREA:0.53 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0 CURRENT ZONING:PCD ALLOWED USES:C-2 Permitted uses PROPOSED ZONING:Revised PCD PROPOSED USE:Office VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested. BACKGROUND: On August 5,1997,the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No.17,542 which established The Village at Rahling Road PCD.The PCD established a 14 lot development with C-2 uses being permitted.The initial action approved a site plan for Lots 1 and 2 of the development with the intent being that each of the remaining lots would be brought to the Commission on an individual basis as a particular development was proposed.Subsequent actions have been approved to allow three small buildings on the properties immediately west of the site. September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:12 Cont.FILE NO Z-6232-D A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant now proposes to revise the PCD to allow the construction of a 6960 square foot office building on unrecorded Lot 10A.The applicant has indicated the site will be used as a medical office type use.The applicant proposes the placement of 20 parking spaces in the rear of the building to be accessed by a shared 30-foot Public Access Easement located on the north property line as are the existing buildings in the area.The applicant proposes the placement of the building at a 12-foot building line and has indicated the building height will not exceed 35-feet. The applicant has indicated the days and hours of operation to be from 7:00 am to 9:00 pm six (6)days per week.The applicant has also indicated signage will comply with city ordinance standard for office zones (not to exceed six (6)feet in height and 64 square feet in area)and the architectural design elements of "The Village of Rahling Road". B.EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is cleared flat site with street improvements in place.The property was cleared and graded with initial development of the PCD.Access to the lot is via Rahling Circle,off of Rahling Road.The 0-2 and PCD zoned properties immediately south and east of the site are undeveloped.A similar office building is located adjacent to the west.The larger buildings of the multiuse PCD are located north of the site. C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: All owners within 200 feet of the site and residents within 300 feet,who could be identified,were notified of the Public Hearing.There is no City recognized neighborhood association within the vicinity of the site.As of this writing staff has received one informational phone call concerning the development. D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works:No comment. Wastewater:Sewer available and not adversely affected. AP &L:No comment received. 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:12 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-6232-D ARKLA:No comment received. Southwestern Bell:No comment received. Water:Water service is available.Developer must extend water service to back of sidewalk.For a dental office,installation of an approved reduced pressure zone backflow preventer assembly will be required on the domestic water service. ~Fire De artmenb Approved as submitted. ~Count Plannin:No comment received. CATA:The site is located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on bus radius,turnout and route. E.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: ~ptannrn Division:This request s located in the Chanel planning District.The Land Use Plan shows Commercial for this property.The applicant has applied for a revision of an existing Planned Commercial Development. Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:The property under review is not located in an area covered by a City of Little Rock recognized neighborhood action plan. ~Landsca e:A portion of the proposed landscape strip south of the proposed parking lot drops below the minimum 6.7-foot width required by the Landscape Ordinance.A water source within seventy-five (75)feet of all landscaped areas will be required. ~Buildin Codes:No comment received. G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(August 29,2002) Mr.Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the application.Staff stated the PCD was an overall development plan for the Villages at Rahling Road knowing that as each lot developed the PCD would be required to be revised.Staff stated the current proposal was for a dentist office on an unrecorded lot in the subdivision. Staff stated the applicant would be required to indicate the number of doctors and the number of employees on the site plan.Staff also stated any additional site lighting must be low level and directed away from residentially zoned 3 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:12 Cont.FILE NO.;Z-6232-D property. Comments from the Water Department were noted and the Landscaping comments were briefly discussed.Staff stated any variance from the Landscape Ordinance would require City Beautiful Commission approval. After the discussion,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 by Staff and the Subdivision Committee.The applicant has indicated there will be two (2)doctors serving the facility.Typically this would require 12 parking spaces and the applicant has indicated there will be 20 on-site parking spaces.In addition,there is a large parking area across the street should parking ever become an issue for the site.The applicant has also indicated a 10- foot landscaping strip along the southern perimeter adjacent to the property line and the parking lot. The applicant has indicated water will be extended to the site by the developer as required by Central Arkansas Water.The applicant has indicated the site will utilize city service for garbage collection and there will not be a dumpster located on the site. Staff is supportive of the request to revise the previously approved PCD to allow a dentist office to be located on proposed Lot 10A.The area is developing as non-residential neighborhood commercial and office type uses.The applicant has indicated signage and lighting will comply with the Zoning Ordinance and the Chenal Design criteria.The applicant has indicated Lot 10A will be final platted prior to development.The applicant has indicated the hours of operation will be from 7:00 am to 9;00 pm six (6)days per week.The proposed use and hours of operation is consistent with the development pattern in the area and should have no adverse impact on the surrounding area. I.STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed revision to the PCD to allow Lot 10A to develop with an office building subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in Paragraphs D,E and F of the Staff Report. 4 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:12 Cont.FILE NO.:2-6232-D PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) Mr.Joe White of White Daters and Associates was present representing the application. There were no objectors present.Staff presented the proposed development with a positive recommendation subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the "Staff Recommendation"above. There was no further discussion.The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for Approval and approved,as recommended by Staff,by a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. 5 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:13 FILE NO.:Z-7256-A NAME:Kincaid's Short-form PD-R LOCATION:Northwest Corner of Kavanaugh Boulevard and Midland Street DEVELOPER:ENGINEER: Johnny Kincaid White-Daters and Associates 100 Morgan Keegan Drive ¹24Rahling Circle Little Rock,AR 72202 Little Rock,AR 72223 AREA:0.28 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS:2 FT.NEW STREET:0 CURRENT ZONING:R-3,Single-family District ALLOWED USES:Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING:PD-R PROPOSED USE:Single-family residential VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested. A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The existing site is approximately 70-feet wide by 165-feet deep.The site contains a single-family residence facing Hill Road and is the rear yard and vacant to Kavanaugh Boulevard.The applicant proposes to subdivide the lot into two single-family lots to allow the development of a second single-family residence on the site facing Kavanaugh Boulevard.The northern lot would be approximately 70 feet by 90 feet and the southern lot would be approximately 70 feet by 75 feet. September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.'3 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7256-A The northern lot will have approximately a 40-foot rear property line setback (for the existing home).The southern lot would have a front yard setback of 10-feet, side yard setback along Midland Street of 5-feet and a rear yard setback (adjacent to the existing residential structure)of 5-feet. B.EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a steep site sloping extremely from Hill Road to Kavanaugh Boulevard and contains a single-family structure facing Hill Road.The site is grass covered with a scattering of trees.Uses in the area include a duplex across Midland Street and multi-family one lot removed to the west (a pair of two-story duplexes). Across Valentine Street there is a multi-family structure containing 6 units fronting onto Kavanaugh Boulevard.The remainder of the area appears to be single-family. Midland Street is an unimproved roadway with no sidewalk and open ditches for drainage.Kavanaugh Boulevard has sidewalks on both sides of the road and curb and gutter. C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing,Staff has received one informational phone call concerning the application.The Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood Association,all property owners within 200-feet of the site and all residents,who could be identified, within 300-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works:No comment. E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater:Sewer available not adversely affected. AP &L:No comment received. ARKLA:No comment received. Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted. Water:Water meter serving the existing residence may need to be relocated at developer's expense.Contact Central Arkansas Water for additional details at 992-2438. 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:13 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7256-A ~prre Ce artment:Approved as submitted. CountaPlanning:No comment received. CATA:Site is located on dedicated Bus Route ¹1and ¹8and has no effect on bus radius,turnout and route. F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Plannin Division:This request is located in the Heights/Hillcrest Planning District.The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property.The applicant has applied for a Planned Development —Residential for residential uses. Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Action Plan.The Housing goal of establishing design guidelines for the construction of new housing in the Hillcrest area is supported by an objective of regulating construction and redevelopment by using Planned Unit Developments as recommended in one of the action statements. ~Landsca e:No comment. ~Buildin Codes:No comment received. G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(August 29,2002) Mr.Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the application.Staff stated wastewater had concerns with the sewer service serving the lot adjacent to Hill Road being accessed across the lot adjacent to Kavanaugh Boulevard.Staff stated the applicant should work with wastewater to resolve this issue.Staff stated the only other issue was that the site plan indicated the property would be owned under a horizontal property regime.Staff questioned if this would be the case or if the lots would be final platted as two separate lots. The Committee then determined there were no further issues to discuss and the item was then forwarded to the full Commission for final action. H.ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised by Staff and the Subdivision Committee.The applicant has reached an agreement with the Little Rock Wastewater Utility concerning sewer line availability and the use of an easement to service the lot facing Hill Road. 3 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:13 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7256-A Staff is supportive of the application.The applicant proposes to establish lot sizes and building setbacks through the Planned Development process. Although,the proposed lots sizes are not consistent with the minimum lot size required for R-2 zoned property,the proposed lot sizes are similar to the lot size in the area. Otherwise,to Staff's knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed development.The proposed development should have no adverse impact on the surrounding neighborhood if developed as planned. I.STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Planned Development subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in Paragraphs D,E and F of this report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) Mr.Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the application. There were no objectors present.Staff stated to their knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed rezoning.Staff presented a positive recommendation of the PD-R subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the "Staff Recommendation"above. There was no further discussion.The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for Approval and approved,as recommended by Staff,by a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. 4 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:14 FILE NO.:LU02-08-04 Name:Land Use Plan Amendment -Central City Planning District Location:2812 S.Ringo St. ~Re uest:Single Family to Multi-Family Source:Clifton White ~PIannin Division: This request is located in the Central City Planning District.The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property.The applicant has applied for a Planned Development- Residential to convert an existing duplex into a fourplex. Since this application is an existing structure and does not change the footprint,the base use of the application is residential,and the structure can be converted back to its original use,a land use plan amendment is not necessary. September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:14.1 FILE NO.:Z-7280 NAME:White Short-form PD-R LOCATION:2812 South Ringo Street DEVELOPER:ENGINEER: Clifton R.White Marlar Engineering Co.,Inc. 5401 Dreher Lane 5318 John F.Kennedy Boulevard Little Rock,AR 72209 Little Rock,AR 72209 AREA:0.32Acres NUMBER OF LOTS:2 FT.NEW STREET:0 CURRENT ZONING:R-4,Two-family District ALLOWED USES:Residential —Duplex PROPOSED ZONING:PD-R PROPOSED USE:Residential —Fourplex VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested. A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes the conversion of an exiting structure (a duplex)into a fourplex.Two units currently exist on the top floor and the applicant proposes the addition of two units on the lower level.The upper units will have access from both the front and the rear the lower units will have access from the rear only. The applicant proposes the placement of four (4)parking spaces adjacent to the south property line in the rear of the structure and to utilize the two (2)existing single car parking pads adjacent to South Ringo Street on the north and south property lines. September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:14.1 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7280 B.EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an existing duplex currently under rehabilitation.The structure sits on two 50 by 100 foot lots in the area which was hard hit by the 1999 tornado.There is a duplex located on the southeast corner of West 28'"and South Ringo Streets with the remainder of the area single-family in appearance. Several of the units are vacant and boarded (two of the three units to the south accessed by the alley and the units immediately to the north and south of the site).There are two vacant lots immediately south of the site. C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: The Wdight Avenue,the Downtown,the MLK and the Southend Neighborhood Associations,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. As of this writing staff has not received any co'mment from the area residents. D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works:No comment. E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater:Sewer available and not adversely affected. AP &L:No comment received. ARKLA:No comment received. Southwestern Bell:No comment received. Water:Contact Central Arkansas Water if additional water meters are needed at 992-2438. ~Fire De artment:Approved as submitted. C~ount Piannin:No comment received CATA:Site is located on Bus Route ff2 and has no effect on bus radius,turnout and route. 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:14.1 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7280 F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: ~ptannin Division:This request is located in the Central City planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property.The applicant has applied for a Planned Development —Residential to convert an existing duplex into a fourplex.Since there will be no change to the building footprint of the structure a Land Use Plan amendment is not necessary. Ci Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the South End Area Improvement Plan.The Residential Development goal is supported by an action statement,which recommends that new multifamily housing design be compatible with existing patterns of massing and setting backs characteristic of the neighborhood. ~bandana e:The plan submitted does not allow for the minimum B.y-foot wide perimeter buffer and landscape strips required along the southern and northern perimeters required by both the Zoning and Landscape Ordinances.The existing screening fences need to be secured in order to make them stable. ~Buttdin Codes:No comment received. G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(August 29,2002) Mr.White,the applicant,was present representing the application.Staff presented the item to the Commission indicating the intent of the development was the conversion of an exiting duplex into a fourplex.Staff stated there were technical issues associated with the proposed development and requested the applicant indicate on the site plan the proposed parking space dimensions. Landscaping issues were addressed.Staff stated the applicant should secure the wooden fence on the north and south property lines if the fence was to be used as screening. There being no further issues for discussion,the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H.ANALYSIS: The applicant has indicated the addition of four parking spaces to the rear of the structure.The applicant notes the parking spaces will be a minimum of nine (9) feet in width and 20.8 feet in length.The applicant has not requested a waiver of the hard surface parking area,which is required by ordinance.The applicant will utilize two (2)existing spaces located adjacent to Ringo Street for the upstairs units.The parking proposed is sufficient to meet the typical minimum parking 3 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO '4 1 Cont.FILE NO '-7280 requirement for a multi-family development of this size (typical six (6)spaces required). There is an existing six (6)foot wooden fence along the north and south property lines.The applicant proposes the fence to act as screening for the development. Staff is not supportive of the proposed development.The site is located near the 1999 tornado area and the neighborhood is very fragile at best.The area is a single-family neighborhood with a duplex located several homes away at the southeast corner of 28'"and Ringo Streets.The existing single-family homes are well kept homes but there are several boarded homes in the area.With the conversion of this duplex into a fourplex,this could be the start of the conversion of additional homes into multi-family units.Staff feels the current density of a duplex is suitable to the neighborhood.The existing parking is sufficient to meet the needs of the development with two (2)spaces adjacent to Ringo Street.With the conversion to a fourplex,additional parking will be required,in the rear of the structure,resulting in a hard surface parking area taking away the residential character of the structure. I.STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the proposed Planned Development request to allow a duplex to be converted into a fourplex. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) The applicant was not present.There were no objectors present.Staff stated the applicant had failed to notify property owners within 200-feet as required by the Planning Commission By-Laws.Staff stated the applicant had requested the item be deferred to the October 31,2002 Public Hearing.Staff stated they were supportive of the request. There was no further discussion.The Chairman placed the item on the Consent Agenda for Deferral.The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. 4 September 19,2002 ITEM NO:15 FILE NO 'U02-18-04 Name:Land Use Plan Amendment —Ellis Mountain Planning District Location:12800 Arthur Lane ~Re uest:Single Family to I ow Density Residential Source:Richard Threadgill PROPOSAL /REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the Ellis Mountain Planning District from Single Family to Low Density Residential.Low Density Residential accommodates a broad range of housing types including single family attached,single family detached,duplex,town homes,multi-family and patio or garden homes.Any combination of these and possibly other housing types may fall in this category provided that the density is between six (6)and ten (10)dwelling units per acre.The applicant wishes to develop townhouses. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is occupied by a small house and is currently zoned R-2 Single Family and is approximately .47+acres in size.All of the surrounding property is zoned R-2 Single Family.The land to the West,North,and East is developed with single-family housing.The land to the south is vacant. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: On July 3,2001 a change was made from Mixed Office Commercial,and Commercial to Single Family in an area bounded by Bowman Rd.,Panther Creek,Cooper Orbit Rd.,and Brodie Creek starting about 1 mile south of the applicant's property.This change was made to revert to the previous use as the result of the revocation of a Planned Unit Development. On February 15,2000 a change was made from Single Family to Low Density Residential on West Glen at Gamble about "/~mile south of the property in question. This change was made to allow the development of town houses. On March 2,1999 multiple changes were made from Low Density Residential, Transition,Neighborhood Commercial,Park/Open Space,Multi-family,Mixed Office Commercial,Office,and Suburban Office,to Single Family,Low Density Residential, Suburban Office,Mixed Office Commercial,Park/Open Space,Service Trades District, Office,Neighborhood Commercial,and Community Shopping within a 1 mile radius of the study area along Kanis Rd.These changes were made to recognize existing conditions. September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:15 Cont.FILE NO.:LU02-18-04 The applicant's property as well as all of the surrounding property is south as Single Family on the Future Land Use Plan. MASTER STREET PLAN: Arther Lane and Atkins Road are-residential streets.Arther Lane would need to be widened and have curbs and gutters installed to meet the Master Street Plan standards for a standard residential street.Atkins Road has curb and gutters on the east side but would need a curb and gutter installed to replace the open ditch on the west side.There are no Bikeways shown on the Master Street Plan that would be affected by this amendment. PARKS: The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 2001 shows that the applicant's property is located in a service deficit area.Park facilities would need to be developed to provide adequate park and open space areas to serve the area covered by this amendment as well as surrounding areas. HISTORIC DISTRICTS: There are no City of Little Rock recognized historic districts that would be affected by this amendment. Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan.The Residential Development goal is supported by an objective of encouraging lower density development in the area.Action Statements include using multi-family housing to act as a buffer between office and single-family uses and limiting the density and square footage of multi-family developments. ANALYSIS: The applicant's property is located in a stable neighborhood of single-family residences.Although higher density residential uses are located in the surrounding neighborhood to the north,the applicant's property is isolated from residential uses of higher density.Most of the trend for higher density housing is located at the northern and southern area of the neighborhood along Minor Arterial and Collector streets.The applicant's property is near the heart of the area shown as Single Family and is located at the intersection of two residential streets.A change to Low Density Residential would increase the density of residential units for a small area in the neighborhood and introduce a land use that would be incompatible with this part of the 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:15 Cont.FILE NO.:LU02-18-04 neighborhood.The proposed density is almost three times the density of the single family areas to the east and north. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:Gibraltar/Pt. West/Timber Ridge,Parkway Place Property Owners Association,and Spring Valley Manor Property Owners Association.Staff has received 1 comment from area residents opposed to the change. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is not appropriate.A change to Low Density Residential would introduce an isolated incompatible use to the neighborhood. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) Brian Minyard,City Staff,made a brief presentation to the Commission.Donna James made a presentation of item 15.1 so the discussion could coincide with the discussion for item 15.See item 15.1 for a complete discussion concerning the Short Form Planned Development-Residential. Terry Haley,of 515 Trumpler Street,spoke against the application concerning density and the proximity to his back yard. Shirley McFarlin lives south of the application and wants a small neighborhood feel. Mary Douglas,of Atkins Road,worked on the neighborhood action plan and does not want the Land Use Plan amended. Bill Gentry lives in the area and thinks that this change would have a negative effect on the property values. Commissioner Faust stated that she was going to vote against it and asked about the location of windows on the sides of the units. A motion was made to approve the application as presented and was denied with a vote of 2 ayes,8 noes,0 absent and 1 abstention. A motion was made to waive the filing fee for reapplication within three months and was approved with a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. 3 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:15.1 FILE NO.:Z-7281 NAME:Threadgill Short-form PD-R LOCATION:12800 Arthur Lane DEVELOPER:ENGINEER: Richard Threadgill Donald Brooks 2303 East Grand Avenue 20880 Arch Street Hot Springs,AR 71901 Hensley,AR 72065 AREA:0.46Acres NUMBER OF LOTS:3 FT.NEWSTREET:0 CURRENT ZONING:R-2,Single-family ALLOWED USES:Single-family residential (6 units per acre) PROPOSED ZONING:PD-R PROPOSED USE:Residential —Townhouse development (17 units per acre) VARIANCESNVAIVERS REQUESTED:Waiver of street improvements to Arthur Lane. A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes the placement of eight (8)townhouse residential units on these three lots.There are four (4)units proposed to be located on the south property line (to back-up to Arthur Lane)and four (4)units to be located along the north property line.There will be a single concrete drive access point to the site from Atkins Road entering the center of the development. Units 2,3,6 and 7 are proposed at 1440 square feet with a 240 square foot garage.Units 1,4,5 and 8 are proposed at 1656 square feet with a 240 square foot garage.The applicant has indicated all units will be two-story.The units will consist of concrete block foundation,concrete slab on the first floor,wood September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO 151 Cont.FILE NO.Z-7281 framing,drywall interiors,composition shingles and brick and vinyl siding exteriors. The applicant has also indicated a six (6)foot wood fence along the north,south and west property lines and a wrought iron fence along the street side of Atkins Road.The development will utilize city garbage pick-up with residents taking their trash to the street side. The applicant has stated the units are for resale as individual homes and a Property Owners Association will be formed for maintenance and upkeep of the common areas. The applicant is requesting a waiver of street improvements to Arthur Lane.The applicant has indicated street improvements will be constructed to Atkins Road. B.EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains three lots one of which (the southern most lot)contains a single-family residence facing Arthur Lane.The site is zoned R-2,single-family as is the area surrounding the site and is shown as Single Family on the Future Land Use Plan.The area to the east is a developed single-family subdivision (Point West Subdivision)and the area to the north and west are developed with single-family residences.The area to the south of the site from Atkins Road to Nix Road is vacant (with the exception of a few homes located on Atkins Road) down to Kanis Road. Atkins Road is a two lane roadway with curb and gutter on the east side of the road but has no sidewalk.Arthur Lane is a narrow chip seal roadway with no curb,gutter or sidewalk adjacent to the site. C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: The Parkway Place and the Gibralter Heights/Point WestfTimber Ridge Neighborhood Associations,all residents,who could be identified,within 300-feet of the site and all property owners within 200-feet of the site were notified of the public hearing.Staff has received several phone calls and letters in opposition to the proposed development. D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1.Atkins Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:15.1 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7281 2.Arthur Lane is classified on the Master Street Plan as a residential street. Dedicate right-of-way to 25 feet from centerline. 3.A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required at Atkins Road and Arthur Lane. 4.Provide design of the streets conforming to eMSPe (Master Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvement to these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned development. 5.All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance.Curb radius of driveway at Atkins needs to be 10'inimum. 6.Obtain permits prior to doing any street cuts or curb cuts.Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way.Contact Traffic Engineering at 501-379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield)for more information. E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements is service is required for the project.Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for additional details at 376-2903. AP 8 L:No comment received. ARKLA:No comment received. Southwestern Bell:No comment received. Water:A water main extension,installed at the expense of the developer,will be required to provide domestic service and adequate fire protection.The Little Rock Fire Department 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 expense of the developer.An acreage charge of $600.00 per acre and a development fee based on the size of the connection currently applies in addition to normal charges in the area.Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional details. ~Fire De artment:Place fire hydrants per code.Contact the i ittle Rock Fire Department at 319-3752 for additional details. ~Count Plannin:No comment received. CATA:Site is located on Bus Route /f5 and has no effect on bus radius,turnout and route. 3 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO 151 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7281 F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Plannin 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 Development —Residential to build an eight (8)unit townhouse development.A Land Use Plan Amendment is a separate item on the agenda (LU02-18-04) Ci Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan.The Residential Development goal is supported by an objective of encouraging lower density development in the area.Action Statements include using multi-family housing to act as a buffer between office and single-family uses and limiting the density and square footage of multi-family developments. ~Landsca e:The plan submitted falls short of the required nine (9f foot wide land use buffer along the northern and western perimeters of the site.Additionally,a portion of the landscape strip west of the proposed paved area drops below the 6.7-foot minimum width requirement of the Landscape Ordinance.A water source within seventy-five (75)feet of all landscaped areas will be required.The face side of the proposed wood fence must be directed outward. ~Buildin Codes:No comment recei ed. G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(August 29,2002) Mr.Richard Threadgill was present representing the application.Staff presented the item to the Committee noting additions,which were needed on the site plan (Signage,height of the wrought iron fence).Staff stated there were questions with regard to maintenance of the development and the common areas.Staff questioned if the units were to be sold what portion would the homeowner own; the unit or would the land area be final platted in some configuration of lots such as zero lot line housing. Public Works comments were addressed.Staff stated street improvements would be required to both Atkins Road and Arthur Lane.Staff also stated a 20- foot radial dedication would be required at the intersection of the two roadways, Staff noted comments from the various utility companies noting a sewer main extension would be required and a water main extension along with easements. Staff also noted the comment from the Little Rock Fire Department and suggested the applicant contact the Fire Department and Water Department to determine the cost of placement of the fire hydrants. 4 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:15.1 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7281 There being no further issues to discuss,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 by staff and the Subdivision Committee.The applicant has indicated patios to be attached to each structure within the side yard setback and a six (6) foot wood fence separating the units and acting as a screen.The applicant proposes a six (6)foot wooden fence located along the north,south and west property lines with a six (6)foot wrought iron fence along the street side of Atkins Road. The applicant is requesting a waiver of street improvements to Arthur Lane.The applicant has indicated the roadway is a narrow road and the residents will not be taking access from Arthur Lane therefore the development will not increase traffic on this roadway.The applicant has indicated street improvements will be constructed to Atkins Road per the Master Street Plan requirements.Staff is not supportive of the requested waiver of street improvements to Arthur Lane.Staff feels without knowing the potential development in the area,streets should be constructed per the Master Street Plan requirements. The landscaping along the north and south property lines is insufficient when the patios are added.The landscaping strip along the northern and western perimeter should maintain a minimum of nine (9)feet in width and at no point fall below 6.7-feet.This is a land use buffer issue and the reduction can be approved by the Planning Commission.Staff is not supportive of the reduction of landscaping.The site abuts single-family in each direction and the single-family should be buffered per the Ordinance requirement.Additionally,the applicant should consider the narrowing of the turnaround along the western driveway to five (5)feet instead of the 7.8 feet shown.Staff recommends the applicant install flat landscaping stones and mondo grass between the stones to allow for additional landscaping in this area. Staff is not supportive of the application as filed.Staff feels the proposed development is too intense for the site and should be developed with single-family homes.Similar developments have been approved and developed to the north of the site,nearer West Markham Street,but were developed adjacent to multi-family and were in areas shown on the Future Land Use Plan for more intense developments.The site is shown on the Future Land Use Plan as Single Family as is the area to the south of the site.The development pattern along this section of Atkins Road has not yet been established although,there are newer (within the last 5 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:15.1 Cont.FILE NO '-7281 15 -20 years)single-family subdivisions located immediately east of the site and immediately west of the site.As stated Staff feels the area would be better served if the site developed as single-family homes. I.STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the requested Planned Residential Development for Threadgill Short-form PD-R. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) Mr.Richard Threadgill was present representing the application.There were numerous objectors present.The land use plan and the rezoning request were discussed simultaneously. Staff introduced the items with a recommendation of denial on each item.Staff stated the density requested was too intense for the proposed site. Mr.Terry Hailey spoke in opposition to the request.He stated he lived at 515 Trumpler Street just west of the site.He stated the land use plan indicated single family for the site.Mr.Hailey stated the proposed development offered a small buffer.He stated the two-story development would impede on his existing privacy.He stated property values in the area could be adversely affected.Mr.Hailey stated he felt the Planning Commission should adhere to the land use and zoning plans for the area.He stated when he purchased his home he did have these two issues in mind and did check the zoning of surrounding properties.He stated he had made an attempt to meet with the applicant and Mr.Threadgill was not responsive to a meeting. Ms.Shirley McFarland spoke in opposition to the proposed development.She stated her opposition was based on the proposed density.She stated she represented the persons who signed the petition but were not asked to attend the meeting. Ms.Mary Douglas spoke in opposition of the proposal.She stated her home was on Atkins Road nearer Markham.She stated the staff analysis wording confused the meaning of the intent of the neighborhood action plan.She stated the intent was to encourage lower density development and not multi-family developments in the area. She stated these developments were proposed to act as a buffer between the single family and the non-residential developments in the area.She stated the proposed development was mid block,surrounded by single family.She stated the Commission should adhere to the land use plan and not place multi-family mid block. 6 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:15.1 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7281 Bill Gentry spoke in opposition to the proposed development.He stated the proposal would change in the character of the development pattern in the area.He stated the Commission should uphold the existing land use plan for the site. Mr.Threadgill spoke on behalf of the application.He stated there were three lots and he proposed to combine the lots into one lot.He stated the units would be brick and siding.He stated development would be an investment into the neighborhood,which had been stagnate.He stated a property owners association would be formed to care for the maintenance of the grounds and buildings.He stated the units would be for resale and not held as rental units. Commissioner Nunnley questioned of the orientation of the buildings could be changed to break up the concrete areas.Mr.Threadgill stated staff was not supportive of the request to change the orientation because of the number of curb cuts that would be required. Commissioner Berry questioned the street conditions in the area.Staff stated Arthur Lane was an unimproved chip seal roadway with open ditches for drainage.Staff also stated they did not support the waiver of street improvements. Commissioner Berry questioned Ms.McFarland as to an appropriate number of units for the site.She stated the site should be developed as single-family. Commissioner Allen asked Mr.Threadgill what would happen to the units if they did not sell.Mr.Threadgill stated the units would then be rented for approximately $800 per month. Commissioner Faust stated the proposal was too dense.She stated the proposal did not feel compatible to the neighborhood.She stated buffers and screening would be a requirement. Mr.Threadgill stated six (6)units would be acceptable and requested to amend his application. Mr,Jim Lawson,Director of Planning and Development,stated the application would have to be reviewed with regard to buffers,screening and setbacks. There was a motion to approve the land use plan amendment as filed.The motion failed by a vote of 2 ayes,8 noes and 1 absent. Commissioner Rector made a motion to approve the application as filed.The motion failed by a vote of 0 ayes,11 noes and 0 absent. 7 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:15.1 Cont.FILE NO Z-7281 There was a motion to waive the filing fee for the applicant should he revise his plan and resubmit to staff within three (3)months.The motion carried 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. 8 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:16 FILE NO 'U02-10-04 Name:Land Use Plan Amendment -Boyle Park Planning District Location:2701 -2723 Walker St. Receuest:Single Family to Multi-Family Source:Christopher Lee Griffin PROPOSAL /REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the Boyle Park Planning District from Single Family to Multi-Family.Multi-Family accommodates residential development of ten (10)to thirty- six (36)dwelling units per acre.The applicant wishes to develop the property for an eighteen-unit apartment complex. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is vacant land currently zoned R-2 Single Family and is approximately .75+acres in size.All of the surrounding property is land zoned R-2 Single Family developed with single-family housing. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: On September 4,2001 a change was made from Park/Open Space to Multi-family at 24'"St.and Junior Deputy Rd.about 9/10 of a mile west of the area in question.This change was made to allow for the expansion of a retirement community. On March 6,2001 a change was made from Single Family to Office at 1911 John Barrow Rd.about a V~mile northwest of the applicant's property.This change was made to allow the expansion of a proposed medical office development. On September 19,2000 a change was made from Single Family to Office at 2109 John Barrow Rd.about 1/3 of a mile northwest of the application area.This change was made to allow the development of medical offices. The applicant's property,as well as all of the surrounding property,is shown as Single Family on the Future Land Use Plan. MASTER STREET PLAN: Walker Street north of W.28'"Street is a Residential Street with open drainage,Curbs and gutters would need to be installed to bring Walker Street up to Standard Residential Street standards.Both W.28'"Street and Walker Street south of W.28" September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:16 Cont.FILE NO.:LU02-10-04 Street are shown as collector streets.W.28'"Street is built to standard while Walker Street south of 28'"is not.There area no Bikeways shown on the Master Street Plan that would be affected by this amendment. PARKS: The applicant's property is located five block west of Boyle Park,which is shown in the 2001 Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan as a large urban park of 243 acres featuring multiple forms of active,and passive recreation facilities. HISTORIC DISTRICTS: There are no City of Little Rock recognized historic districts that would be affected by this amendment. Ci Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the John Barrow Neighborhood Area Plan.The Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization goal of improving the overall appearance and safety of the neighborhood is supplemented by an objective of reviewing design standards for new construction of residential units,which is supported by an action statement stating that the design of new residential units should be compatible with existing architecture in the area. ANALYSIS: The applicant's property is located in a established residential neighborhood.The houses to the north and east are relatively new and built on streets with curb and gutter.The remaining houses are older and built on streets needing improvements to conform to Master Street Plan standards.All of the combined surrounding property firmly establishes the residential character of the neighborhood.Although the applicant's property is located on a street corner at the intersection of two Collector Streets,a change to Multi-family would substantially increase the density of residential units of the neighborhood and introduce a small area that would be incompatible with the neighborhood.Land shown as Multi-family could increase the variety of housing types available in the neighborhood and allow for the development of more housing units in the neighborhood at higher densities but would do at the expense of land shown as Single Family. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:Broadmoor Neighborhood Association,Brownwood Terrace Neighborhood Association,College Terrace Neighborhood Association,Leander Neighborhood Association,Point 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:16 Cont.FILE NO.:LU02-10-04 O'Woods Neighborhood Association,University Park Neighborhood Association,and Westwood Neighborhood Association.Staff has not received any comments from area residents. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is not appropriate.A change to Multi-family would introduce an isolated use that is incompatible with neighboring uses. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the October 31,2002 Planning Commission meeting.A motion was made to waive the by-laws for a five- day notice to defer prior to the Planning Commission meeting.That motion to waive the bylaws was made and approved with a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes,and 0 absent.A motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved with a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes,and 0 absent. 3 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:16.1 FILE NO '-7282 NAME:Griffin Short-form PD-R LOCATION:2701 —2723 Walker Street DEVELOPER:ENGINEER: Christopher L.Griffin Marvin T.Griffin 8212 Pine Summit Court 11324 Kanis Road Little Rock,AR 72204 Little Rock,AR 72211 AREA:0.75 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS:3 FT.NEW STREET:0 CURRENT ZONING:R-2,Single-family ALLOWED USES:Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING:PD-R PROPOSED USE:Multi-family (24 units per acre) VARIANCESNVAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested. A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes the construction of 18 units of multi-family housing on this 0.75 acre site.The site will be accessed by a single entry from Walker Street with all the parking spaces heading into the buildings.There are 32 parking spaces proposed as a part of the development. September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:16.1 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7282 B.EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a vacant,flat,grass covered site and the few trees,which once occupied the site have been removed.The area is primarily developed as single- family in all directions around the site.There is a sidewalk along West 28"Street adjacent to the site and running west but not extending any further to the east. West 28'"Street also has curb and gutter in place.Walker Street is an unimproved roadway with open ditches for drainage. C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing staff has received several informational phone calls from the neighborhood concerning the development.The John Barrow,the Campus Place,the Westbrook,the Kensington Place Neighborhood Association,all residents,who could be identified,within 300-feet of the site and all property owners within 200-feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works: 1.Walker Street would be classified under this proposal on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street.Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 2.A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required at 28'"Street and Walker Street. 3.Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"(Master Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvements to these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned development.(Street width on 28'"Street is adequate.) 4.All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance.Edge of driveway on Walker must have minimum 25'pacing from property line.As an alternative,take access from 28'"Street. 5.Obtain permits prior to doing any street cuts or curb cuts. 6.Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way.Contact Traffic Engineering at 501-379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield)for more information. 7.Stormwater detention ordinance does not apply to this property. 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:16.1 Cont.FILE NO '-7282 E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements if service is required for the project.Capacity Contribution Analysis is required.Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility at 376-2903 for additional details. AP &L:No comment received. ARKLA:No comment received. Southwestern Bell:No comment received. Water:Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 regarding water service to this development.The Little Rock Fire Department 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. ~pire De artment:Place fire hydrants per code.Contact the Little Rock Fire Department at 319-3752 for additional details. ~Count Plannin:No comment received. CATA:The site is no located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on bus radius,turnout and route. F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Plannin Division:The request is located in the Boyle Park Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property.The applicant has applied for a Planned Development —Residential for apartments (18 Units).A I and Use Plan Amendment is a separate item on this agenda (LU02-10-04), Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the John Barrow Neighborhood Area Plan.The housing and neighborhood revitalization goal of improving the overall appearance and safety of the neighborhood is supplemented by an objective of reviewing design standards for new construction of residential units,which is supported by an action statement stating that the design of new residential units should be compatible with existing architecture in the area. ~kandsca e:The plan suhmilted does not allow for the minimum nine fht foot wide land use buffer,or the minimum 6.7 foot wide landscape strip along the northern perimeter of the site.A six (6)foot high opaque screen,either a 3 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:16.1 Cont.FILE NO '-7282 wooden fence with its face side directed outward,a wall,or dense evergreen plantings,is required along the northern,southern and eastern perimeters of the site. ~Bottdin Codes:No comment received. G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(August 29,2002) The applicant was not present.Staff presented the item to the Committee indicating the intent of the development.Staff stated there were technical issues associated with the proposed development and Staff would work with the applicant to resolve these issues prior to the Commission meeting. The Committee then determined there were no further issues for discussion.The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H.ANALYSIS: The applicant has not submitted a revised plan to staff therefore,there are several technical issues which still need to be resolved.The applicant has not indicated the location of the dumpster.It is possible the dumpster could be located at the end of the driveway in the parking area to the north.The applicant will be required to fully screen the dumpster as required by the ordinance,three sides at least two feet above the top of the dumpster. The applicant also has not relocated the driveway.In Staff's opinion the development and the neighborhood would be better served if the driveway were moved to West 28th Street and access were not allowed from Walker Street, There would be an estimated 150 to 200 trips per day generated from the development.West 28rB Street,in some areas,has been constructed to Master Street Plan Standard and is classified as a collector street while Walker Street is an unimproved roadway adjacent to the site and is classified as a residential street.(The portion of Walker Street south of the site,from West 28rB Street to Asher Avenue is classified as a collector street and has been constructed.)Staff feels the bulk of the traffic should be routed to the collector street. The applicant has also not indicated screening and landscaping.The applicant will be required to install a nine (9)foot wide buffer along the northern perimeter of the site and a six (6)foot high opaque screen,either a wooden fence or dense evergreen plantings,along the northern,southern and eastern perimeters of the site. Although,there are many technical questions left unanswered,Staff feels the issues can be fflushed out"at the Public Hearing. 4 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO '6.1 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-7282 Staff is not supportive of the application,as filed.The proposed density of the development is too intense for this site.The site is situated in the heart of a single-family neighborhood and the area of the proposed development is much too small to accommodate a development of this intensity.Furthermore,Walker Street is an unimproved chip seal roadway with open ditches for drainage.Even though the applicant would be required to install street improvements adjacent to the site,the remainder of Walker Street would remain in its current conditions. The area has "turned around"in the past few years with several new single- family homes having been built.A development of this intensity could reverse the trend of the neighborhood and cause the area to begin a decline or become stagnant.Staff feels a development of this intensity would be better served by locating nearer Asher Avenue,John Barrow Road or West 12'"Street.Staff does not feel the placement of 18 multi-family units on this site is an appropriate measure.Staff feels a development of 24-units per acre is much too intense for this site but a development of lower density might be appropriate as in-fill. I.STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the requested application for Griffin Short-form PD-R as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19 2002) Mr.Christopher Griffin was present representing the application.There were objectors present.Staff stated the applicant had requested the item be deferred to the October 31,2002 Public Hearing to allow Mr.Griffin time to work with the neighborhood on issues associated with the proposed development,to review the proposed density and possible reduce the density.Staff stated the deferral would require a waiver of the By-Laws. There was no further discussion.A motion was made to waive the By-Laws and place the item on the Consent Agenda for Deferral to the October 31,2002 Public Hearing. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. The item was then placed on the Consent Agenda for Deferral and approved,as recommended by Staff,by a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. 5 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:17 FILE NO '-4470-C NAME:Chenal Commercial Park (Lot 3R)Short-form PD-C —Time Extension LOCATION:Northwest corner of Chenal Parkway and Wellington Village Road DEVELOPER:ENGINEER: Saturn West LLC.The Mehlburger Firm 1700 North Shackelford Road 201 South Izard Street Little Rock,AR 72212 Little Rock,AR 72201 AREA:4.2Acres NUMBEROF LOTS:1 FT.NEWSTREET:0 CURRENT ZONING:PD-C PROPOSED USES:Auto dealership VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None Requested. BACKGROUND: November 11,1999 the Planning Commission reviewed a proposed revision to a preliminary plat for the Chenal Commercial Park Subdivision to add approximately 1.74 acres to Lot 3 and a request to rezone Lot 3 from 0-3 to PD-C to allow an auto dealership. The applicant proposed two (2)buildings for the site.A 15,000 square foot office/showroom/service building and 2,500 square foot auto detail building,The applicant noted the buildings would not exceed 28-feet in height.The Planning Commission placed several conditions on the recommendation of approval,which the applicant agreed to comply with should the Board of Directors approve the request.The conditions were no vehicular display within the first 20-feet of the property on the street sides,the service entry doors were to be located on a side of the building other than the Chenal Parkway side,no test drives were to be taken through the Wellington Village neighborhood,there was to be no body shop located at the site and the proposed hours of operation were to be from 8:00 am to 7:00 pm,Monday —Saturday (no Sunday hours). September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:17 Cont.FILE NO '-4470-C Ordinance No.18,187 approved by the Board of Directors on January 4,2000 approved the rezoning for the site to allow Parker Cadillac to construct a Saturn car dealership with the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission. A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant has requested approval by the Planning Commission of a three year time extension for implementation of the improvements associated with the establishment of the Saturn auto dealership. B.EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is undeveloped and wooded.The property slopes upward slightly from Chenal Parkway and Wellington Village Road.There is a church immediately to the west of the site,with undeveloped 0-3 and C-2 zoned property to the north and east,across Wellington Village Road.The One Source Home Center is located across Chenal Parkway to the south. C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received no comment from the neighborhood as of this writing.The St. Charles and Parkway Place Neighborhood Association were notified of the Public Hearing. D.ENGINEERING COMMENT/UTILITY COMMENT/SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: This item was not transmitted to agencies for comment or the Subdivision Committee for comment. E.ANALYSIS: As per Section 36-454 (e)"...the applicant shall have three years from the date of passage of the ordinance approving the preliminary approval to submit the final development plan.The applicant may request a three-year time extension prior to expiration of the approval by submitting a request to the Planning Commission". The applicant wishes to retain the option of developing the site as originally planned.The PD-C will expire January 2003 and the land will revert to its former zoning classification unless the time extension is approved. 2 September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:17 Cont.FILE NO.:Z-4470-C F.STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested three-year time extension subject to compliance with all conditions previously imposed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) Mr.Rick Parker was present representing the application.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the item with a positive recommendation of the request to allow a one-year time extension subject to compliance with all conditions previously imposed on the PD-C. There was no further discussion.The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for Approval and approved,as recommended by Staff,by a vote of 11 ayes,0 noes and 0 absent. 3 September 19,2002 ITEM NO.:18 Name:Sardis Road Land Alteration for Fenceline Clearing Location:11210 Sardis Road in Little Rock,Pulaski County,Arkansas ~Oner/A t cant:Kerry Haley,property owner ~Re uest:Appealing a Notice of Violation (ANOVn)of the land alteration regulations (29-166)for altering land by clearing more than 7 trees without a grading permit to:1)rebuild approximately 1000 feet of fencing along southern property line and 2)construct 1000 feet of 16 foot wide drive along the fenceline for access to his property and future residence. STAFF REVIEW: 1.Master Street Plan This portion of Sardis Road is a minor arterial. 2.Develo ment Potential This site along Sardis Road is a 38 acre residentially zoned property.The adjacent property to the south and north is zoned industrial with the land across Sardis Road being residential. 3.Nei hborhood Land Use and Effect The general area is primarily undeveloped pasture and woods with adjacent residential development.This area has a history of pastureland use for livestock. 4.Nei hborhood Position Neighborhood has not been notified by Public Works. September 1-,2002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.:18 5.Effect on Public Services or Utilities A 100 feet utility ROW crosses the property with overhead power lines.See attached site drawing. 6.Public Welfare and Safet Issues No apparent adverse effects on the public welfare and safety. STAFF ANALYSIS Mr.Haley owns property adjacent to Sardis Road and north of Alexander Road that has long been used as agricultural property but is zoned for residential use.A few months ago,Mr.Haley began installing a fence on his property and in the process cleared about 15 trees within an approximate 250 ft x 20 ft area. Mr.Haley also has plans to construct additional fencing.Public Works issued Mr. Haley a notice he had violated section 29-170(h)of the Little Rock Code of Ordinances by clearing trees greater than 6 inch diameter without a grading permit.The notice required that Mr.Haley restore the land to its original condition as required by Section 29-170(c). Mr.Haley has chosen to appeal the notice of violation to the Planning Commission as provided for in Section 29-170(e).Mr.Haley believes that a grading permit should not be required for this activity because the land has been historically used for agricultural purposes and because the ordinance exempts land zoned for agricultural and forestry uses.See Little Rock Code Section 29-187(1). Staff is reluctant and does not believe it proper to recommend approval or denial of the appeal since this is part of an ongoing enforcement action.It would simply prefer for the Commission to decide whether the notice of violation and the corrective action are proper based on the facts of this action.If the Commission decides to overturn the notice of violation,then it should also decide whether a grading permit is required for this work. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(SEPTEMBER 19,2002) Mr.Kerry Haley was present representing the application.There were objectors present.Staff introduced the item indicating the application was an enforcement issue. Mr.Haley spoke on behalf of the application stating the area in question was an existing fencerow.He stated the fence was in need of replacing and the only feasible 2 September 19,z002 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO '8 way to replace the fence was to remove a few of the trees.He stated he had not removed any to the trees which were not on the property line and the in the direct line of the proposed fence. Mr.Don Thompson spoke on behalf of the application indicating he was the adjoining property owner.He stated the trees removed were to place the fence on the property line to avoid adverse possession of the property. City Director B.J.Wyrick spoke on behalf of the application.She stated the fencing was in need of replacing and it was important to place the fence on the property line. She stated the current fence would not contain the livestock in the pasture.She stated this could cause risk to persons or damage to property. Ms.Dottie Funk spoke in opposition of the proposed removal of the trees.She stated the Tree Ordinances were put in place to protect all areas of the city.She stated if this applicant were not punished then future violators could indicate their reasoning for removing of trees was agricultural related.She stated if the property were zoned agricultural then the removal of the trees would not be an issue. Mr.Troy Laha spoke in opposition to the proposal.He stated he was requesting the Commission to uphold the existing ordinances.He stated should tree removal for agricultural purposes be allowable without proper zoning then this could possibly lead to future violations claiming the clearing was agricultural related. There was a lengthy discussion concerning the application and the rights of the property owner.The Commission then voted to approve a grading permit for the applicant by a vote of 9 ayes,0 noes and 2 absent. 3 August 13,2002 Kerry Haley P.O.Box 1056 11210 Sardis Road Mabelvale,Ar 72103 To Whom It May Concern: I would like to appeal,to the planning commission,the Notice of Violation of Little Rock City Code sec 29-186 (a}k (b}.The land alteration was done in an attempttobuildfencingalongtheSouthernpropertyline,for approximately 1000'. I would like to continue with restoring my fencing around the remaining property line,the area being afFected would be approximately 20'ide. Plans also include constructing a drive (16'ide)along my Southern fence line; this will be to access a bam,a future home,and the western part of my land.This part of the plan will not have confIict with the Land Alteration Ordinance. Kerry Haley(,~-330~) PLANNING COMMISSION VOTE RECORD DATE l MEMBER 'B&E 2 3V '7 (i i i,i ALLEN,FRED,JR. BERRY,CRAIG FAUST,JUDITH FLOYD,NORM LOWRY,BOB MEYER,JERRY MUSE,ROHN NUNNLEY,OBRAY,JR. RAHMAN,MIZAN RECTOR,BILL STEBBINS,ROBERT ne u*tu "»d t uAue end-,tgl +d.L»5 MEMBER jjj ..5 .rdr5 js ALLEN,FRED,JR.~»q q,-~v v v w e 8 u'e v BERRY,CRAIG e V Y ~V v'AUST,JUDITH V-V V 4 dj vV 4 +V &~V» FLOYD,NORM v-+V V djj 0 y 1 0 V P een V LOWRY,BOB y V v 0 ~v'V MEYER,JERRY V I en'rg V ~v MUSE,ROHN L~~@~~~V v u o V a ~4 NUNNLEY,OBRAY,JR.'V I v +p gg v V v'AHMAN,MI ZAN gd V v'0 0 V v ~ RECTOR,BILL V g 0 4&g v v STEBBINS,ROBERT V e V''b Wgj»HAPP.~rje&LL p',jgje Meeting Adjourned ~r&P.td. j AYE +NAYE A ABSENT ~ABSTAIN K RECUSE September 19,2002 SUBDIVISION MINUTES There being no further business before the Commission,the meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m. to (Oz- Dat Ch r an ecr t