pc_03 08 2001subLITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION HEARING
SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD
MARCH 8,2001
4:00 P.M.
I.Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being nine in number.
II.Approval of the Minutes of the January 25,2001 meeting.
The minutes were approved as mailed.
III.Members Present:Craig Berry
Rohn MuseBillRector
Judith Faust
Mizan Rahman
Hugh Earnest
Bob Lowry
Fred Allen,Jr.
Pam Adcock
Members Absent:Obray Nunnley
Richard Downing
City Attorney:Stephen Giles
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION AGENDA
MARCH 8,2001
I.DEFERRED ITEMS:
A.Gamble Road Subdivision —Preliminary Plat (S-1303)
A.1.Davis Properties —Short-Form PCD (Z-6915-A)
A.2.LU01-19-01 —A Land Use Plan Amendment in the
Chenal Planning District,from Multi-Family to
Mixed Use
I I .PRELMINARY PLAT S:
1.Parkside Addition —Preliminary Plat (S-1305)
III.PLANNED ZONING DEVELOPMENTS:
2.Maris —Short-Form PD-R (Z-2941-A)
3.Pereira —Short-Form PD-0 (Z-3500-D)
4.Loftin —Short-Form PCD (Z-6398-A)
4.1.LU01-16-01 —A Land Use Plan Amendment in the
Otter Creek Planning District from Single FamilytoCommercial.
5.Ficklin —Short-Form PD-R (Z-6981)
5.1.LU01-08-01 —A Land Use Plan Amendment in theEllisMountainPlanningDistrictfromOffice to
Multi-Family.
IV.SITE PLAN REVIEWS:
6.The Ranch (Tract G)Apartments —Subdivision Site Plan
Review (S-285-MM)
7.Dillards —Revised Zoning Site Plan (Z-5098-C)
Agenda,Page Two
V.OTHER MATTERS:
8.Pleasant Ridge Square —Long-Form PCD (Z-4411-A)
Time Extension
9.Investment Motorcar Corp.—Short-Form PCD (Z-5340)
Revocation
10.Kanis Road Master Street Plan Amendment
6
HW
10
CO
U
N
Pu
b
ic
He
a
r
i
n
g
It
e
m
s
1
9
A
A.
1
A.
7
N
'i
l
47
7
7
~
R/
V
g
PR
I
D
E
VA
L
L
E
Y
MA
HA
M
zz
MA
R
K
M
I
a
1-
6
3
o
3
CI
T
Y
LI
M
I
T
S
KA
N
I
S
1-
6
3
0
Y,
A
N
I
S
12
T
H
12
T
H
9T
H
E
6T
H
47
6
.
10
6g
cP
CX
Y
5
5.
1
g
WR
I
G
H
T
OT
O
y
C
L
1-
4
3
0
RO
O
S
E
V
E
L
T
~z
@
z~
36
TH
z
RO
O
S
E
V
E
L
T
LA
W
S
O
N
~&
V
o
1-
4
4
0
++
~U
-4
4
z
FR
A
Z
I
E
R
PI
K
E
LA
KS
P
N
ZE
U
B
E
R
DA
V
I
D
I-
0
+s
0
DO
D
D
65
T
H
J~
65
T
H
RA
I
N
E
S
c
VA
L
L
E
Y
IT
Y
LI
M
I
T
S
65
16
7
TX
A
DI
X
O
N
BA
S
E
L
I
N
E
BA
S
E
L
I
N
E
z
3-
CL
o
C3
DI
X
O
N
3
5
HA
R
P
E
R
OT
T
E
R
MA
B
VA
L
E
CU
T
O
F
F
z
CR
E
E
K
MA
B
E
L
V
A
L
E
SL
I
N
K
E
R
WE
S
T
K
tz
VI
N
S
O
N
DR
E
H
E
R
AL
E
X
A
N
D
E
R
z
CE
'
I
E
R
SP
G
S
C
OF
F
CU
T
O
F
F
z
41
—
CU
T
O
F
F
CI
T
Y
LI
M
I
T
S
16
7
o+
EL
65
36
5
AS
H
E
R
~o
PR
A
T
T
Su
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
Ag
e
n
d
&
gl
.
o
h
8,
20
0
1
March 8,
20'TEM
NO.:A FILE NO.:S-1303
NAME:Gamble Road Subdivision —Preliminary Plat
LOCATION:Northwest corner of Chenal Parkway and Gamble Road
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Davis Properties White-Daters and Associates
P .O.Box 241025 24 Rahling CircleLittleRock,AR 72223 Little Rock,AR 72223
AREA:3.2 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:3 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:0-3
PLANNING DISTRICT:19
CENSUS TRACT:42.06
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
A variance to allow a lot without public street frontage (Lot 3).
A.PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to subdivide 3.2 acres at thenorthwestcornerofChenalParkwayandGambleRoadintothree(3)lots.The applicant is also proposing to rezonethepropertyfrom0-3 to PCD (Item 3.1 on this agenda)foramixedoffice/commercial development.
There is an existing office building with associated
parking areas located on the proposed Lot 1.The proposedLots2and3arecurrentlyundeveloped.The applicantproposestoaccesstheproposedsubdivisionfromGamble
Road with access easements across Lot 2 to Lots 1 and 3.
March 8,
20'UBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1303
The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a lot
without public street frontage (Lot 3).The applicant is
proposing an access easement from Gamble Road (across Lot
2)to serve Lot 3.
The applicant also notes that all three (3)of the lotswillbefinalplattedatthesametime.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There is an existing office building and parking on the
proposed Lot 1,with a single access point from Gamble
Road.The proposed Lots 2 and 3 are grass-covered with
small pine trees.
There is a mixture of commercial uses to the east alongChenalParkway,with a car dealership across Chenal to thesouth.There is a multifamily development to the west andvacantR-2 zoned property (including floodway)to thenorth.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Parkway Place and Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber
Ridge Neighborhood Associations were notified of the publichearing.As of this writing,staff has received no commentfromtheneighborhood.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Resubmit preliminary plat based on re-design requiredforasiteplanonItem¹2-6915-A (Item 3.1).
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements toserveLots1and3.
Entergy:No Comment received.
AIBA:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
2
March 8,
20'UBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1303
Water:No objection,a water main extension,at the expenseofthedeveloper,may be required to serve Lot 3,on-sitefireprotection,at the expense of the developer,may be
required.
Fire Department:Place fire hydrants per code.Contact
Dennis Free at 918-3752 for details.
Count Plannin :No Comment.
CATA:Site is on ¹5 bus route but does not effect bus
radius,turnout and route.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
No Comment.
Landsca e Issues:
No Comment.
G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(JANUARY 4,2001)
Tim Daters was present,representing the application.Staff briefly described the proposed plat and noted several
items that needed to be shown on a revised plat drawing.Staff also noted that the applicant needed to request a
variance for a lot without public street frontage (Lot 3).
This item and the proposed PCD (Item 3.1)were discussed
simultaneously.The Public Works requirements were
discussed,including internal circulation and drive
locations.It was suggested that the southernmost drive
along Gamble Road be an exit only drive.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the
preliminary plat to the full Commission for final action.
H.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat drawingtostaffonJanuary10,2001.The revised plat includes
the additional notations as required by staff.
3
March 8,
20'UBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1303
As noted in paragraph A.,the applicant is requesting a
variance to allow a lot without public street frontage (Lot3).The applicant is providing an access easement across
Lot 2 to serve this lot.Staff supports the variance as
requested.
The Public Works Department has reviewed the revised plat
and notes the following concerns:
1.Additional right-of-way for Gamble Road not shown.2.Driveway locations
3.Internal circulation
4.No turnaround at the end of Gamble Road
The applicant has noted that he will meet with Public Workspriortothepublichearingtoresolvetheseissues.With
resolution of these issues,staff has no objections to the
proposed preliminary plat.The subdivision should have no
adverse impact on the general area.
I .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat subjecttothefollowingconditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D and E of this report.2.Staff recommends approval of the variance to allow Lot
3 with no public street frontage.3.The Public Works issues as noted in paragraph H.must
be resolved.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 25,2001)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted aletteronJanuary19,2001 requesting that this application bedeferredtotheMarch8,2001 agenda.Staff supported thedeferralrequest.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion
within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the March 8,2001
agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed byavoteof10ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.
4
March 8,20~
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1303
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff
on February 22,2001.The revised plat was presented to
and briefly discussed by the Subdivision Committee on
February 15,2001.
Public Works has reviewed the revised preliminary plat and notes
that the applicant has not resolved any of the Public Works
concerns as noted in paragraph H.of this report.The applicant
has mentioned the fact that the section of Gamble Road from the
existing drive for this property to the north could be
abandoned,which would eliminate the Public Works concerns.
However,as of this writing,the abandonment request has not
been made a component of this preliminary plat application.
Staff has informed the applicant that the Public Works issues
need to be resolved.The applicant has noted that they will
continue to work with the adjacent property owner and Public
Works regarding the outstanding issues and possible abandonment
of Gamble Road.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 8,2001)
The staff presented a positive recommendation on this
application,as there were no further issues for resolution.
There were no objectors to this matter.
Staff noted that all Public Works issues had been resolved.
Staff stated that the applicant amended the application to make
the abandonment of the section of Gamble Road,north of the
existing driveways,part of the proposal.The applicant also
agreed to construct a sidewalk with the service drive along the
east property line.Staff noted that the PCD would not be
presented to the Board of Directors until the required paperwork
for the right-of-way abandonment is submitted to Public Works.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion
within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.
A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by a vote
of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
5
March 8,
20'TEM
NO.:A.1 FILE NO.:Z-6915-A
NAME:Davis Properties —Short-Form PCD
LOCATION:Northwest corner of Chenal Parkway and Gamble Road
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Davis Properties White-Daters and Associates
P.0.Box 241025 24 Rahling CircleLittleRock,AR 72223 Little Rock,AR 72223
AREA:3.2 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:3 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:0-3 ALLOWED USES:Office
PROPOSED USE:Office/Commercial
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone the property at the
northwest corner of Chenal Parkway and Gamble Road from 0-3toPCDtoallowamixedoffice/commercial development.TheapplicanthasalsofiledaLandUsePlanAmendmentfromMulti-Family to Mixed Use (Item 3.2 on this agenda)forthisproperty.
As a component of the PCD,the applicant has also requestedathree(3)lot preliminary plat (Item 3 on this agenda).
The proposed uses for the lots are as follows:
Lot 1 —0-3 permitted uses
Lot 2 —0-3 permitted uses and
furniture store
Lot 3 —0-3 permitted uses
The proposed hours of operation are 7:00 a.m.to 9:00 p.m.daily.
March 8,
20'UBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6915-A
There is an existing two-story brick office building andassociatedparkingareasonLot1.This development takesaccessfromGambleRoadacrosstheproposedLot2.
The proposal for Lot 2 includes a 21,840 square foot
building,with parking on the north and south sides.Thebuildingwillhavetheappearanceofaone-story structure
from Chenal Parkway,with a second lower level on thebuilding's north side.The proposal for Lot 3 includes aone-story 3,500 square foot building and associatedparking.The applicant notes that the maximum buildingheightwillbe45feetforLot2and30feetforLot3.Access to Lot 2 will be gained by utilizing driveways from
Gamble Road,with an access easement across Lot 2 to serveLot3.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There is an existing office building and parking on the
proposed Lot 1,with a single access point from GambleRoad.The proposed Lots 2 and 3 are grass-covered withsmallpinetrees.
There is a mixture of commercial uses to the east alongChenalParkway,with a car dealership across Chenal to thesouth.There is a multifamily development to the west andvacantR-2 zoned property (including floodway)to thenorth.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Parkway Place and Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber
Ridge Neighborhood Associations were notified of the publichearing.As of this writing,staff has received no comment
from the neighborhood.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Gamble Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as a
minor commercial.A dedication of right-of-way to 25feetfromcenterlineisrequired.
2.Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"(MasterStreetPlan).Construct full street improvement to
these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned
development.
3.Appropriate handicap ramps will be required per current
ADA standards.
2
March 8,
20'UBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6915-A
4.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk thatisdamagedintheChenalright-of-way prior to
occupancy.
5.Sidewalks shall be shown conforming to Sec.31-175 and
the "MSP".
6.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
7.A grading permit and development permit for special
flood hazard area is required prior to construction.
8.The minimum Finish Floor elevation of 431feet is
required to be shown on plat and grading plans for
Lot 3.
9.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.10.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities
are recpxired.
11.Easements shown for proposed storm drainage are
required.
12.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
streetlights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little
Rock Code.All recpxests should be forwarded to Traffic
Engineering.
13.Legal access to all lots within the subdivision must be
provided.Service easements,if used,must conform to
Ord.No.18031.Variance recpxests must be accompanied byjustifications.
14.Two entrances to parking in front of Lot 2 are not
permissible.Redesign in conformance with Ord.No.
18031.
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension recpxired with easements to
serve Lots 1 and 3.
Entergy:No Comment received.
ARKLA:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:No objection,a water main extension,at the expense
of the developer,may be required to serve Lot 3,on-sitefireprotection,at the expense of the developer,may be
required.
3
March 8,20&
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A.l (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6915-A
Fire Department:Place fire hydrants per code.Contact
Dennis Free at 918-3752 for details.
Count Plannin :No Comment.
CATA:Site is on 45 bus route but does not effect bus
radius,turnout and route.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
This request is located in the Chenal Planning District.
The Land Use Plan shows Multi-Family for this property.
The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial
Development for new office and retail buildings.The
property is currently zoned 0-3 General Office.A land use
plan amendment for a change to Mixed Use is a separate item
on this agenda.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the
Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan.The Office and
Commercial Development goal listed three objectives
relevant to this case.The first objective is promotion of
commercial development to meet the needs of neighborhoodresidents.The second objective is maintaining as much as
possible the existing topography,trees,and green space.
The third objective is enhancing the primarily residential
character of the community.The plan also states,
"Aggressively use Planned Zoning Districts to influence
more neighborhood-friendly and better quality
developments."
Landsca e Issues:
The on-site street buffer along Gamble Road must not drop
below a width of 9 feet.
The on-site perimeter landscape strips along the northern
and western perimeters must not drop below a width of 6.7feet.
4
March 8,201
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A.l (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-6915-A
The normally required 6 foot high opaque screen,either a
wooden fence with its face side directed outward or dense
evergreen plantings,may not be deemed necessary along the
northern perimeter as long as the existing trees remain
within the adjacent floodway.
A total of eight percent (800 sq.ft.)of the interior of
the southern parking lot must be landscaped with interior
landscaped islands.The northern vehicular use area will
required 1,105 sq.ft.of interior landscaping.To receivecreditforinteriorlandscaping,islands must be at least
150 sq.ft.in area and not drop below a width of 7 4 ft.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be
required.
Buildin Codes:
The building on lot 2,the west elevation will require fire
rated wall and limited openings including overhead doors.
The type and details would have to be worked out later,
there was not enough detail to make specific comments.
Contact Mark Whitaker at 371-4839 for details.
G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(JANUARY 4,2001)
Tim Daters was present,representing the application.Staff briefly described the proposed PCD and noted that
additional project information was needed.Staff also
noted that some additional items needed to be shown on thesiteplan.
The Public Norks requirements were discussed.This
discussion included internal vehicular circulation and
driveway locations along Gamble Road.It was suggested
that the southernmost drive along Gamble Road be an exit
only drive.
The landscaping requirements were also discussed.Bob
Brown,of the Planning Staff,noted that some additional
landscape areas needed to be shown on the site plan.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the PCD to
the full Commission for resolution.
5
March 8,
20'UBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6915-A
H.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
January 10,2001.The revised plan provides some of theadditionalnotationsasrequiredbystaff.The applicantalsosubmittedadditionalprojectinformationasrequested.
The proposed PCD site is located within the
Chenal/Financial Center Design Overlay District.The
proposed signage,utilities and lighting must conform tothefollowingordinancestandards:
1.Ground-mounted signs must be monument type with a maximumheightof8feetandamaximumareaof100squarefeet.
The applicant has proposed two (2)ground-mounted signs(Lots 1 and 2).2.Lighting must be directed to the parking areas and notreflectedontoadjacentparcelsordisturbthescenic
appearance of the corridor.3.All lighting and utilities located in front of the rearlineofbuildingsmustbeunderground.
Public Works has reviewed the revised site plan and notes
concerns with the following issues:
1.No additional right-of-way has been shown for Gamble
Road.
2.No sidewalk has been shown along the Gamble Road
frontage.
3.Driveway locations
4.Internal circulation
5.No turnaround at the end of Gamble Road
Bob Brown,of the Planning Staff,has also reviewed the
revised plan and noted the following deficiencies:
1.Landscape buffers required between Lots 1 and 2 and Lots
2 and 3.
2.Additional interior landscaping required for the parkingareaswithinLot2.
The applicant has noted that he will meet with Public Works
and Planning Staffs to resolve these issues prior to the
public hearing.
The following is the parking analysis for the proposedproject:
6
March 8,
20'UBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6915-A
Parkin t icall re i red Parkin rovided
Lot 1 22 spaces 56 spaces (existing)
Lot 2 66 spaces 61 spaces
Lot 3 8 spaces 20 spaces
Staff is comfortable with the parking plan as proposed.
Some of the parking spaces will be lost in order to provide
the additional landscaping as noted above.
With resolution of the Public Works and Landscape issues as
noted,staff supports the proposed PCD zoning.The
proposed furniture store for Lot 2 should prove to be alow-traffic commercial use,with the 0-3 uses on Lots 1 and
3 providing adequate transition to the multi-family
residential use to the west.Staff feels that the proposed
PCD will have no adverse impact on the general area.
I .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the PCD rezoning subject tothefollowingconditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D,E and F of this report.2.Signage,utilities and site lighting must conform to theChenal/Financial Center Design Overlay District as notedinparagraphH.of this report.3.The outstanding Public Works issues must be resolved.4.The outstanding Landscaping issues must be resolved,ortheapplicantmustapplyforavariancetotheCityBeautifulCommission.5.The proposed dumpster area must be screened on three (3)sides with an eight (8)foot high opaque fence or wall.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 25,2001)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted aletteronJanuary19,2001 requesting that this application bedeferredtotheMarch8,2001 agenda.Staff supported thedeferralrequest.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion
within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the March 8,2001
agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed byavoteof10ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.
7
March 8,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6915-A
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
February 22,2001.The revised plan was presented to and briefly
discussed by the Subdivision Committee on February 15,2001.
Bob Brown,of the Planning Staff,reviewed the revised plan and
notes that the deficiencies in landscaping have been corrected.
The applicant has provided the additional interior and perimeter
landscape areas as required,thereby resolving all landscaping
issues.The revised plan shows a reduction in parking due to
providing the increased landscape areas.The total number of
parking spaces for Lot 2 has been reduced by four (4)spaces,with
the number for Lot 3 being reduced by five (5)spaces.Staff
supports the parking plan as proposed.
Public Works has reviewed the revised site plan and notes that the
applicant has not resolved any of the Public Works concerns as
noted in paragraph H.of this report.The applicant has mentioned
the fact that the section of Gamble Road from the existing drive
for this property to the north could be abandoned,which would
eliminate Public Works concerns ¹1 and 3-5.However,as of this
writing,the abandonment request has not been made a component of
this PCD application.
Staff has informed the applicant that the Public Works issues need
to be resolved.The applicant has noted that they will continue
to work with the adjacent property owner and Public Works
regarding the outstanding issues and possible abandonment of
Gamble Road.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 8,2001)
The staff presented a positive recommendation on this
application,as there were no further issues for resolution.
There were no objectors to this matter.
Staff noted that all Public Works issues had been resolved.
Staff stated that the applicant amended the application to make
the abandonment of the section of Gamble Road,north of the
existing driveways,part of the proposal.The applicant also
agreed to construct a sidewalk with the service drive along the
east property line.Staff noted that the PCD would not be
presented to the Board of Directors until the required paperwork
for the right-of-way abandonment is submitted to Public Works.
8
March 8,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A.l (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6915-A
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion
within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.
A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by a vote
of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
9
March 8,20
ITEM NO.:A.2 FILE NO.:LU01-19-01
Name:Land Use Plan Amendment —Chenal Planning District
Location:13000 Chenal Parkway
~Re est:Multi-Family to Mixed Use
Source:Max Davis,Davis Properties
PROPOSAL /REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the Chenal Planning District from
Multi-Family to Mixed Use.The Mixed Use category provides for a
mixture of residential,office and commercial uses to occur.A
Planned Zoning District is required if the use is entirely
office or commercial or if the use is a mixture of the three.
The applicant wishes to develop the property for office and
commercial uses.
Staff is not expanding the application since the Land Use Plan
in this area was reviewed less than two years ago.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is currently zoned 0-3 General Office and is
approximately 3.22+ acres in size.The property to the north
is the floodway for Rock Creek and is zoned R-2 Single Family.
To the east is a retail business in a Planned Commercial
Development zone.To the south is retail and automobile sales
businesses zoned as a Planned Commercial Development.To the
west is an apartment complex on land zoned R-5 Urban Residence.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On December 15,2000 a change took place from Single Family to
Low Density Residential on the west side of Gamble Road south of
Kanis Road about 1 mile south of the applicant's property.
On March 2,1999 multiple changes took place along Kanis Road
about 1 mile south of the applicant's property.
On April 6,1999 a change took place from Single Family to
Public Institutional on the west side of Kirby Road at Kings
Point about 1 mile west of the applicant's property.
1
March 8,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A.2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-19-01
On December 15,1998 a change took place from Multi-Family to
Suburban Office on Kanis Road at Point West about 1 mile south
of the applicant's property.
On December 15,1998 a change took place from Single Family to
Public Institutional on the south side of Chenal Parkway at
Pride Valley Drive about 1 mile west of the applicant's
property.
On May 20,1997 a change took place from Office to Commercial on
the north side of Chenal Parkway east of Bowman Road about 8 of
a mile southeast of the applicant'property.
The applicant's property is shown as Multi-Family on the Future
Land Use Plan.The property to the north is shown as Park/Open
Space.The properties east of Gamble Road,as well as the
properties south of Chenal Parkway,are all shown as Commercial.
The neighboring property to the west is shown as Multi-Family.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Chenal Parkway is shown as a Principal Arterial on the Master
Street Plan.The section of Gamble Road next to the applicant's
property is shown on the Master Street Plan as a local street,.
A Class I bikeway is shown on Chenal Parkway connecting Bowman
Road to State Highway 10.The Master Street Plan also states
that Class I bikeways built as part of an arterial will require
an additional 10 feet of right-of-way (5 foot each side for one-
way path)or an easement in which the path is placed.The
required sidewalk along these streets can be incorporated into
the bike path.The result would be a 9-foot wide path on each
side of the road.A four-foot section of the path should be
marked for pedestrian use.
PARKS:
The Park System Master Plan shows existing parkland north of the
applicant's property inside the Park/Open Space strip running
along Rock Creek.The existing parkland is along the floodway of
Rock Creek.Any further development of this site should address
negative impacts on the floodway and ecological balance of the
natural area.With the build out of this site,access points to
the park area will be limited.
2
March 8,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A.2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-19-01
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Rock
Creek Neighborhood Action Plan.The Office and Commercial
Development goal listed three objectives relevant to this case.
The first objective is promotion of commercial development to
meet the needs of neighborhood residents.The second objectiveismaintainingasmuchaspossibletheexistingtopography,trees,and green space.The third objective is enhancing the
primarily residential character of the community.The plan also
recommends aggressive use of Planned Zoning Districts to
influence more neighborhood-friendly and better quality
developments.
ANALYSIS:
The applicant's property is an established office use occupied
by a clinic located across the street from intense commercial
uses.On the north side of Chenal Parkway,the applicant's
property is located in an area that transitions from intense
Commercial to the east and less intense Multi-Family to the
west.A little further to the west is an open area where Rock
Creek crosses the west bound lanes of Chenal Parkway from the
median to the Park/Open Space area to the north of the
applicant's property.Currently,there is a step-down from
Commercial to Office to Multi-family which functions well as a
transition from more intense uses to the east and less intense
uses to the west.Presently,Gamble Road serves as a dividing
line between the commercial and residential uses in this area.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:
Gibraltar/Pt.West/Timber Ridge,Parkway Place P.O.A.,Aberdeen
Court P.O.A.,Bayonne Place P.O.A.,Carriage Creek P.O.A.,Eagle
Pointe P.O.A.,Glen Eagles P.O.A.,Hillsborough P.O.A.,Hunters
Cove P.O.A.,Hunters Green P.O.A.,Johnson Ranch N.A.,Marlowe
Manor P.O.A.,and St Charles P.O.A.No comments have been
received on this item.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is appropriate.The change to Mixed
Use still allows for residential development,while permitting
3
March 8,20~
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A.2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-19-01
non-residential uses only as a planned development where review
for compatibility of use and design is possible.The proposed
change would continue a reasonable pattern of transition from
the intense commercial uses to the east and the less intense
residential uses to the west.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 25,2001)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the
March 8,2001 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:(MARCH 8,2001)
The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval.A
motion was made to approve the consent agenda and was approved
with a vote of 9 ayes,0 noes and 2 absent.
4
March 8,
20'TEM
NO.:1 FILE NO.:S-1305
NAME:Parksdale Addition —Preliminary Plat
LOCATION:4322 "I"Street
DEVEI OPER:ENGINEER:
Don Evans White-Daters and Associates
124 West Capitol Avenue 24 Rahling CircleLittleRock,AR 72201 Little Rock,AR 72223
AREA:0.67 acre NUMBER OF LOTS:2 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:R-2
PLANNING DISTRICT:4
CENSUS TRACT:15
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1.A variance to allow a pipe-stem lot.
2.A variance from the minimum width requirements for a
pipe-stem lot.
A.PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to subdivide the 0.67 acre propertyat4322"I"Street into two (2)lots.There is an existingsinglefamilyresidenceontheproperty(Lot 1),with asecondsinglefamilystructureplannedfortheproposedLot2.
As part of the proposed plat,the applicant is requesting
two (2)variances from subdivision design standards.Theapplicantisrequestingavariancetoallowapipe-stem lot(Lot 1)and a variance from the minimum width requirementsfortheproposedpipe-stem lot.
March 8,
20'UBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1305
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
As noted earlier,there is an existing single familyresidenceontheproperty(proposed Lot 1).The propertyslopesdownwardtothenorthfrom"I"Street,approximately
50 feet from front to back.
There are single family residences to the west and south
along "I"and Walnut Streets.There is R-2 zoned park
property to the north and east.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received no comment from the
neighborhood.The Hillcrest and Cedar Hill Terrace
Neighborhood Associations were notified of the publichearing.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Show location of residential driveways.
2.Clarify location and ownership of tennis court.3.Show right-of-way on the plat.
4.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is
damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy.5.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.
6.Show right-of-way on "I"and Walnut.
7.Show adjacent ownership of unplatted tracts.
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements to
serve Lot 2.
Entergy:No Comment.
ARKLA:No Comment.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment.
Water:8-inch is the largest meter size available off theexistingwatermain.
Fire Department:No Comment.
2
March 8,
20'UBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1305
Count Plannin :No Comment.
CATA:Site is close to bus route 41 and has no effect on
bus radius,turnout and route.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
No Comment.
Landsca e Issues:
No Comment.
G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(FEBRUARY 15,2001)
Joe White and Don Evans were present,representing the
application.Staff briefly described the proposed
preliminary plat,noting that several items needed to be
shown on a revised plat drawing.
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.Mr.
White stated that the applicant would like to use the
existing curb cut to serve Lot 2,with a new curb cut
within the pipe-stem to serve Lot 1.Mr.Evans noted that
the two drives were needed because of the difference in
grade between the two lots.This issue was briefly
discussed.Mr.White stated that he would meet with Public
Works regarding this issue.The applicant also noted that
the tennis court immediately south of the property was
owned by the property owner to the south.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the
preliminary plat to the full Commission for final action.
H.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat drawing
to staff on February 21,2001.The revised plat addresses
the issues as raised by staff and the Subdivision
Committee.The Street right-of-way has been shown.as
required.
3
March 8,20~
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1305
The revised plat also shows the proposed driveway locations
for the two lots.Public Works has reviewed the revised
plat and approves of the driveway locations as shown.
As noted in paragraph A.,the applicant is requesting
variances to allow a pipe-stem lot and a variance from the
minimum width requirement for the proposed pipe-stem.The
ordinance requires a minimum pipe-stem width of 30 feet.
The proposed pipe-stem width for Lot 1 is 20 feet.Based
on the topography of the property and the minimal right-of-
way frontage which exists,staff feels that the pipe-stemlotwithreducedwidthisreasonable.The pipe-stem lot
complies with all other design standards.
Otherwise,to staff's knowledge there are no outstanding
issues associated with the preliminary plat.The proposed
plat to create a second single family residential site
should have no adverse impact on the general area.
I .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat subjecttothefollowingconditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraph
D and E of this report.2.Staff recommends approval of the variances to allow a
pipe-stem lot (Lot 1)with a reduced pipe-stem width.3.Staff recommends approval of the driveway locations as
shown.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 8,2001)
The staff presented a positive recommendation on this
application,as there were no further issues for resolution.
There were no objectors to this matter.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion
within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.
A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by a vote
of 8 ayes,0 nays,1 abstention (Rector)and 2 absent.
4
March 8,20~~
ITEM NO.:2 FILE NO.:Z-2941-A
NAME:Maris —Short-Form PD-R
LOCATION:6315/6317 Kavanaugh Blvd.
DEVELOPER:ARCHITECT:
Eugene Lee Maris,Jr.Williams and Dean Architects
53 River Estates Cove 18 Corporate Hill Dr.
Little Rock,AR 72223 Little Rock,AR 72205
AREA:approx.0.24 acre NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:R-4 ALLOWED USES:Two-Family Residential
PROPOSED USE:Multi-Family (4 units)
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone the property at 6315/6317
Kavanaugh Blvd.from R-4 to PD-R to allow for the
construction of a second duplex structure on the property.
The proposed duplex structure will be located within the
southern one-half of the property,with six (6)new paved
parking spaces to serve the four (4)residential units.A
driveway at the northeast corner of the property is
proposed for access.
The second duplex structure is proposed to be two (2)stories in height and include approximately 1,800 squarefeet(900 square feet per unit).The proposed structure
will be frame construction with an exterior similar to the
existing duplex structure.
The applicant notes that there will be no signage on the
property.There will also be no dumpster on the property,
as the development will utilize city garbage collection.
March 8,20~~
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-2941-A
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There is a one-story frame duplex structure located within
the northern portion of the property.There is a duplex on
the property immediately east,with single-family
residences further east.There are also single-family
residences to the north across Kavanaugh Blvd.,and to the
south.There is a small commercial building and a churchtothenorthwest.A small multifamily development is
located immediately west of this property,with single
family residences further west across McKinley Street.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS
As of this writing,staff has received several phone calls
from persons requesting information on this application,
but no noted opposition.The Heights,Normandy-Shannon and
South Normandy Neighborhood Associations were notified of
the public hearing.
D .ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Kavanaugh Blvd.is classified on the Master Street Plan
as a collector street.
2.Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
this street including 5-foot sidewalk with planned
development.
3.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
4.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements to
serve apartments.
Entergy:No Comment.
ARKLA:No Comment.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment.
Water:Contact the Water Works regarding the size and
location of the water meter(s).
2
March 8,20«
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-2941-A
Fire Department:No Comment.
Count Plannin :No Comment.
CATA:Site is on bus route 51 and has no effect on bus
radius,turnout and route.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN
Plannin Division:
This request is located in the West Little Rock Planning
District.The Land Use Plan shows Multi-family for this
property.The applicant has applied for a Planned
Residential Development for a new duplex.The property is
currently zoned R-4 Two Family.A Land Use Plan amendment
is not required.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
This property is located in an area that is not covered by
a city recognized neighborhood action plan.
Landsca e Issues:
The land use buffer along the eastern perimeter is required
to be 9 feet in width.The Landscape Ordinance,requires a
minimum width of 9 feet.The proposed landscape buffer
width is only 3 feet.
The street buffer minimum width required is 9 feet.The
Landscape Ordinance also requires 9 feet.The proposed
street landscape buffer width is only 6 feet.
A water source within 75 feet of landscaped areas will be
required.
The proposed structure encroaches 3 feet 9 inches into the
minimum 9-foot wide land use buffer required along the
southern perimeter.
A 6-foot high opaque screen,either a wooden fence with its
face side directed outward or dense evergreen plantings,is
required along the southern and eastern perimeters.
3
March 8,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-2941-A
G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(FEBRUARY 15,2001)
Lee Maris was present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the proposed PD-R.
Mr.Maris noted that there would be no signage on the
property and that the units would utilize city garbage
collection (no dumpster).
The Public Works issues were discussed.Commissioner Berry
asked if the street improvements were necessary.Public
Works representatives noted that an in-lieu contribution
would be acceptable.This issue was discussed.
The landscaping requirements were also discussed.It was
noted that the site plan would be revised to provide the
required street buffer and south land use buffer.Mr.
Maris noted that it would be difficult to meet the required
nine (9)foot land use buffer along the east property line.
He stated that he would obtain a letter from the property
owners to the east,agreeing to the three (3)foot eastern
buffer as proposed.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the PD-R to
the full Commission for resolution.
H.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
February 21,2001.The revised plan addresses all but one
(1)of the issues as raised by staff and the Subdivision
Committee.The required street buffer and south land use
buffer have been shown on the revised plan.The revised
plan also shows the required right-of-way dedication andstreetimprovements.Therefore,Public Works has no
outstanding issues with this plan.
The revised site plan shows a total of six (6)parking
spaces to serve the development.The ordinance would
typically require a minimum of six (6)spaces to serve a
four (4)unit apartment development.Staff supports the
parking plan as proposed.
To staff'knowledge,the only outstanding issue relates to
the land use/landscape buffer along the east property line.
4
March 8,
20'UBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-2941-A
The Landscape Ordinance requires a minimum landscape buffer
width of 9 feet.The Zoning Ordinance also requires a
9 foot wide land use buffer.The proposed buffer width is
3 feet.The applicant is requesting the reduced buffer
width based on the fact that a driveway is needed to serve
the rear parking area and the location of the existing
building dictates the drive placement.
Given the fact that the Landscape Ordinance requires the
buffer,the City Beautiful Commission will need to approve
the variance.The applicant has noted that he is working
to obtain letters from the two (2)abutting property owners
to the east,approving of the 3 foot buffer width.Staff
supports the site plan contingent upon the City Beautiful
Commission approving the landscape buffer variance.
Otherwise,to staff's knowledge there are no outstanding
issues associated with the PD-R rezoning.The proposed
second duplex structure should have no adverse impact on
the general area.
I .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the PD-R rezoning subject to
the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D,E and F of this report.2.Any site lighting must be low-level and directed away
from adjacent residential property.3.The proposed 3-foot wide landscape buffer along theeastpropertylinemustbeapprovedbytheCityBeautifulCommission.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 8,2001)
Lee Maris was present,representing the application.There were
several persons present in opposition to the proposed PD-R.
Chairman Rector began the public hearing by addressing the
notification issue.Staff noted that the applicant mailed a
certified letter to property owners within 200 feet more than
15 days prior to the meeting,but the letter did not contain the
public hearing date and time.Staff further noted that when
5
March 8,20~
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-2941-A
Mr.Maris notified staff of the error,staff instructed Mr.
Maris to mail new certified notices with all of the required
information.The second notice was mailed March 2,2001.
Commission Lowry asked Mr.Maris if he would consider deferring
the application so that the required notices could be mailed in
a timely manner.Mr.Maris noted that he would accept a
deferral.This issue was discussed.
Chairman Rector asked the neighbors present if a deferral would
be acceptable.The neighbors indicated a desire to hear the
item at this meeting.
Kathleen Oleson,of The League of Women Voters of Pulaski
County,addressed the Commission regarding the notification
issue.She noted that the League felt that correct notice
procedures should be followed.
Commissioner Adcock asked Ms.Oleson about this particular
notice issue.Ms.Oleson stated that she was acceptable to this
specific notice waiver,but did not want bylaw waivers for
notification to become commonplace.
There was a motion to waive the bylaws and accept the
notification as done by Mr.Maris.The motion passed by a vote
of 8 ayes,1 nay and 2 absent.
Staff described the proposed PD-R rezoning with a recommendation
of approval as noted in paragraph I.of the agenda report.
Mr.Maris addressed the Commission in support of the
application.He noted that the proposed duplex would be
constructed in a tasteful manner and would be compatible with
the existing structures in the area.
Suzanne Peyton addressed the Commission in opposition to the
proposed rezoning.She submitted photos of the property to the
Commission.She noted three reasons for opposition as follows:
1.Property values would decrease.
2.The two-story building would present a privacy concern.
3.The additional dwelling units would provide a concern for
safety in the area.She noted that there were several
small children in the area.
6
March 8,20»
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-2941-A
Virginia Tustison also addressed the Commission in opposition.
She noted concerns with decreases in property values,increase
in property density,landscape ordinance requirements,building
height and size,traffic,noise and parking.
Lance Pelton also addressed the Commission in opposition.He
noted a concern with traffic.
Todd Rutherford also addressed the Commission in opposition.He
stated concerns with parking and traffic.He also noted concern
with building height.He stated that he would like to be
notified of other meetings.
Chairman Rector asked about notification for the City Beautiful
Commission.Bob Brown,of the Planning Staff,noted that
notices were required for City Beautiful Commission issues.
Inez Cook and Janice Botner addressed the Commission and noted
agreement with the others who spoke in opposition.
Charles Phillips also addressed the Commission and spoke in
opposition to the proposed PD-R.
The Commission discussed the photos of the area as submitted by
Ms.Peyton.
Commissioner Berry asked about the traffic impact that this
development would have.Bob Turner,Director of Public Works,
stated that this development would not cause a significant
increase in traffic.
Commissioner Rahman asked about building height.Staff noted
that a maximum building height of 35 feet was allowed in R-4
zoning.
Commissioner Faust asked how long this property had been
multifamily on the Land Use Plan.Brian Minyard noted that the
property had been multifamily since at least August,1987.
Commissioner Faust commented about renters.Mr.Pelton noted
that he rented property in the area for several years,prior to
the purchase of his house.
Commissioner Earnest made comments about the property values in
the area.He stated that he didn'feel that the proposed PD-R
7
March 8,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-2941-A
would have an adverse impact on property values.Mr.Maris
noted that the project would be a quality development.He noted
that all of the parking,except one (1)space,would be behind
the existing duplex structure.
Commissioner Muse asked about driveway width.Mr.Turner noted
that the width was approximately 22 feet.The driveway width
and east landscape area was discussed.
Mr.Rutherford made additional comments pertaining to the
proposed development.
The Commission discussed deferring the application to allow time
for Mr.Maris to meet with the concerned neighbors and discuss
the project.Mr.Maris noted no objection to a deferral.
A motion was made to defer the application to the April 19,2001
agenda.The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes,1 nay and
2 absent.Staff suggested that the applicant re-notify the
property owners within 200 feet of the property of the April 19,
2001 public hearing.
8
March 8,20
ITEM NO.:3 FILE NO.:Z-3500-D
NAME:Pereira —Short-Form PD-0
LOCATION:212 N.McKinley Street
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Firstar Bank McGetrick and McGetrick
¹1 Riverfront Place 319 East Markham St.,Ste.202
North Little Rock,AR 72114 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:0.52 acre NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:R-2 ALLOWED USES:Single-Family Residential
PROPOSED USE:Acupuncture Clinic
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1.Deferral of required sidewalk construction for four (4)years
or until adjacent walk is constructed.
BACKGROUND
The property at 212 N.McKinley is zoned R-2 and contains a
2,950 square foot,two-story building.The building is
currently vacant,but once housed a daycare center that operated
under an approved conditional use permit.
On May 11,2000 the Planning Commission approved a rezoning of
this property from R-2 to PD-0 for a "birth center",and an
accompanying land use plan amendment.However,the applicant
decided not to pursue the rezoning and withdrew it from the
Board of Director's agenda.The applicant did follow through
with the land use plan amendment,and on June 20,2000 the Board
of Directors passed ordinance No.18,296.This ordinance
changed the land use plan for this property and the two (2)
properties immediately north from SF (single family)to SO
(Suburban Office).
March 8,20~
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:3 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3500-D
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone the property at 212 N.
McKinley Street from R-2 to PD-0 to utilize the existing
building as an acupuncture clinic.The applicant is
requesting 0-1 (Quiet Office District)permitted uses as analternate/future use of the building.
The proposed acupuncture clinic will have one (1)doctor
and two (2)additional staff members.The clinic will also
have an accessory herb dispensary,which will be for theclinic's patients only.The proposed hours of operationwillbefrom9:00 a.m.to 5:00 p.m.,Monday through Friday.
The proposed site plan shows a ground-mounted sign locationnearthesoutheastcorneroftheproperty.The applicantnotesthatthesignwillconformtoCitystandardsforofficezoning(maximum height —6 feet,maximum area —64
square feet).
The property contains an existing 2,950 square foot,two-
story building,with parking along the building's north and
south sides.The applicant notes that there will be nophysicalchangesmadetothepropertyexceptfortheadditionoftheground-mounted sign and reduction of the
paved areas to allow for the required buffer areas alongthenorthandsouthpropertylines.The applicant alsonotesthattherewillbenodumpsteronthesite.
As part of the PD-0 request,the applicant is requesting adeferralofsidewalkconstructionalongN.McKinley Street.
The requested deferral would be for four (4)years or untiladjacentdevelopmentoccurs.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There is an existing two-story stucco building on the site,with a circular drive.There are small areas of existing
paved parking on the building's north and south sides.
There is an existing six-foot wood screening fence alongthesouth,west and a portion of the north property lines.
There are single family residences immediately north,south
and west of the site.The Park Plaza Mall is locatedacrossMcKinleyStreettotheeast.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Briarwood and Hillcrest Neighborhood Associations werenotifiedofthepublichearing.Staff has received no
comment from the neighborhood as of this writing.
2
March 8,2G
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:3 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3500-D
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.McKinley Street is classified on the Master Street Plan
as a collector street.Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet
from centerline.
2.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.
3.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is
damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
4.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Location of sewer service unknown.No sewer
main is located in this area.Sewer main extension required
with easements to serve property if service is required.
Entergy:Provide easements for existing overhead facilities
(10 foot easement along west and south property lines and a
15 foot easement along the east property line).
ARKLA:No Comment.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment.
Water:No Comment.
Fire Department:No Comment.
Count Plannin :No Comment.
CATA:Site is on bus route ¹21 and has no effect on bus
radius,turnout and route.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
This request is located in the West Little Rock Planning
District.The Land Use Plan shows Suburban Office for this
property.The applicant has applied for a Planned
Development-Office for an acupuncture clinic.The property
3
March 8,20,
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:3 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3500-D
is currently zoned R-2 Single Family.A Land Use Plan
amendment is not required.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
This property is located in an area that is not covered by
a city recognized neighborhood action plan.
Landsca e Issues:
The plan submitted does not allow for the 9-foot wide
minimum land use buffers along the northern and southern
perimeters of the site.
A water source within 75 feet of all landscaped areas is
required.
G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(FEBRUARY 15,2001)
Pat McGetrick was present,representing the application.Staff briefly described the proposed PD-0 and noted that
additional information was needed regarding the proposed
use (hours,signage,number of employees,etc.).
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.
Mr.McGetrick noted that a deferral of sidewalk
construction was requested.
The landscaping requirements were also briefly discussed.
Bob Brown,of the Planning Staff,noted that additional
buffer width was needed between the north and south parkingareasandthesidepropertylines.
After the brief discussion,the Committee forwarded the
PD-0 application to the full Commission for resolution.
H.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
February 21,2001.The revised plan addresses the issues
as raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee.The
revised plan provides for the required nine (9)foot wide
land use buffers along the north and south property lines.
4
March 8,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:3 (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-3500-D
The proposed site plan shows a total of eight (8)parking
spaces.The ordinance would typically require a minimum of
six (6)parking spaces for a clinic of this size.If the
building is ever converted to general/professional office
use,the typical ordinance minimum would be seven (7)
spaces.Staff supports the parking plan as proposed.
As noted in paragraph A.,the applicant is requesting a
deferral of sidewalk construction along N.McKinley Street.
Public Works supports the deferral for four (4)years or
until adjacent sidewalk construction,whichever occursfirst.
To staff's knowledge,there are no outstanding issues
associated with the proposed PD-O.Staff feels that the
proposed use of the property is appropriate and should have
no adverse impact on the general area.
I .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the PD-0 rezoning subject to
the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D,E and F of this report.2.Staff supports 0-1 permitted uses as alternate uses for
the property.3.Any site lighting must be low-level and directed away
from adjacent residential property.4.The ground-mounted sign must conform to City standardsforofficezoning(maximum height —6 feet,maximum area
64 square feet).5.Staff supports the deferral of sidewalk construction
along N.McKinley Street for four (4)years or until
adjacent sidewalk construction,whichever occurs first.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 8,2001)
The staff presented a positive recommendation on this
application,as there were no further issues for resolution.
There were no objectors to this matter.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion
within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.
A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by a vote
of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
5
March 8,20.
ITEM NO.:4 FILE NO.:Z-6398-A
NAME:Loftin —Short-Form PCD
LOCATION:North side of County Line Road,approximately 300feeteastofVimyRidgeRoad
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Doug Loftin Construction Hope Engineers,Inc.
612 Oakdale 203 Lillian Street
Alexander,AR 72002 Benton,AR 72015
AREA:3.54 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:2 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:R-2 ALLOWED USES:Single-Family Residential
PROPOSED USE:Mini-Warehouses and Daycare
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone the 3.54 acre propertyalongthenorthsideofCountyLineRoad(approximately 300feeteastofVimyRidgeRoad)from R-2 to PCD to allow amini-warehouse and daycare development.As a component oftheproposedPCDrezoning,the applicant proposes tosubdividethepropertyintotwo(2)lots.
The following is the proposed development criteria for theproperty:
TRACT A TRACT B
Proposed Uses:Mini-warehouse Daycare (general/
professional office
as alternate use)
Number of Buildin s:5 1
Total Buildin Area:25,400 s .ft.6,000 s .ft.
Buildin Hei ht:12 feet 19 feet
Parkin 3 s aces 27 s aces
Hours:6:00 a.m.—8:00 p.m.,6:00 a.m.—7:00 p.m.,daily Monday-Friday
March 8,2G
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6398-A
As noted above,Tract A is proposed for mini-warehouses.
The site plan shows that 1,350 square feet of the
westernmost building will be used as a manager's apartment.Tract A will be accessed by utilizing a proposed driveway
near the southwest corner of the property.The site planalsoshowsaground-mounted sign for Tract A,along theeastsideofthedrive(maximum height —10 feet,maximum
area —48 square feet).
Tract B is proposed for a daycare use (general/professionalofficeasanalternateuse).The applicant notes that
there will be a maximum of 100 students and 12 employees.
A single driveway near the center of Tract B will beutilizedtoaccessthislot.The site plan shows a ground-
mounted sign along the east side of the driveway (maximum
height —6 feet,maximum area —24 square feet).The
applicant notes that there will be no dumpster on eitherlotandthatanysitelightingwillbelow-level anddirectedawayfromadjacentresidentialproperty.
The applicant has also proposed a land use plan amendmentfortheproperty(Item 4.1.on this agenda).
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The property is undeveloped wooded.There are single-
family residences to the east and north.A conveniencestoreislocatedimmediatelywestofthesite,with a
Family Dollar Store further west across Vimy Ridge Road.
There is an elementary school to the south,across County
Line Road (Bryant School District).
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Alexander Road,Quail Run,Meyer Lane and SouthwestLittleRockUnitedforProgressNeighborhoodAssociations
were notified of the public hearing.As of this writing,staff has received no comment from the neighborhood.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.County Line Road is classified on the Master Street Plan
as a minor arterial.A dedication of right-of-way 45
feet from section lane will be required.
2.Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
2
March 8,2G
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6398-A
this street including 5-foot sidewalk with planned
development.
3.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.
4.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
5.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.6.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities
are required.
7.Street Improvement plans shall include signage and
striping.Completed plans must be approved by Traffic
Engineering prior to construction.
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements to
serve property.
Entergy:No Comment received.
ARKLA:No Comment.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:Water main extension will be 8-inch ductile iron.
The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to
determine whether additional public and/or private fire
hydrant(s)will be required.
Fire Department:No Comment.
Count Plannin :No Comment.
CATA:Proposed site has no effect on bus radius,turnout
and route.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
This request is located in the Otter Creek Planning
District.The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this
property.The applicant has applied for a Planned
Commercial Development for mini-storage and daycarefacilities.The property is currently zoned R-2 Single
Family.A Land Use Plan amendment for a change to
Commercial is a separate item on this agenda.
3
March 8,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6398-A
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The Chicot West/I-30 South Neighborhood Action Plan states
in the Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization goal the
action statement of concentrating "...development efforts in
the more urbanized northern portion of the study area..."and
"...view the southern portion of the study area as an 'urbanreserve'o be developed as market forces become stronger
in the area."This reclassification is located next to the
southern boundary of the study area.
Landsca e Issues:
The plan submitted does not allow for the average 12 foot
width required for the street buffer (9-foot minimum at any
given point)nor the 6.7 foot wide minimum landscape strips
required between the two sites and along the western
perimeter.
Tract "B"is 422 square foot short of the 902 square foot
interior landscaping required within the interior of the
paved area.
A 6-foot high opaque screen,either a wooden fence with its
face side directed outward or dense evergreen plantings,is
required along the northern and eastern perimeters of thesite.
The 20-foot wide easement area along the northern perimeter
cannot count as part of the 12-foot wide land use buffer
required.A total of 70%of this buffer must remain
undisturbed.
An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be
required.
G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(FEBRUARY 15,2001)
Doug Loftin and Bill Hope were present,representing the
application.Staff briefly described the proposed PCD and
noted that additional information on the project was
needed.The applicant noted that a two-lot plat was part
of the PCD proposal.
4
March 8,2G
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6398-A
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed,
specifically the required right-of-way dedication.Mr.
Loftin indicated that the Public Works requirements would
be complied with.
The landscaping requirements were also discussed.Bob
Brown,of the Planning Staff,noted that additional
perimeter buffer areas and interior landscaping was needed.
The utility easements were discussed with respect to the
landscaped areas.Mr.Hope noted that the proposed sewer
easement could be moved to the interior of the site.This
issue was briefly discussed.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the PCD to
the full Commission for resolution.
H.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
February 21,2001.The revised plan addresses most of the
technical design issues as raised by staff and the
Subdivision Committee.
Bob Brown,of the Planning Staff,reviewed the revised site
plan and noted that the areas set aside for landscaping and
buffers conform to ordinance standards.The revised plan
also shows the six (6)foot screening fence along the north
and east property lines.
Public Works also reviewed the revised site plan and noted
that the plan conforms to the requirements as noted in
paragraph D.of this report.Public Works notes that the
fire department needs to approve the internal circulation
around the southernmost mini-warehouse building,based on
the fact that the southernmost drive width was reduced to
provide an increased street buffer.
As noted in paragraph A.,a total of 100 students and 12
employees is proposed for the daycare use on Tract B.This
would typically require a minimum of 22 on-site parking
spaces.A total of 27 spaces is shown for Tract B.The
site plan does not provide back-out areas for the parking
spaces at the end of each isle.
5
March 8,2(
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6398-A
To staff's knowledge,the internal circulation around the
southernmost mini-warehouse building and the lack of back-
out areas for the daycare parking are the only outstandingsitedesignissues.
Although the applicant has done an above average job in
addressing the technical site design issues associated with
this property,staff cannot support the uses as proposed.Staff feels that the proposed mini-warehouse use is not
appropriate for nor compatible with the general area.ThisisprimarilyduetothefactthattheuseisofC-4 type
and adjacent to single family residential and school uses.
I .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends denial of the PCD rezoning request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 8,2001)
Doug Loftin was present,representing the application.There
were several persons present in opposition to the proposed PCD.
Staff briefly described the proposed PCD with a recommendation
of denial.
Doug Loftin addressed the Commission in support of the
application.He stated that the property is zoned MF-6 and not
R-2.
Chairman Rector asked about the MF-6 zoning issue.Brian
Minyard,of the Planning Staff,explained that the property was
zoned R-2 from MF-6 at the time of the neighborhood plan for
this area.He explained that the current property owner,Mr.
Loftin,had purchased the property during the time of the
rezoning process,and that the notice of rezoning went to the
previous property owner based on the current county records at
that time.
Mr.Loftin stated that he was ready to develop the property,and
that if the PCD is not approved he would construct apartments.
Janet Berry,of SWLR UP,noted that SWLR Up met and voted to
oppose the proposed land use plan amendment and PCD rezoning.
She noted the concerns of her association as noted in a letter
dated March 7,2001.She stated that SWLR UP supported the
6
March 8,2(
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6398-A
Irish Spring Estates neighborhood.Ms.Berry also noted that
the Bryant School District was opposed to the previous land use
plan amendment.
Gary Patterson addressed the Commission in opposition to the
proposed land use plan amendment and PCD.He stated that the
proposed project would not be compatible with the adjacent Irish
Spring Estates neighborhood.He expressed opposition the both
the mini-warehouse and daycare uses.
Michelle Ready also addressed the Commission in opposition.She
expressed concern with the close proximity of the proposed
development to the single-family neighborhood to the north and
east.She stated that she would like this property to remain
residential.
Joe Longinotti also spoke in opposition to the proposed
development.He noted that the proposed development would not
be compatible with the adjacent residential property.
Mr.Loftin asked if County Line Road was going to be connected
to the future South Loop as a minor arterial.Bob Turner,
Director of Public Works,noted that the intent is for County
Line Road to extend to the east and connect with the future
South Loop.Mr.Loftin asked about the construction standards
for a minor arterial.Mr.Turner noted that the required
construction would include four (4)lanes and a center turn
lane,five (5)lanes total.
There was additional discussion about the street classification
and the proposed uses at this location.
There was a motion to approve the Land Use Plan Amendment.The
motion failed by a vote of 0 ayes,9 nays and 2 absent.There
was a second motion to approve the PCD rezoning as presented by
the applicant.The motion failed by a vote of 0 ayes,9 nays
and 2 absent.The applications were denied.
7
March 8,2G
ITEM NO.:4.1 FILE NO.:LU01-16-01
Name:Land Use Plan Amendment —Otter Creek Planning District
Location:12800 County Line Rd.
~Re eat:Single Family to Commercial
Source:Doug Loftin
PROPOSAL /REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the Otter Creek Planning District
from Single Family to Commercial.The Commercial category
includes a broad range of retail and wholesale of products,
personal and professional services,and general businessactivities.Commercial activities very in type and scale,
depending on the trade area that they serve.The applicant
wishes to develop the property under review for a day care
center and a mini-storage warehouse.
Staff is not expanding this application since the land use in
this area was reviewed a year ago.On July 18,2000,after a
series of deferrals,the applicant requested that the item be
withdrawn without prejudice.The Planning Commission formally
approved the withdrawal of the application at the August 3,2000
Planning Commission meeting.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The property is currently zoned R-2 Single Family Residential
and is approximately 3.54 +acres in size.The property to the
north and east is zoned R-2 Single Family Residential and is
occupied by the Irish Spring subdivision.A convenience storeislocatedtothewestonapieceofpropertyzonedC-3 General
Commercial at the northeast corner of the Vimy Ridge /County
Line Road intersection.The property to the south lies in
Saline County and in the city limits of Shannon Hills.It is
zoned R-1 Single Family.Directly across County Line Road lies
Davis Elementary school,part of the Bryant School district.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On November 4,1997 three changes took place from Low Density
Residential to Single Family along both sides of Vimy Ridge Road
March 8,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:4.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-16-01
with in a mile north of the applicant's property.
On November 4,1997 a change was made from Low Density
Residential to Commercial at the northwest corner of the Vimy
Ridge /County Line Road intersection about 300 feet west of the
applicant's property.
On November 21,1995 various changes were made on both sides of
Vimy Ridge Road on large tracts of land within a mile north of
the applicant's property,one of those changes included the
change from Neighborhood Commercial to Commercial west of the
applicant's property on the northeast corner of the Vimy Ridge /
County Line Road intersection west of the applicant's property.
The applicant's properties,as well as the property to the north
and east,are all shown as Single Family on the Land Use Plan.
West of the applicant's property are two areas shown as
Commercial on the northwest and northeast corners of Vimy Ridge
Road and County Line Road.The area to the south of the
applicant's property is located in Saline County.The Shannon
Hills Comprehensive Development Plan shows the southwest corner
of the intersection as Commercial and the southeast corner as
Park/Elementary School.The remainder of the area along Vimy
Ridge Road and County Line Road is shown as Residential.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Vimy Ridge Road is shown as a minor arterial from Alexander Road
to the Saline County line.County Line Road is shown as a minor
arterial from Vimy Ridge Road with a proposed extension east as
a minor arterial to connect to the proposed South Loop.Vimy
Ridge Road is also shown as continuing south from the County
Line through Shannon Hills as a minor arterial on the Central
Arkansas Transportation System (CARTS)Future Classification
Plan.The CARTS Future Classification Plan shows County Line
Road as a major collector from Vimy Ridge Road to the Donnie
Drive /Joan Drive intersection in Shannon Hills.Both the
Master Street Plan and the CARTS Future Classification Plan show
County Line Road continuing west from the intersection with Vimy
Ridge Road as a residential street.
PARKS:
The Master Parks Plan does not show any parks,existing or
proposed,effected by this amendment.
2
March 8,20~~
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:4.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-16-01
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The Chicot West /I-30 South Neighborhood Action Plan states in
the Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization goal the action
statement of concentrating "...development efforts in the more
urbanized northern portion of the study area..."and "...view the
southern portion of the study area as an 'urban reserve'o be
developed as market forces become stronger in the area."This
reclassification is located next to the southern boundary of the
study area.
ANALYSIS:
Much of the area surrounding the Vimy Ridge /County Line Road
intersection consists of large tracts of undeveloped land in a
semi-rural setting.R.L.Davis Elementary School lies across
the street from the applicant's property.Commercial uses
across from a school on a street may cause traffic conflicts
from both the loading and unloading of school students and the
commercial traffic throughout the day.The undeveloped tract of
land on the southwest corner of the intersection provides for
future development of commercial areas.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:
Meyer Lane Neighborhood Association,Otter Creek Homeowners
Association,Quail Run Neighborhood Association,and Rolling
Pines Neighborhood Association.
Staff has received no comments from area residents.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is premature and therefore not
appropriate.The area shown as Commercial on the southwest
corner of the Vimy Ridge /County Line Road intersection
provides an area for future Commercial uses.This area will be
reviewed as part of the Chicot West I-30 South Neighborhood
Action Plan review in about a year.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 8,2001)
Brian Minyard,City Staff,made a brief presentation to the
commission.Mr.Minyard stated that this item was the same
3'
March 8,20~~
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:4.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-16-01
requested change that appeared before the Planning Commission on
March 2,2000.Mr.Minyard stated that the Staff recommendation
for denial has remained the same.Mr.Minyard closed his
presentation by stating that the Chicot West /I-30 South
Neighborhood Action Plan referred to in the staff report was due
for a three-year update.The Future Land Use Plan for this area
would be reviewed by the update steering committee.
Monte Moore made a presentation of item 4 so the discussion
could coincide with the discussion for item 4.1.See item 4 for
a complete discussion concerning the Short Form Planned
Commercial Development.
Doug Loftin,the applicant,spoke in support of his application.
Mr.Loftin stated his belief that the property in question is
currently zoned MF-6 Multi-family.Mr.Loftin stated that he
was not notified of any pending changes in zoning when he bought
the property.
Planning Commission Vice-Chair,Bill Rector asked if the zoning
was indeed MF-6 Multi-family.Stephen Giles,city staff,
replied that a mini-storage warehouse could not be built in an
area zoned MF-6 Multi-family.Brian Minyard,City Staff,
clarified what had happened.Staff gets ownership from the
Assessors Office and there is a lag time between the deed change
and the time the records were updated at the Pulaski County Tax
Assessors office.There is also a lag time between the time
research of property owners is performed and the letters are
mailed out.As a result,in this case it appears the previous
owners were notified of the changes instead of Mr.Loftin.The
previous owners did not act upon the notification letter.The
question before the Planning Commission in any case is the Land
Use Plan amendment and the PCD.
Doug Loftin stated that he wanted to build either a mini-storage
warehouse and daycare or apartments on his property.The
applicant insisted that his property is zoned MF-6 Multi-family
and that his plans depended on the outcome of the meeting.
Janet Berry,representing Southwest Little Rock United for
Progress,spoke in opposition to both the zone change request
and Land Use Plan Amendment.Ms.Berry stated that the Chicot
West /I-30 South Neighborhood Action Plan was the basis for
opposition to Mr.Loftin's request.Ms.Berry stated that the
steering committee supported changes to Commercial located at
nodes on Collector and larger streets.The intent was to place
4
March 8,20'~
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:4.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-16-01
such uses along the proposed South Loop shown on the Master
Street Plan.The property in question is not located at one of
the nodes intended for commercial development by the steering
committee.In addition,she stated that the Irish Spring
neighborhood is worried about changes in the area and that most
of the changes occurred across the street in Saline County in an
area outside the City of Little Rock's jurisdiction.
Gary Patterson spoke in opposition to the application and
mentioned problems of noise and access related to mini-storagefacilities.Mr.Patterson also stated that he had concerns
about a possible daycare center located on the property as well
as potential drainage problems.
Michelle Ready spoke in opposition to the application and stated
that the proposed buildings located on Mr.Loftin's property
would be too close to her property.Ms.Ready stated that she
wanted to make sure that there would be a buffer zone between
her property and potential development on Mr.Loftin's property.
A daycare center would create noise problems in the neighborhood
during hours of operation.Ms.Ready also stated that she
wanted the area to stay residential in character.
Joe Longinotti spoke in opposition to the application and stated
his concerns about the possibility of a daycare center located
close to the neighborhood.
Doug Loftin responded to the comments made and stated that
County Line Road is proposed to be widened and connect with the
South Loop.Bob Turner,City Staff,stated that County Line
Road was shown as a minor arterial on the Master Street Plan and
that it would eventually connect to the proposed South Loop.
Mr.Loftin asked how wide County Line Road would eventually be.
Mr.Turner stated that a minor arterial would eventually be
widened to five lanes.Mr.Loftin closed his arguments by
stating that his property is better suited to commercial
development because of the minor arterial status of County Line
Road.
A motion was made to approve the item as presented.The item
was denied with a vote of 0 ayes,9 noes,and 2 absent.
5
March 8,
20'TEM
NO.:5 FILE NO.:Z-6981
NAME:Ficklin —Short-Form PD-R
LOCATION:West side of Gamble Road,approximately 600 feet
south of West Markham Street
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Steve Ficklin White-Daters and Associates
13914 St.Michael Dr.24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock,AR 72211 Little Rock,AR 72223
AREA:0.43 acre NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:R-2 ALLOWED USES:Single-Family Residential
PROPOSED USE:Multi-Family Residential
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone the 0.43 acre property onthewestsideofGambleRoad(approximately 600 feet southofWestMarkhamStreet)from R-2 to PD-R to allow for theconstructionofaneight(8)unit condominium development.
The applicant notes that the project will be developed as ahorizontalpropertyregime,where each individual unit will
be sold with the entirety of the property being a single
ownership,governed by a property owner's association.The
applicant also notes that the project will be very similar
in design to the PD-R development immediately west of thissite.
The proposed site plan includes two (2)four-unit
condominium buildings (two stories each),with a singleaccesspointfromGambleRoad.Each unit will have asinglecargarage,with a two-car driveway leading to eachunit.
March 8,
20'UBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6981
The proposed site plan also shows a ground-mounted signalongthenorthsideofthedriveway.The applicant notesthatthesignwillconformtocitystandardsfor
multifamily zoning (maximum height —6 feet,maximum area—
24 scpxare feet).
The applicant also notes that there will be no dumpster onthesite,and the project will utilize city garbagecollection.The site plan also notes two (2)mail kiosks
which will serve the units.The applicant has also filed alanduseplanamendmentforthispropertyfromofficetomultifamily(Item 5.1 on this agenda).
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The property is undeveloped and grass-covered.There are
few existing trees on the site.
There is an office/commercial building to the north,withanotherofficebuildingfurthernorthacrossStacyLane.There are single-family residences to the south,with onesingle-family residence and the Bale Chevrolet detail shopacrossGambleRoadtotheeast.There are additionalsingle-family residences to the southeast and a church tothenortheast.There is a similar condominium developmenttothewest,with a large apartment complex (Shadow LakesApartments)further west across Farris Street.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received severalinformationalphonecallsregardingthisproject,but novoicedopposition.The Parkway Place and Gibralter
Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood Associations
were notified of the public hearing.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Gamble Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as acollectorstreet.Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet fromcenterline.
2.Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"(MasterStreetPlan).Construct one-half street improvements tothisstreetincluding5-foot sidewalk with planned
development.
3.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
2
March 8,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6981
4.Street Improvement plans shall include signage and
striping.Completed plans must be approved by Traffic
Engineering prior to construction.
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Entergy:No Comment received.
AEKLA:No Comment.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:Contact the Water Works regarding the size and
location of the water meter(s).The Little Rock Fire
Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether
additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s)will be
required.
Fire Department:No Comment.
Count Plannin :No Comment.
CATA:Site is not on a dedicated bus route and has noeffectonbusradius,turnout and route.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
This request is located in the Ellis Mountain PlanningDistrict.The Land Use Plan shows Office for this
property.The applicant has applied for a Planned
Development-Residential for condominiums.The property is
currently zoned R-2 Single Family.A Land Use Plan
amendment for a change to Multi-family is a separate item
on this agenda.
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 three action statements relevant tothiscase.The first action statement states,"Require
City Staff to ensure a mix of single-family and multi-
family in newly developing areas,allowing the multi-family
3
March 8,20~.
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6981
to act as a buffer between single family and office."The
second action statement states,"Require all rental
complexes (multi-family and single-family)and grounds to
be maintained in a high-quality manner citywide."The
third action statement states,"Develop ordinance for Rock
Creek Neighborhood Plan area to limit/density/square
footage of property wherever multi-family housing is
approved."
Landsca e Issues:
The landscape strip along the western perimeter must not
drop below a width of 6.7 feet.
The proposed structure encroaches one-foot into the 9-foot
wide land use buffer required along the southern perimeterofthesite.At least 70%of this buffer is required to
remain undisturbed.If a utility easement is present,it
cannot be counted as part of the land use buffer area.
A 6-foot high opaque screen,either a wooden fence with itsfacesidedirectedoutward,a wall,or dense evergreen
plantings,is required along the southern perimeter.
A water source will be required within 75 feet of all
landscaped areas.
G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(FEBRUARY 15,2001)
Joe White was present,representing the application.StaffbrieflydescribedthePD-R request and noted that some
additional information was needed.
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.
Mr.White noted that these requirements would be complied
with.
The landscaping requirements were also discussed.Bob
Brown,of the Planning Staff,noted that the south and westbufferareasneededtobeincreased.Mr.White indicatedthatthesiteplanwouldberevisedaccordingly.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the PD-R tothefullCommissionforresolution.
4
March 8,2(
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6981
H.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
February 21,2001.The revised plan addresses the issues
as raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee.The
revised plan provides for the required landscape and buffer
areas along the west and south property lines.The revised
plan also shows a six (6)foot screening fence along the
south property line.
The site plan shows a total of 16 parking spaces (one
garage space and one driveway space per unit)to serve the
development.The ordinance would typically require a
minimum of 12 spaces for the development.Staff supports
the parking plan as proposed.
To staff's knowledge,there are no outstanding issues
associated with this PD-R rezoning.The applicant has
noted that all Public Works and Planning requirements will
be complied with.As noted in paragraph A.,this project
will be very similar in design to the PD-R condominium
development immediately west,which fronts on Farris
Street.The proposed condominium development should have
no adverse impact on the general area.
I .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approved of the PD-R rezoning subject to
the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D,E and F of this report.2.The ground-mounted sign must not exceed the city
standards for multifamily zoning (maximum height —6feet,maximum area —24 square feet).3.Any site lighting must be low-level and directed away
from adjacent residential property.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 8,2001)
Joe White was present,representing the application.There was
one (1)person present in opposition of the PD-R rezoning.
Chairman Rector asked to hear from the objector first.Matthew
Carman addressed the Commission.He asked about the
notification process.The required notices to property owners
5
March 8,2 G.
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6981
and residents were discussed.Staff also noted that the Parkway
Place and Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood
Associations were notified of the public hearing.Mr.Carman
noted that he was opposed to the PD-R application.
Staff presented the PD-R with a recommendation of approval as
noted in paragraph I.of the agenda report.
Joe White addressed the Commission in support of the proposed
development.He noted that he contacted three (3)neighborhood
associations and that only one (1)returned his call and that
the association only had questions about the development.He
noted that this proposed development is very similar to the PD-R
(condo)development immediately west of the site.
Mr.Carman noted that there were no apartments along Gamble
Road.He noted opposition to the multifamily development of
this property.Chairman Rector noted that these units would be
owner-occupied.Mr.Carman stated that he objected to any
multifamily development of this property.Mr.White noted that
the units would initially be leased and then sold.He stated
that the units would be constructed as units for sale,with
firewalls.
Commissioner Rahman asked Mr.Carman if he would be opposed to
an office development on this property.Mr.Carman stated that
he would rather have an office development.
Commissioner Berry asked about the allowed building height in
office zoning.Staff noted that 0-3 zoning allowed a building
height of 45 feet.
Commissioner Berry made additional comments concerning
multifamily developments.
Mr.Carman asked if this development would be connected to the
condo development to the west.Mr.White stated that it would
not.
There was a motion to approve the Land Use Plan Amendment.The
motion passed by a vote of 7 ayes,1 nay,1 abstention (Lowry)
and 2 absent.There was a second motion to approve the PD-R
rezoning as recommended by staff.The motion passed by a vote
of 8 ayes,1 nay and 2 absent.The applications were approved.
6
March 8,20i-
ITEM NO.:5.1 FILE NO.:LU01-18-01
Name:Land Use Plan Amendment —Ellis Mountain Planning
District
Location:Near the Southwest corner of Gamble Rd.and Stacy
Lane.
Receuest:Office tc Multi-Family
Source:Steve Ficklin
PROPOSAL /REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the Ellis Mountain Planning District
from Office to Multi-Family.The Multi-Family category
accommodates residential development of ten (10)to thirty-six
(36)dwelling units per acre.The applicant wishes to build two
condominium buildings of four units each on .43+acres of land.
Prompted by this Land Use Plan amendment request,the Planning
Staff expanded the area of review to include three neighboring
properties:two to the west,and one to the south.With these
changes,the Multifamily shown west of Farris Street would be
extended east toward Gamble Road.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The applicant's property is currently vacant land zoned R-2
Single Family and is approximately .43+acres in size.The
expanded area of review,1.98+acres,consists of a house built
on a large lot zoned R-2 Single Family south of the applicant's
property and two apartment buildings zoned Planned Development-
Residential built west of the applicant's property.
North of the area of review,the property fronting Stacy Lane
consists of a house and an office building zoned 0-3 General
Office.The neighboring property to the east fronting Gamble
Road consists of a parking lot zoned 0-3 General Office for a
detail shop zoned C-3 General Commercial,a house on a lot at
the middle of the block zoned R-2 Single Family,and a vacant
lot zoned 0-3 General Office on the corner of Lorena Avenue.
All of the property south of Lorena Avenue consists of single-
family houses built on lots zoned R-2 Single Family.The
property west of Farris Street is a large apartment complex
zoned MF-18 Multi-Family.
March 8,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-18-01
The most intense uses in the surrounding area consists of an
auto-dealership zoned as a Planned Commercial Development and a
shopping center zoned C-3 General Commercial between Chenal
Parkway and Markham Street.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On February 15,2000 a change was made from Single Family to Low
Density Residential at West Glen Dr.at Gamble Rd.about a
mile south of the applicant's property.
On March 2,1999 various changes were made along the Kanis Rd.
corridor about a c mile south of the applicant's property.
On December 15,1998 a change was made from Single Family to
Public Institutional at 600 Kirby Rd.about 2/3 of a mile
Southwest of the applicant's property.
On December 15,1998 a change was made from Multi-Family to
Suburban Office at Kanis Rd.at Pt.West about a 'c mile south of
the applicant's property.
On December 15,1998 a change was made from Office to Commercial
and Park/Open Space at Timber Ridge and Chenal Parkway about 1/4
of a mile east of the applicant's property.
On December 15,1998 a change was made from Single Family to
Public Institutional at 1 Covenant Dr.about 1 mile west of the
applicant's property.
On September 17,1998 a change was made from Public
Institutional and Park/Open Space to Commercial near the
Northwest corner of the Chenal Parkway and Markham Street
intersection about 1/3 of a mile east of the applicant's
property.
The expanded area of review is shown as Office on the Future
Land Use Plan.All of the property to the north and east of the
expanded area is shown as Office.The property south of Lorena
Avenue is shown as Single Family.The land west of Farris
Street is shown as Multi-Family.A large area is shown as
Commercial between Chenal Parkway and Markham Street.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
Gamble Road is shown on the Master Street Plan as a Collector
Street from Markham Street to Misty Creek Drive.There are no a
bikeways shown on the Master Street Plan for Gamble Road.
2
March 8,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-18-01
PARKS:
The Park System Master Plan shows existing parkland north of the
applicant's property inside the Park/Open Space strip running
along Rock Creek.The existing parkland is along the floodway of
Rock Creek.This parkland would not be affected by the proposed
amendment.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Rock
Creek Neighborhood Action Plan.The Residential Development
goal listed three action statements relevant to this case.Thefirstactionstatementstates,Require City Staff to ensure a
mix of Single Family and Multi-Family in newly developing areas,
allowing the Multi-Family to act as a buffer between Single
Family and Office."The second action statement states "Requireallrentalcomplexes(multi-family and single-family)and
grounds to be maintained in a high-quality manner citywide."
The third action statement states,"Develop ordinance for Rock
Creek Neighborhood Plan area to limit density/square footage of
property wherever multi-family housing is approved."
ANALYSIS:
The area under review is located south of an expanding office
area along Markham Street/Chenal Parkway.Much of the office
development in the area provides a transition between the
intense commercial developments located on Chenal Parkway and
the residential areas located south of Lorena Avenue.Multi-
Family developments in this area could create an alternative
transition between the commercial developments on Markham Street
and the single-family developments south of Lorena Avenue.
Currently,Shadow Lake Drive and Lorena Avenue acts as,the
northern boundary of a stable single-family residential
neighborhood.A change to Multi-family would further establish
Shadow Lake Drive and Lorena Avenue as a definitive boundary
between the single-family neighborhood from the more intense
developments to the 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
3
March 8,20~
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-18-01
Association.Staff has received one comment from area residents
of a neutral nature.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is appropriate.The expansion of
Multi-Family will further enhance extend a buffer to protect the
large area to the south shown as Single Family from the intense
Commercial uses located on Chenal Parkway.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 8,2001)
Matthew Carman raised a question about the notification process.
Brian Minyard,City Staff,gave a brief description of the
notification process.Planning Commission Vice-Chair,Bill
Rector stated that the notices sent conformed to the rules.
Brian Minyard,City Staff,made a brief presentation to the
commission.Monte Moore made a presentation of item 5,a
Planned Development-Residential for this site,so the discussion
could coincide with the discussion for item 5.1.See item 5 for
a complete discussion concerning the Short Form Planned
Development —Residential.
Commissioner Rohn Muse asked a question about the area of
notification for the Land Use Plan Amendment vs.the requested
Zone change.Brian Minyard,City Staff,stated that the
notification area for the zoning request was slightly smaller
than the area of notification of the Land Use Plan Amendment
because of the differences in areas covered by the boundaries
for the two items.
Joe White spoke on behalf of the applicant and stated that he
contacted the neighborhood associations and that he had not
heard any negative comments from the neighborhoods.Mr.White
gave a brief description of proposed development.
Matthew Carman spoke in opposition to the application.
Mr.Carman stated that there were no other apartments located on
Gamble Road and that the property was designated for office
development.Mr.Carmen expressed concerns about current multi-
family complexes in the area and worried about construction of
future apartments in the area.
4
March 8,20~
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU01-18-01
Commissioner Mizan Rahman asked if Mr.Carman preferred office
buildings instead of apartments.Mr.Carman replied that he
preferred office developments.A brief discussion took place
concerning the height office buildings vs.apartment buildings.
A motion was made to approve the item as presented.The item
was approved with a vote of 7 ayes,1 noes,1 abstention,and
2 absent.
5
March 8,20
ITEM NO.:6 FILE NO.:S-285-MM
NAME:The Ranch (Tract G)Apartments —Subdivision Site
Plan Review
LOCATION:West side of Chenonceau Boulevard (future street),
approximately 1,500 feet north of Cantrell Road and along the east
side of Patrick Country Road
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Zimmerman Investments,LLC White-Daters and Associates
P.O.Box 3737 24 Rahling Circle
Springfield,MO 65808 Little Rock,AR 72223
AREA:15.1 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:MF-18 ALLOWED USES:Multi-family
PROPOSED USE:Multi-family
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
STAFF NOTE:
The applicant submitted a letter to staff on February 14,2001
requesting that this application be withdrawn,without
prejudice.Staff supports the withdrawal,as requested.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 8,2001)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted aletteronFebruary14,2001 requesting that this application be
withdrawn without prejudice.Staff supported the withdrawal as
requested.
March 8,
20'UBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:6 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-285-MM
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion
within the Consent Agenda for withdrawal,without prejudice.A
motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by a vote of
9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
2
March 8,20~=
ITEM NO.:7 FILE NO.:Z-5098-C
NAME:Dillards —Revised Zoning Site Plan
LOCATION:1600 Cantrell Road
DEVELOPER:ARCHITECT:
Dillards,Inc.Architecture Plus
1600 Cantrell Road 300 Washington Street,Suite 400LittleRock,AR 72201 Monroe,LA 71201
AREA:14.4 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:0-2/I-3 ALLOWED USES:Office
PROPOSED USE:Office
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
BACKGROUND
The majority of the property at 1600 Cantrell Road is zoned 0-2
and contains the existing Dillards office building.Based on
the fact that the property is zoned 0-2,the site plan review
process applies for any development.
The 124,155 square foot,5-story Dillard's office building islocatedwithintheeastone-half of the property,with parking
along its south,east and west sides.A total of 541 parking
spaces exists on the site.The site is heavily landscaped.
Access to the property is gained by utilizing two (2)existing
drives from Cantrell Road.
On February 17,2000,the Planning Commission approved a site
plan for this property.The approved plan included a 181,858
square foot building addition to the west side of the existing
building and an increase in parking to 834 spaces.The parkingareawestoftheofficebuildingwasapprovedasathree-leveltiereddesign.On-grade parking along the west side of the
building is to be tiered down to a mid-level parking structure,
March 8,20~
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-5098-C
which is tiered down to an on grade parking area along the west
and south property lines.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to revise the previously approvedsiteplanbyaddingupper-level parking above the mid-level
parking area.This new level of parking will match up to
the on-grade parking along the office building's west side.
The new proposed level of parking will result in a net
increase of 126 spaces.This is the only proposed changetothepreviouslyapprovedsiteplan.
Please see the attached site plan and south propertyelevationfortheproposedlocationoftheupperlevel
parking structure.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site contains the existing Dillard's office building
and parking areas.The previously approved building and
parking expansions are currently under construction.
There is a mixture of commercial and industrial uses to the
west along the north side of Cantrell Road.The Cathedral
School development (currently under construction)is
located to the south across Cantrell Road,with 0-3 zoned
property to the east.The Arkansas River is located
immediately north of the site.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received one (1)
informational phone call regarding this development.The
Downtown and Capitol View-Stifft Station Neighborhood
Associations were notified of the public hearing.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is
damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
2.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
2
March 8,
20'UBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-5098-C
Entergy:No Comment received.
AEGCLA:No Comment.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:No Comment.
Fire Department:No Comment.
Count Plannin :No Comment.
CATA:Site is on bus route ¹21 and has no effect on bus
radius,turnout and route.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
No Comment.
Landsca e Issues:
No Comment.
G.SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(FEBRUARY 15,2001)
Larry Blunt was present,representing the application.Staff reviewed the previously approved site plan with the
Committee and the change in the west parking area that the
applicant proposes to make.
Staff noted that there were no outstanding issues with the
revised site plan to discuss.Neither Mr.Blunt nor the
committee had any additional comments.
Therefore,the committee forwarded the revised zoning site
plan to the full Commission for final action.
H.ANALYSIS:
As noted in paragraph A.,the applicant is proposing to
revise the previously approved zoning site plan for this
property by adding an upper-level parking structure above
the approved mid-level parking structure.This will result
in a net increase of 126 parking spaces.As shown on the
3
March 8,20
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-5098-C
attached south property elevation,the proposed upper-level
structure will be at the same elevation as the on-grade
parking along the west side of the office building.
The minimum number of parking spaces required for an office
development of this size is 683 spaces.The total parking
proposed with revisions is 960 spaces.As justification
for the total number of parking spaces,the applicant
previously noted that there will be a total of 987
employees after the building expansion.Although rarely,if ever,are all of the employees at the site at any given
time.Staff supports the parking plan as proposed.
Otherwise,there should be no outstanding issues associated
with the revised site plan.The proposed upper-level
parking addition should have no adverse impact on the
general area.
I .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the revised zoning site plansubjecttocompliancewiththePublicNorksrequirements as
noted in paragraph D.of this report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 8,2001)
The staff presented a positive recommendation on this
application,as there were no further issues for resolution.
There were no objectors to this matter.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion
within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.
A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by a vote
of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
4
March 8,20
ITEM NO.:8 FILE NO.:Z-4411-A
NAME:Pleasant Ridge Square —Long-Form PCD —Time Extension
LOCATION:South side of Cantrell Road at Southridge Drive
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Schickel Development Co.White-Daters and Associates
2723 Foxcroft,Ste.201 24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock,AR 72207 Little Rock,AR 72223
AREA:12.83 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:PCD ALLOWED USES:Commercial/Office
PROPOSED USE:Commercial/Office
STAFF NOTE:
On advisement from the City Attorney's Office,staff has
determined that the Pleasant Ridge Square —Long-Form PCD is
currently in effect and has not expired,and that the applicant
may request the final plan review (staff-level).This
determination is based on the fact that a grading/excavation
permit was obtained,site work was done and two (2)buildings
previously on the site were demolished.
Therefore,the applicant requests that the time extension be
withdrawn from the agenda.Staff supports the withdrawal as
requested.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 8,2001)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a
letter on February 12,2001 requesting that this item be
withdrawn.Staff supported the withdrawal request.
March 8,
20'UBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4411-A
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion
within the Consent Agenda for withdrawal.A motion to thateffectwasmade.The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays
and 2 absent.
2
March 8,
20'TEM
NO.:9 FILE NO.:Z-5340
NAME:Investment Motorcar Corporation —Short-Form PCD
Revocation
LOCATION:2905 Cantrell Road
DEVELOPER:
Riverside Properties,LLC
124 W.Capitol,Suite 1590
Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:0.5 acre NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:PCD ALLOWED USES:Auto dealership
PROPOSED USE:Commercial
A.BACKGROUND:
On August 21,1990,the Board of Directors passed Ordinance
No.15,920 rezoning this property from C-3 to PCD to allow
an auto dealership.The approved PCD allowed small areasofoutsidevehiculardisplayaswellasasmallserviceand
auto detail operation within the existing buildings.The
auto dealership recently vacated the property and was
replaced with an antique mall,an entirely enclosed
commercial operation.
B.PROPOSAL:
The property owner,Riverside Properties,LLC,submitted alettertostaffonJanuary4,2001,requesting that the PCD
be officially revoked and the property revert to its
original C-3 zoning.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
The Capitol View Stifft Station,Hillcrest and Cedar Hill
Terrace Neighborhood Associations were notified of the
revocation request.Staff has received no comment from theassociations,as of this writing.
March 8,20.
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-5340
D.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the PCD be revoked;that Ordinance
No.15,920 be repealed and that the property be returned toC-3 General Commercial District as previously existed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 8,2001)
The staff presented a positive recommendation on this
application,as there were no further issues for resolution.
There were no objectors to this matter.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion
within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.
A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by a vote
of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
2
March 8,2001
ITEM NO.:10
NAME:Master Street Plan Amendment
LOCATION:Master Street Plan Revision on the Kanis Road Corridor
SOURCE:Developers and Public Works Staff
~Bk
The Public Works Staff requests a deferral of this item to the April 19,2001 Planning
Commission hearing because of an upcoming hearing before the Pulaski County Planning Board
on March 29,2001.Part of the proposed amendment falls within the extraterritorial limit,where
county jurisdiction overlaps City jurisdiction.Staff also requires more time to perform traffic
counts,which are currently underway and showing the need for staff to define precise limits for
the proposed amendment.
Plannin Commission Action:March S 2001
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant requested that MSP Kanis goad proposal
be deferred to the April 19,2001,meeting.Extra time was needed for Public Works staffers
to present the proposal to the Pulaski County Planning Board meeting of March 29,2001,
and to perform additional traffic counts.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the consent
Agenda for deferral to the April 19,2001 agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The
motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays,and 2 absent.
I
1
PL
A
N
N
I
N
G
CO
M
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
VO
T
E
RE
C
O
R
D
DA
T
E
)
ME
M
B
E
R
"I
RE
C
T
O
R
,
BI
L
L
DO
W
N
I
N
G
,
RI
C
H
A
R
D
EA
R
N
E
S
T
,
HU
G
H
NU
N
N
L
E
Y
,
OB
R
A
Y
BE
R
R
Y
,
CR
A
I
G
AD
C
O
C
K
,
PA
M
RA
H
M
A
N
,
MI
Z
A
N
/
LO
W
R
Y
,
BO
B
AL
L
E
N
,
FR
E
D
,
JR
.
FA
U
S
T
,
JU
D
I
T
H
MU
S
E
,
RO
H
N
'R
EG
-
U
~
K
R
„
g
ME
M
B
E
R
pZ
.
0
~'
~
r
RE
C
T
O
R
,
BI
L
L
DO
W
N
I
N
G
,
RI
C
H
A
R
D
EA
R
N
E
S
T
,
HU
G
H
)
V
0
~
NU
N
N
L
E
Y
,
OB
R
A
Y
te
l
BE
R
R
Y
,
CR
A
I
G
o
~
v
AD
C
O
C
K
,
PA
M
e
~
0
~
RA
H
M
A
N
,
MI
Z
A
N
0
e
LO
W
R
Y
,
BO
B
~
e
AL
L
E
N
,
FR
E
D
,
JR
.
v
~
0
0
FA
U
S
T
,
JU
D
I
T
H
tj
i
i
e
MU
S
E
,
RO
H
N
e
e
~
u
Me
e
t
i
n
g
Ad
j
o
u
r
n
e
d
X~
~~
P.
M
.
+A
Y
E
NA
Y
E
~A
B
S
E
N
T
~A
B
S
T
A
I
N
~I
R
E
C
U
S
E
March 8,2001
SUBDIVISION MINUTES
There being no further business before the Commission,the
meeting adjourned at 5:30 p.m.
Date
Chairman cre ary