pc_03 30 2000subLITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION HEARING
SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD
MARCH 30,2000
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 February 17,2000 and
March 2,2000 Meetings.The minutes were approvedasmailed.
III.Members Present:Hugh EarnestBillRector
Bob Lowry
Craig Berry
Pam Adcock
Rohn Muse
Judith Faust
Herb Hawn
Richard Downing
Members Absent:Mizan Rahman
Obray Nunnley
City Attorney:Stephen Giles
LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBDIVISION AGENDA
MARCH 30,2000
I.DEFERRED ITEMS:
A.Claremore Court —Preliminary Plat (S-1272)
B.Bed and Breakfast Inn —Short-Form PD-C (Z-6809)
C.Summit Mall —Revised PCD (Z-4923-A)
D.Parkway Center —Subdivision Site Plan Review (S-1271)
E.LUOO-18-02 —A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Ellis
Mountain Planning District from Office to CommercialforthesouthwestcornerofAtkinsRoadandWest
Markham Street
F.Atkins Road Partnership —Short-Form PCD (Z-3292-D)
G.First Assembly of God —Conditional Use Permit
(Z-2120-A)
H.Barrow Road Church of Christ —Revised C.U.P.(Z-5966-B)
I.Greater Center Star Baptist Church —Revised C.U.P.
(Z-4420-B)
II.PRELIMINARY PLATS:
1.Colonel Glenn Commercial —Preliminary Plat (S-1240)
Time Extension
2.Mabelvale Business Park —Revised Preliminary Plat(S-993-F)
3.Hastings Industrial Park —Preliminary Plat (S-1076-A)
4.Hughey'Replat —Preliminary Plat (S-1275)
5.Crestwood Corporate Center —Preliminary Plat (S-1276)
5.1.Crestwood Corporate Center —Revised POD
(Z-4403-F)
Agenda,Page Two
III.PLANNED ZONING DEVELOPMENTS:
6.Folkner —Short-Form PCD (Z-6830)
7.Trammell —Short-Form PD-0 (Z-6831)
8.Oak Place Court —Short-Form PRD (Z-6832)
IV.SITE PLAN REVIEW:
9.The Villas at Hickory Creek —Subdivision Site Plan
(S-1135-B)
10.Chenal Place Shopping Center —Revised Zoning Site
Plan (Z-5802-C)
V.CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS:
11.Southwest Christian Academy —Revised Conditional Use
Permit (Z-5786-B)
12.Boone Day Care —Conditional Use Permit (Z-6817)
13.Harold Hunter —Conditional Use Permit (Z-6821)
14.Muslim Community Center —Conditional Use Permit
(Z-6823)
15.Chalamont Park —Conditional Use Permit (Z-6825)
16.Melton Micro-brewery —Conditional Use Permit (Z-6827)
VI.OTHER MATTERS:
17.Z-6828 Northwest corner of 0-3 to 0-2
Centerview Drive and
Peachtree Drive
17.1.Hilton Inn —Conditional Use Permit (Z-6828-A)
18.McAlmont Street to McMath Avenue -Street Name Change(G-25-176)
19.Kinder Morgan Power Plant Water Main Extension
(G-40-17)
Pu
b
ic
He
a
r
i
n
g
te
m
s
1-
4
3
0
«
«N
«
/
3
'L
j
E
16
RI
V
E
R
g«
4
PR
I
D
E
VA
L
L
E
Y
GT
Y
UM
I
T
S
4
a
1-
6
Ul
IS
CO
I-
6
3
0
13
D
IS
12
T
H
9
E.
6
T
H
g
%x
«
18
H
4/
~
/
ID
CI
m
DA
M
//
N
5.
1
RO
O
S
E
V
E
L
T
EF
I
I-
4
3
6
RO
O
S
E
l
l
E
L
T
7'
7
14
WG
LA
W
S
O
N
C
pC
K
FR
A
2
I
E
R
PI
K
E
1
N
12
2E
U
B
E
R
23
43
CA
I
R
O
E43
g
O'
D
O
D
D
65
T
H
«6
5
T
H
RA
I
N
E
S
+
VA
I
L
E
Y
CI
T
Y
UM
I
T
S
M
65
8.
1
8
TB
4
DI
X
O
N
BA
S
E
U
N
E
I
i
DI
X
O
N
36
5
HA
R
ER
P
(L
OT
T
E
R
MA
B
E
L
V
A
L
E
MA
B
E
L
V
A
L
E
CU
T
O
F
F
SL
I
N
K
E
R
CR
E
E
K
WE
S
T
K
5
VI
N
S
O
N
I
11
DR
E
H
E
R
4„
C
CF
F
I
AL
E
X
A
N
D
E
R
Q
CE
Y
E
R
SP
C
S
~4
,
C
CF
~i
s
CU
T
O
F
F
IW
CU
T
O
F
F
4'
L
AS
H
E
R
CI
T
Y
LI
M
I
T
S
e
PR
A
T
T
I
45
T
H
Su
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
Ag
e
n
d
a
Ma
r
c
h
30
,
2
0
0
0
March 30,ZC50
ITEM NO.:A FILE NO.:S-1272
NAME:Claremore Court —Preliminary Plat
LOCATION:West end of Claremore Court,at Beasley Drive
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Norman Holcomb McGetrick &McGetrick
2311 Biscayne Dr.319 E.Markham St.,Ste.202
Little Rock,AR 72227 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:1.23 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:7 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:MF-6
PLANNING DISTRICT:2
CENSUS TRACT:22.04
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None recpxes ted.
A.PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to subdivide 1.23 acres into seven
(7)lots to allow for the development of single family
residences.The applicant proposes to access the lots byutilizinganexistingpavedaccesseasementfromClaremore
Drive.All of the lots will be final platted at the same
time.
The property is zoned MF-6,which does not allow single-
family residential development.The applicant will need to
rezone the property to R-2.
March 30,c.&0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:A (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1272
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(FEBRUARY 17,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had submitted a
letter requesting that this item be deferred to the March 30,
2000 agenda.Staff supported the deferral request.With a vote
of 9 ayes,0 nays,and 2 absent,the Commission voted to waive
their bylaws and accept the deferral request being made less than
five (5)working days prior to the public hearing.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion
within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the March 30,2000
agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by
a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a
letter on March 22,2000 requesting that this application be
deferred to the May ll,2000 agenda.Staff noted that the
applicant,requesting a third deferral,would be required to
renotify abutting property owners.Staff supported the deferral
request.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the
May ll,2000 agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The
motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
5
March 30,'O
ITEM NO.:B FILE NO.:Z-6809
NAME:Bed and Breakfast Inn —Short-Form PD-C
LOCATION:Southwest corner of West 7 and Cedar Streets
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Brad Bell White-Daters and Associates
4112 "A"Street 401 S.Victory StreetLittleRock,AR 72205 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:0.83 acre NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:R-5 ALLOWED USES:Multifamily Residential and
&0-3 Office
PROPOSED USE:Hotel
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone the property at the
southwest corner of West 7 and Cedar Streets from R-5/0-3
to PD-C to allow for the construction of a hotel.The
proposed hotel will consist of 26,426 square feet (heated
and cooled area)and 60 rooms.The proposed building will
be a three-story structure with an overall height of
approximately 44 feet from finished grade to the peak of
the roof (approximately 35 feet to mid-roof line.).
The proposed site plan includes a parking area for 34vehicleswithintheeastportionofthepropertyand along
the north side of the building.The applicant has noted anintenttolease32parkingspacesfromUAMS,in order to
comply with the typical ordinance minimum for a 60 roomhotel(66 parking spaces typically required by ordinance).
The applicant is proposing two (2)access points from West
7 Street.The westernmost drive is proposed to be an"entry only"drive as requested by Public Works.A 2 foot
March 30,~JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6809
by 3 foot "entry only"sign is proposed at this drivelocation.
The proposed building,drives and parking areas are noted
on the attached site plan.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There are two (2)existing multifamily structures and
parking areas on the site,which will be removed with the
proposed construction.The UAMS campus is located to the
north (across West 7 Street)and west.Interstate 630isimmediatelysouth,with two (2)office buildings acrossI-630.There are single family residential structures to
the northeast,across Cedar Street.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received no neighborhood
comment.The Capitol View Stifft Station,Forest Hills and
Pine to Woodrow Neighborhood Associations were notified of
the public hearing.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.West 7'nd Cedar Streets are classified on the Master
Street Plan as commercial streets.Dedicate right-of-
way to 30 feet from centerline.
2.A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required
at the corner of West 7'nd Cedar Streets.
3.Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned
development.
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.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the
Little Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to
Traffic Engineering.
8.Cedar Street has a 1996 average traffic count of 5,100.
2
March 30,~JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6809
9.Driveways shall conform to Sec.3-210 or Ordinance
18,031.Redesign west drive to entry only.
10.Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway
right-of-way from AHTD,District VI.
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
AP&L:There is an existing primary circuit located on the
north and east sides of the existing buildings.
Relocation or removal cost may be incurred by the
developer.15 foot easement requested.Contact Jerome
Strickland at 569-5448 for details.
Arkla:No Comment.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment.
Water:There appears to be a conflict with a 12"water
main in Elm Street (abandoned).Any required relocation
of water facilities will be at developer's expense.
On-site fire protection may be required.
Fire Department:No Comment.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Comment received.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
This request is located in the I-630 Planning District.The
Land Use Plan shows Public Institutional for this location.If the proposed use is not a public use,Staff considers
that proposed use to be consistent if it fits the adjoining
land use categories.The proposed zone changes from R-5
Urban Residential and 0-3 General Office to a Planned
Office District for a motel is consistent with the
adjoining Land Use Plan categories of Mixed Use and Office.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:The Woodruff
Neighborhood Area Plan recommends land uses that are
consistent with the Public Institutional category west of
Cedar Street.Other goals include reviewing neighborhood
zoning for appropriateness to preserve the character of the
neighborhood's community and to work with UAMS to stabilize
the western edge of the neighborhood.
3
March 30,'O
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6809
Landsca e Issues:
Areas set aside for buffers meet with ordinance
requirements.
The proposed areas set aside for interior landscaping fall
short of the 954 square feet required by the Landscape
Ordinance by 438 square feet.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan and additional
information to staff on February 2,2000.The revised plan
changes the parking design and shows a dumpster area (theoriginalsiteplanhadabasementparkingarea,which has
been eliminated).Additional interior landscaping has been
shown.
As noted in paragraph A of this report,the applicant is
proposing 34 on-site parking spaces.The ordinance would
typically require 66 on-site parking spaces for a 60 roomhotel.The applicant has noted that 32 spaces will be
leased from a nearby UAMS parking lot.The applicant needstoprovidestaffwithanexecutedleasefortheadditional
parking.
Also noted in paragraph A,the applicant has shown a 2 foot
by 3 foot "entry only"sign at the westernmost drive.Thisistheonlysignshownonthesiteplan.The applicant
needs to provide staff with the additional sign details.
Along with the revised site plan,the applicant submitted a
north/south section of the property showing the existing
and finished grades.The section notes that the site will
be lowered approximately 10 feet from the existing
elevation at the curb line of West 7 Street to a retaining
wall located on the south side of the building (approximate
distance of 125 feet).The retaining wall on the south
side of the building will be approximately 10 feet in
height.
Otherwise,to staff'knowledge there are no additional
outstanding issues associated with this site plan.With an
approved signage plan and executed lease for the additional
parking,the proposed PD-C rezoning should have no adverseeffectonthegeneralarea.
4
March 30,~JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6809
H.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the PD-C rezoning subject to
the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D,E and F of this report.2.The applicant must submit an executed lease agreement for
the additional parking on the UAMS property.3.The applicant must provide sign details to staff.4.The dumpster must be screened on three (3)sides with an
8 foot opaque fence or wall.5.Any site lighting should be low-level and directed away
from adjacent property.6.The westernmost access drive from West 7 Street must be
an "entry only"drive.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(JANUARY 27,2000)
Tim Daters was present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the proposed PD-C site plan,noting that
information on signage and north/south sections needed to be
provided.Staff also noted that if the applicant wished to
receive credit for parking spaces on the UAMS property,a
written agreement from UAMS needed to be provided.
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.It was
noted that the west drive needed to be an entry drive only.
This issue was briefly discussed.
The landscape requirements were also discussed.It was noted
that additional interior landscaping needed to be provided.Mr.
Daters noted that the required interior landscaping would be
provided.
There being no further issues for discussion,the Committee
forwarded the PD-C to the full Commission for resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(FEBRUARY 17,2000)
Tim Daters and Brad Bell were present,representing the
application.Staff briefly described the PD-C rezoning,with a
recommendation of approval with conditions.Staff noted that
the issues relating to signage and parking had been resolved.
5
March 30,~JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6809
Staff noted that two (2)ground-mounted signs were shown on thesiteplan(a 4 foot high,24 square foot monument-type sign
along West 7 Street and a 30 foot high,160 square foot maximum
ground-mounted sign at the southwest corner of the property).Staff also noted that a letter from UAMS had been received,
agreeing to lease the applicant 30 parking spaces.Staff noted
that a building permit for the project would not be issued until
a executed lease for the parking is submitted to staff.
Antoinette Fiduccia,of the Capital View Stifft Station
Neighborhood Association,addressed the Commission with
concerns.She stated that she had a concern with the parkingissue.She stated that UAMS is currently parking on the
residential streets in the area.She also stated that she did
not want additional parking lots along Cedar Street.She noted
that there are two (2)other hotels in the area that she would
like to see renovated.She concluded by stating that UAMS could
use this property for office uses.
Tim Daters addressed the Commission in support of the
application.He briefly described the property and the proposed
project.He stated that he was not familiar with the parking
problem on the UAMS campus.
Robert Hamilton,of the Capitol View Stifft Station Neighborhood
Association,addressed the Commission.He stated that he was
not opposed to the hotel use,but he wished to work with the
applicant to resolve the parking issue.
Brad Bell addressed the Commission in support of the
application.He addressed the parking issue.He noted that
there is ample parking on the UAMS campus.He stated that the
parking for the hotel will not effect the neighborhood.
Mr.Bell stated that there had been 90 police calls to this
property over the last two (2)years,and that eliminating the
existing apartment buildings will be on asset to the
neighborhood.He noted that renovation of the two (2)existing
hotels in the area was not an option.
Mr.Daters noted that UAMS had declined to purchase this
property in the past.
Commissioner Hawn objected to Mr.Bell's attitude toward the
parking issue and the neighborhood.He asked about traffic flow
to and from the property.
6
March 30,~JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6809
Mr.Daters described the traffic flow with respect to the two
(2)proposed drives.There was additional discussion concerning
the traffic circulation issue.
Bob Turner,of Public Works,addressed the traffic circulation
issue.He described how the proposed drives would function.
Commissioner Muse commented on the 1996 traffic count as
provided by Public Works.He stated that UAMS had grown since
1996.
Mr.Turner stated that the 1996 count was the most recent.He
agreed that traffic has increased in this area since then.
Commissioner Muse made additional comments related to traffic
and parking.He noted that he was in favor of deferring the
application so the applicant could meet with the neighborhood.
Commissioner Lowery asked if a new traffic count could be doneiftheitemweredeferred.
Mr.Turner stated that a traffic count could be done within a
week.
Commissioner Earnest stated that he viewed the proposed hotel as
an improvement to the area.He noted that the hotel could act
as a buffer between the neighborhood and UAMS,which would
benefit the neighborhood and UAMS long-term.
Commissioner Rahman stated that he had a problem with the
proposed lease for additional parking.
Chairman Berry referred to the previously approved PCD at the
corner of Kavanaugh Blvd.and Spruce Street,which has leased
parking.
Commissioner Nunnley asked if the applicant would consider
deferring the application.
Mr.Daters noted that he would defer the application and meet
with the neighborhood.
Commissioner Nunnley asked how many hotel rooms the parking on
the site plan would serve.
7
March 30,c.~0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6809
Jim Lawson,Director of Planning and Development,noted that the
parking would serve approximately 31 rooms.
There was a discussion of a possible deferral of the item.Mr.
Lawson suggested deferral to the March 30 agenda.
The Planning Commission asked that a new traffic count be done
by Public Works.
Commissioner Downing asked about vehicle circulation in this
area.This issue was briefly discussed.
The Commission took a brief recess at the request of the
television crew.
After the recess,Mr.Daters formally requested a deferral to
the March 30,2000 agenda.
A motion was made to defer the application to the March 30,2000
agenda.The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and
2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Tim Daters and John Seiter were present,representing the
application.Staff briefly described the proposed PD-C,with a
recommendation of approval with conditions.Staff noted that
the Capitol View Stifft Station Neighborhood Association had
submitted two letters with specific concerns,and that the
applicant had received a copy of the letters.
Bob Turner,Director of Public Works,presented the Commission
with the recent traffic counts for the area.In response to a
question from the Commission,Mr.Turner noted that the currenttrafficcountswereanincreasefromthepreviouscounts.
Tim Daters addressed the Commission in support of the
application.He stated that he had met with the neighborhoodassociation.Mr.Daters noted the following in response to the
neighborhood concern:
1.A long-tenn lease for the parking would be executed prior to
a building permit application.
2.Landscape screening would be installed between the parkingareaandCedarStreet.
8
March 30,c &0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:B (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6809
3.The maximum area for the proposed ground-mounted sign would
be reduced to 130 square feet.
In response to a question from the Commission,staff noted that
the applicant had requested a ground-mounted sign with a maximum
height of 30 feet and a maximum area of 160 square feet.
Commissioner Lowry asked Mr.Daters about the terms of the leaseforparking.Mr.Daters responded that the lease would be for a
minimum of 20 years.
Commissioner Muse asked about the sign type.Mr.Daters statedthatitwouldbea30foothighpylonsignandwouldbelighted.
Commissioner Berry suggested that the hotel would be primarily
supported by the VA and UAMS,and a minimal amount of signage
would be needed.Mr.Daters noted that there were franchise
requirements for signage.This issue was briefly discussed.
John Seiter noted that the franchise required that there be a
ground-mounted sign.Commissioner Berry suggested that thefranchiserequirementmaynotbeappropriateforthissituation.
Commissioner Muse asked if anyone from the neighborhoodassociationwishedtorespond.There was no one from theassociationpresent.
Commissioner Lowry asked that a condition be placed on the
application that the sign have a maximum height of 30 feet and a
maximum area of 130 square feet or the minimum size sign allowed
by the franchise,whichever is less.This issue was brieflydiscussed.
There was a motion to approve the PD-C subject to the conditions
as noted by staff,the additional conditions offered by the
applicant and the condition on signage as noted in the previous
paragraph.
Commissioner Earnest commented on the fact that the applicant
must have a long-term lease on the parking prior to a building
permit being issued.Staff noted that the lease must be
submitted prior to a building permit being issued and that thefranchiserequirementsforsignagemustalsobesubmitted.
The previous motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and
2 absent.
9
March 30,~JO
ITEM NO.:C FILE NO.:Z-4923-A
NAME:Summit Mall —Revised PCD
LOCATION:Southwest corner of Shackleford Road and
Interstate 430
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Summit Mall Co.,LLC McGetrick and McGetrick
&Construction Developers,Inc.219 East Markham St.,Ste.202
c/o Simon Development Group Little Rock,AR 72201
115 West Washington Street
Indianapolis,IN 46204
AREA:97 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:PCD ALLOWED USES:Commercial/Office Mixed
Development
PROPOSED USE:Commercial
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
BACKGROUND:
On December 1,1987,the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No.
15,385 rezoning this 97 acre property from R-2/0-2 to PCD,
establishing the Summit Mall —Long-Form PCD.The approved site
plan included a 975,000 square foot shopping mall,three (3)office buildings totaling 335,000 square feet,a 190,000 square
foot hotel (250 rooms)and two (2)restaurant lease parcels
totaling 20,000 square feet.A total of 5,945 parking spaces
was proposed,some of which were located in a parking deck for
the proposed office buildings.
The previously approved PCD has received several time extensions
over the years and currently expires on March 18,2000.
March 30,~JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4923-A
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to revise the previously approved
PCD with an entirely new site development plan.The new
proposed site plan consists of the following:
1.An 878,000 shopping mall located within the north one-
half of the property.2.An 85,700 square foot,4,238 seat movie theatre located
near the southwest corner of the property.3.Three (3)retail/office buildings with a total area of
77,400 square feet,located between the mall building and
the theatre.4.Four (4)lease parcels/restaurant sites (32,000 squarefeettotal)at the southeast corner of the property.5.A lease/out parcel at the northeast corner of the
property labeled as office/hotel/retail.6.4,734 parking spaces.7.Three (3)access points from Shackleford Road.
The proposed buildings,parking areas,drives and
landscaped areas are noted on the attached site plan.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The proposed site is undeveloped and heavily wooded,with
varying degrees of slope throughout the property.Interstate 430 is located immediately north and west of the
property,with Shackleford Road along the eastern boundary.
Camp Aldersgate is located across Shackleford Road to theeast.The property immediately south is also vacant and
wooded.
There is a Comcast Cable office building and tower along
the west side of Shackleford Road which is surrounded bytheproposedmallsite.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received comments and
concerns from the Camp Aldersgate representatives.The
John Barrow,Sandpiper and Sewer District 5147 Neighborhood
Associations have been notified of the public hearing.
D .ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Provide Site Traffic Impact Analysis.
2
March 30,~JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4923-A
2.Redesign site to include a ring road built to commercial
street standards for access to commercial activity
around the site.This road should have access points
designed along the route with drive spacing at not less
than 250 feet on center.
3.Analyze the Shackleford/I-430 interchange capacity with
and without development traffic to verify adequacy of
the interchange and recommend improvements due to
development.
4.Verify with plan and profile that adequate sight
distance is provided at all points of access.
5.Verify with capacity analysis that all site
intersections will operate at a minimum level of service
of "D"during the peak hour of the generator.
6.Provide preliminary arterial lighting plan for
Shackleford Road adjacent to site.
7.NPDES permit from ADEQ,including Wetland Clearance will
be required.
8.Shackleford Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as
a minor arterial.A dedication of right-of-way to 45
feet from centerline is required.
9.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.
10.Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
these street including 5 foot sidewalks with planned
development.
11.All internal streets must be designed to commercial
street standards.
12 .Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
13.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
14.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities
are required.
15.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the
Little Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to
Traffic Engineering.
16.Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway
right-of-way from AHTD,District VI.
17.Existing topographic information at maximum five foot
contour interval 100 base flood elevation is required.
18.A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec.29-186(e)is
required.
19.A Grading Permit per Secs.29-186(c)and (d)is
required.
3
March 30,~.JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4923-A
20.A Grading Permit for Special Flood Hazard Area per Sec.
8-283 is required.
21.A Development Permit for Flood Hazard Area per Sec.8-
283 is required.
22.Contact the ADPC&E for approval prior to start work is
required.
23.Contact the USACE-LRD for approval prior to start of
work is required.
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main relocation and extension required
with easements.
AP&L:Underground easements will have to be negotiated at
a later date when transformers are located to make a loop
through the shopping center.
Arkla:No Comment.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:On site fire protection will be required.An
acreage charge of $150/acre,plus a development fee based
on the size of connections,will apply in addition to the
normal connection charges.
Fire Department:Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752 for
information regarding turning radii and fire hydrant
placement.
Count Plannin :No Comment.
CATA:CATA Route ¹3 serves very near this site.This
location is in a key area for transit.CATA would like to
discuss opportunities with the developer to incorporate a
bus pullout(s)on the periphery of the site.Better
pedestrian links/stronger connections within the site need
to be established.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
This request is in the I-430 Planning District.The Land
Use Plan currently shows Mixed Office and Commercial.The
revision of an existing PCD is consistent with the current
land use category.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:This area is not
covered by a city recognized neighborhood plan.
4
March 30,~JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4923-A
Landsca e Issues:
Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with
ordinance requirements.
Because this property has significant variations in its
grade elevations,cross sections showing the proposed
method of treatment will be necessary.
Since this site is currently covered in trees,the City
Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many of the
existing trees as feasible.This includes preserving trees
within the street buffers.Extra credit toward fulfilling
Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when
preserving trees of 6 inch caliper or larger.
G.ANALYSIS:
As noted in the Subdivision Committee comments,a great
deal of information regarding this application is needed bystaff.Some of the additional information requested bystaffattheSubdivisionCommitteemeetingisasfollows:
1.Discuss phasing plan.Show proposed phasing on site
plan.
2.Provide grading plan with respect to the proposed
phases.Note areas within the site where existing trees
will be preserved.3.Discuss street buffer treatment along I-430 and
Shackleford Road.
4.Note proposed sign location(s)and provide details.5.Show dumpster locations.
6.Provide north/south and east/west sections and
elevations.
7.Show retaining walls on the site plan and providedetails.
8.There should be no grading or site work prior to
obtaining a building permit.
9.Staff has concerns with the proposed lease parcels at
the southeast corner of the property.The previously
approved site plan included only two (2)lease
parcels/restaurant sites,one (1)on each side of the
Comcast property.Provide proposed uses for the lease
parcels.
5
March 30,~JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4923-A
10.Provide definite proposed use for the lease parcel at
the northeast corner of the property.11.Provide a very detailed cover letter regarding this
project (phases,proposed uses,etc.)and addressing the
design features as offered by the previous developer and
the conditions agreed to with the previous approval.
12.Define proposal.Is the proposed revised PCD site plan
requested for a three (3)year approval?Include this
information in the cover letter.
These are issues which need to be addressed by the
applicant in addition to the Public Works,Utility,Fire
Department,CATA and Landscape requirements and comments.
One of the main concerns that staff has with the proposed
project relates to the phasing of the plan with respect to
the overall site grading (cuts and fill,etc.).The
existing contour plan as submitted by the applicant notes
that the existing high point of the property is located
within the northeast one-quarter of the property and the
lowest point within the site is near the southwest corner
of the property.The proposed contour plan shows that the
high point of the property will be lowered approximately 75
to 80 feet and the low point (location of theatre building)
will be raised approximately 60 feet.An overall plan for
the site phasing and grading needs to be resolved,to
include information on street buffer treatment and tree
preservation.The effect of the proposed development on
the adjacent property to the south and the Camp Aldersgate
property across Shackleford Road to the east should also be
discussed and resolved.
The Subdivision Committee determined at its meeting on
December 9,1999 that the applicant should make a
preliminary presentation of this item to the full
Commission on January 6,2000.This will allow the other
commissioners to express concerns that they might have with
this proposed development.Then the item would need to be
deferred to the February 17,2000 agenda to allow the
applicant to respond to the issues and concerns,and
present additional information to staff and the Subdivision
Committee (January 27,2000).It was also discussed by the
Subdivision Committee that a six (6)month time extension
of the previously approved PCD would be reasonable.This
6
March 30,'O
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4923-A
is based on the fact that a deferral as requested by staff
and the Subdivision Committee would cause this issue to
extend beyond the March 18,2000 expiration date.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends deferral of this application to the
February 17,2000 Planning Commission agenda.
Staff also recommends that the expiration date of the
previously approved PCD be extended six (6)months to
September 18,2000.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(DECEMBER 9,1999)
Pat McGetrick and Rod Vosper were present,representing the
application.Staff described the proposed revised PCD site
plan,noting that a great deal of additional information was
needed.Staff noted that this item was a candidate for
deferral.
There was a discussion of the project which included topics
relating to phasing,grading,parking standards and the
conditions approved with the previous site plan.It was noted
that better pedestrian circulation needed to be provided between
the mall building and the lease parcel at the northeast corner
of the property.
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.It was
noted that a traffic impact analysis was needed.Phasing of
street improvements was also discussed.Public Works
representatives noted phased development to include street
improvements could be supported.The grading of the site and
cuts into the hillside were also discussed.
The Committee ultimately decided that the applicant should make
a preliminary presentation to the full Commission on January 6,
2000 in order to determine what other issues commissioners might
have.Then the item would be deferred to the February 17,2000
agenda to allow time for the applicant to address staff and
Commission concerns and present the plan back to the Subdivision
Committee on January 27,2000.
7
March 30,~JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4923-A
It was also determined that a six (6)month time extension on
the previously approved PCD would be appropriate,given the fact
that a deferral would cause this issue to extend beyond the
March 18,2000 expiration date.The Committee then forwarded
the revised PCD to the full Commission for preliminary
discuss3.on.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 6,2000)
Pat McGetrick and Rod Vosper were present,representing the
application.Staff explained that as a result of the
Subdivision Committee review of this item,the applicant was to
make a preliminary presentation of the revised PCD at this
meeting and that the item should be deferred to the February 17,
2000 agenda.Staff noted that there was much additional
information which was needed.Staff also noted that since the
application needed to be deferred,an extension of time for the
previously approved PCD was in order.The previously approved
PCD expires on March 18,2000.
Commissioner Rahman asked that the time extension be consideredfirst.There was a brief discussion regarding the time
extension issue.
Jim Lawson,Director of Planning and Development,explained the
time extension issue.There was a motion to grant a six (6)
month extension for the previously approved PCD (new expiration
date-September 18,2000).The motion passed with a vote of 9
ayes,1 nay and 1 absent.
Commissioner Nunnley asked the purpose of the preliminary
presentation.
Staff explained that the preliminary presentation was to
determine if the Commission had any additional concerns that
have not been addressed by staff.
Chair Adcock expressed concern with having the preliminary
presentation at this time.
Mr.Lawson noted that the Camp Aldersgate representatives had
concerns with the proposed development that needed to be worked
out.
8
March 30,~JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4923-A
Commissioner Rector stated that the applicant should work with
Camp Aldersgate and address any concerns.
There was a motion to defer the application to the February 17,
2000 agenda.There was a brief discussion of the deferral.The
motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(JANUARY 27,2000)
Pat McGetrick,Chuck Synder,Ernie Peters,Greg Simmons and
Merle Seamon were present,representing the application.The
applicants briefly reviewed the revised site plan with the
Committee,noting that the most significant change in the plan
was within the southeast corner of the property.The drive
location was revised with the restaurants being on the south
side of the drive and a landscaped lake area between the drive
and the Comcast property.The applicants then discussed the
phasing plan for the property.The new phasing plan limits the
total clearing and excavation to be done with Phase I (cinema
building and restaurants).
There was a brief discussion regarding the amount of cut andfillthatwouldbedone.Mr.McGetrick noted that the maximum
cut would be approximately 110 feet at the highest point.He
also noted that the largest amount of fill would be
approximately 45 feet near the southwest corner of the property.
Issues relating to grading and retaining wall construction were
briefly discussed.
Bob Turner,of Public Works,noted that the applicant had
submitted a traffic study.He noted that Public Works had
concerns related to the traffic study and was not in a position
at this time to support the study.There was a general
discussion of this issue.The applicant stated that the
Commissioners would be provided with a copy of the study,most
likely when completed to Public Works satisfaction.
The applicant presented cross-sections of the proposed project.
These were briefly discussed.
Frank Riggins noted that Camp Aldersgate was in support of the
revised site plan,but was still negotiating with the applicant
on some issues (lighting,etc.).
9
March 30,2 ~0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:C (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4923-A
There was additional discussion of the site design.There was
also discussion as to whether the applicant would be ready for a
vote from the Commission on February 17,2000.
The applicants stated that an attempt would be made to resolvealloftheoutstandingissuesandbereadyforCommissionaction
on February 17,2000.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the application to
the full Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(FEBRUARY 17,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had submitted aletterrecpxestingthatthisitembedeferredtotheMarch30,
2000 agenda.Staff supported the deferral recpxest.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion
within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the March 30,2000
agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by
a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted aletteronMarch23,2000 recpxesting that this application be
deferred to the June 22,2000 agenda.Staff noted that the
applicant,recpxesting a third deferral,would be required to
renotify property owners within 200 feet.Staff supported thedeferralrequest.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the
June 22,2000 agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The
motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
10
p
'to
Camp Al.beusgaf e
January 21,2000
Mr.Roderick Vosper
Simon Property Group
Regional Vice-President -Development
P.O.Box 7033
Indianapolis,IN 46207
RE:Shackleford Road Property,Little Rock,Arkansas
Dear Rod:
Thank you for your letter of January 12,2000,regarding your authorization of the design of
"Concept 3"for the Summit Mall plans.We appreciate very much your authorization of the
change in the plans for the southeast corner of your property.
We look forward to seeing the revised site plan and understand that this concept will be furnished
to the City of Little Rock as well.
Again,our thanks for this consideration for Camp Aldersgate.
Sincerely,
SarahM.Sp n er
Executive Director
cc:Frank Riggins,Board of Directors
Bill Spivey,Board of Directors
Jim Lawson,City of Little Rock ~~
JAN 9 7 7000
2000 Aldersgate Road ~Little Rock,Arkansas 72205-7018
Phone 501/225-1444 ~Fax 501/225-2019 ~ARKCAMP@aokcom
UnRad vasr A project related to the Board of Global Ministries of the United Methodist Church
March 30,c JO
ITEM NO.:D FILE NO.:S-1271
NAME:Parkway Center —Subdivision Site Plan Review
LOCATION:Southeast corner of Chenal Parkway and Oak
Meadow Drive
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Ashley Company The Mehlburger Firm
2851 Lakewood Village Dr.201 S.Izard Street
No.Little Rock,AR 72116 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:Approx.12.39 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:C-3 ALLOWED USES:Commercial
PROPOSED USE:Commercial
VARIANCE S/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
Variance for a reduced number of parking spaces.
BACKGROUND:
The property at the southeast corner of Chenal Parkway and Oak
Meadow Drive is zoned C-3 commercial and the applicant is
proposing to utilize the property for C-3 permitted uses.
However,based on the fact that the applicant is proposing a two
(2)building site plan,the plan requires review and approval bythePlanningCommission.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to construct two (2)buildings on
the site with a total building area of 128,500 square feet.
The larger building which will contain a mixture of
commercial uses will face Chenal Parkway,with parking
between the building and the street.The smaller building
will contain a mixture of office and commercial space and
will front West Markham Street and Oak Meadow Dr.There
will also be parking between this building and the streets.
March 30,c.JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1271
The applicant has noted that the buildings will not exceed
a height of 30 feet.There is a service court proposed
between the two buildings for deliveries,employee parking,
dumpsters,etc.
Seven (7)access points are proposed to serve the
development (two from Chenal Parkway,two from Oak Meadow
Dr.,two from West Markham Street and one from Parkway
Place Dr.A total of 556 parking spaces is proposed for
the development.The Ordinance requires a total of 571
spaces for a shopping center development of this size.The
applicant is requesting a variance for the reduced number
of spaces.The applicant has noted that additional
landscaping will be installed along Chenal Parkway where
head-in parking is proposed.
A ground-mounted sign is proposed at the main entrance from
Chenal Parkway.The applicant notes that the sign will
conform to the Chenal/Financial Center Design OverlayDistrict(monument type,maximum area —100 square feet,
maximum height —8 feet,set back at least 5 feet from any
property line).
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The property is undeveloped and partially wooded.There is
a Little Rock Fire Station and undeveloped 0-3 zoned
property to the west and southwest across Oak Meadow Drive,
with single family residences further west and southwest.
There is a church located across West Markham Street to the
south,with additional single family residences further
south.There is a convenience store and carwash
immediately east of this site,with a funeral home further
east across Parkway Place Drive.There is a retirement
village located across Chenal Parkway to the north.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received two (2)phones calls
from persons expressing concerns with the proposed
development.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.Oak Meadow Drive is commercial street.A dedication of
right-of-way 30 feet from centerline is required.
2
March 30,~.JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1271
2.Construct all improvements on Chenal Parkway to Chenal
standards.
3.Driveway shall conform to Section 31-210 or Ordinance
18,031 or eliminate driveways.
4.Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
these streets including 5 foot sidewalks with planned
development.
5.Redesign main entrance on Chenal for adequate stacking
and eliminate cross traffic.
6.Out parcels on Chenal and Oak Meadow Drive should have
internal access.
7.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
8.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities
are required.
9.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the
Little Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to
Traffic Engineering.
10.Existing topographic information at maximum five foot
contour interval 100 base flood elevation is required.
11.A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec.29-186(e)is
required.
12 .A Grading Permit per Secs.29-186(c)and (d)is
required.
13.Contact the ADPC&E for approval prior to start of work
is required.
14.Chenal Parkway has average daily traffic count of
17,000.
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
AP&L:If a 30 foot overhead power line is required,a 30
foot easement will be required.(15 feet plus street
ROW).
Arkla:No Comment.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:On site fire protection will be required.
Fire Department:Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752 for
details on fire hydrant placement and turning radii.
Count Plannin :No Comment.
3
March 30,~a'0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1271
CATA:Site is very near CATA Route ¹5.Approved for
transit purposes.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
No Comment.
Landsca e Issues:
No provision has been made for building landscaping between
the public parking areas and building they serve.
Normally,this would be a 3 foot deep landscape strip.
Considerable flexibility with this requirement is allowed.
The proposed street buffer depth along Chenal Parkway drops
below the full average requirement of 30 feet but meets the
minimum requirement average of 20 feet when the allowed
transfers are figured in.The proposed street buffer depth
along West Markham meets and exceeds the full requirement
of 26 feet when averaged out though it drops to as low as 9
feet for 153 feet.
This property is tree covered.The City Beautiful
Commission recommends preserving as many trees as feasible.
This would include those on the street side.Extra credit
can be given toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance
requirements when preserving trees of 6 inch caliper or
larger.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan and additional
information to staff on December 16,1999.The revised
plan addresses some of the staff concerns.A sign location
has been shown on the plan,which will conform to the
Chenal/Financial Center DOD standards as noted in paragraph
A.One of the proposed driveways from Oak Meadow Drive has
been eliminated (reduced from 3 to 2 drives).
The revised plan shows that the building area has been
reduced to 128,500 square feet and that parking has been
added,primarily within the service court area.The total
number of parking spaces proposed is 556 spaces.The
4
March 30,c a0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1271
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D,E and F of this report.2.The issue relating to driveway design (main entry drive
from Chenal Parkway)and number of driveways needs to be
discussed and resolved.3.The proposed ground-mounted sign must conform to the
Chenal/Financial Center DOD standards (monument-type,
maximum height —8 feet,maximum area —100 square feet,
set back at least 5 feet from any property line).
4.The site lighting and utilities must conform to the
Chenal/Financial Center DOD standards as noted in
paragraph G.5.Staff recommends approval of the variance to allow a
reduced number of parking spaces.
6.Based on the fact that a portion of the property is
wooded,there should be no grading or site work prior to
a building permit being issued.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(DECEMBER 9,1999)
Frank Riggins was present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the proposed site plan,noting that the
applicant needed to request a variance for a reduced number of
parking spaces.The parking issue was briefly discussed.
The issue relating to driveway locations was briefly discussed.
Staff noted that the number of proposed driveways needed to be
reduced in order to conform to ordinance standards.
Mr.Riggins noted that he had no problems with the additional
staff or Public Works comments/requirements.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the site plan to
the full Commission for final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(JANUARY 6,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a
letter on January 4,2000 requesting that this item be deferred
to the February 17,2000 agenda.Staff supported the deferral
request.With a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays,the Commission
voted to waive their bylaws and accept the deferral request
being made less than five (5)working days prior to the public
hearing.
6
March 30,2~JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:D (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1271
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion
within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the February 17,2000
agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by
a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(FEBRUARY 17,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had submitted aletterrequestingthatthisitembedeferredtotheMarch30,
2000 agenda.Staff supported the deferral request.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion
within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the March 30,2000
agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by
a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted aletteronMarch21,2000 requesting that this application be
withdrawn,without prejudice.Staff supported the withdrawal as
requested.
The Chairperson 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.
7
i)
&-v-v f
PARKWAY PLACE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
600 Kirby Road
Little Rock,AR 72211
February 19,2000
Little Rock Planning Commission
723 West Markham
Little Rock,AR 72201
RE:Parkway Center —Site Plan
Dear Sir;
The Session of Parkway Place Presbyterian Church requested that I write and
express our desires on the proposed shopping center site plan.
Location of the buildings on the site plan needs to be moved to the north to
provide more room for a wider buAer zone for church building located just south of West
Markham Street.
West Markham Street needs to be widened to permit parking and two lanes of
traAic.Presently the street is too narrow for two lanes of traffic when cars are parked for
church services.
Planting of trees south of service court would help shield noise from local
residents.
Thanks for opportunity to express our opinions about this plan even though we
are late.
Yours Truly,
Robert Oates
Clerk of Session
RECEIVED
FEB R3 ZOOO
BY'
~IMb:XF"s@P~~h~'I~%%%R~~tfge"K'-KWf
H,Iaaf
g-isa (
':Dear 8irs;
---My Bund@ and,I have lived in the PaIdcwsy Place:IHMi 'Illa Ot haatr b ht
-..of giowth in this area during this time.Our concern
-.for jour is aot only iacreased traffic in our
Because of the of Chenal
Aberden Phyla,aad oQMr
off Highw~S,mar pea,pie depend on.,:-CbeIIial to comW to wodc.Also,the:-:H,"b gag afH IhM b
:ihaahcrease in aad 'ervice that
---.'.often,cari are ~u9ed on both sides of est Madcham
,dutriag all services and f'unctions.
Qf -Our oUMM concern as owaers is that a moorrfeuthtr,Hurue Quarters,just NsMf uut af htmuessann}/"Sah ~M Tl:Ipa~t &st food at least two sites in each
-'straipf mall iip and dove,Cbenal Bokmry are alsofallllPP::;,:::,,"I..bight b hhMlh"gll gib M ~t Ih)
of in a three mile radius.Do we'ached more than This has got to be a strain on
gg ~illow ~'ity.services such as the 'ad fue
Court bio axe right in fmait of the fire.How are they s~gmsed to Net Out with allLittleRode,AR -----.the traAM Mhzutes sa™velives.
72211 Iri dosiag,please consider that your actions aow will
imfpact these ani their residents for
to came.Mime is aot atweys bethe'xe we want
that benefit our aot justt'.gl hilrht H hh aailaihl
The aearest one is 5 plus miles fmm this location.
Tba'gh 'f Ialla~
-Biaemly,
Gary..Phillip&'.,-.JQ 0)20~~
.Sirvice Maaajler .
Gwmtney Chevrolet
...M.=:KK~~S..bY~e:A=:FPWRRKVh~~~~T'?XKKr.WQ'~%Ye~
5,m P
5 —/~7(
I a/&gyp
g~~ex.,P ~dA
~Bc~
aA~
C~~~
u
7g 7/7 ~~
RECEIVKD
DEC 3 9 1999
BY:
Ih-2o
5-z~~fTimandMelodiFranklin
15 Honey Locust Court ~~P 5 )Little Rock,AR 72211
Little Rock Planning Commission
723 West Markham
Little Rock,AR 72201
Dear Sir or Madam:
We are property owners in the Parkway Place Subdivision.We have several concerns
regarding a proposed commercial development you will be considering at your meeting
on January 6,2000.This particular development would be bordered by Chenal Parkway,
Markham Street,Parkway Place Drive,and Oak Meadow Drive.
The majority of our concerns involve traffic.Chenal Parkway is already at/past capacity.
Many other streets in the area do well to handle residential traffic,but would be stressed
to handle the additional constraints presented by the large scale of the proposed
commercial development.Our specific traffic concerns include:
~Increased traffic and congestion on Chenal Parkway.
~Increased traffic and congestion on Markham Street.Markham Street is hilly and
narrows at one spot between Chenal Parkway and Parkway Place Drive.
~Increased amount of traffic at the dangerous Chenal Parkway/Loyola Drive/Parkway
Place intersection.
~Increased amount of traffic at Markham Street/Parkway Place intersection.There are
currently no stop lights,warning lights,or four-way stop signs at this interchange.
~Lack of marked pedestrian crosswalks to aid drivers and the high number of walkers
and joggers that utilize this area.
~Potential increased traffic on narrow and hilly Kirby Road.Kirby Road would provide
the easiest access to Kanis Road.
In addition,we have a concern regarding the close proximity of this proposed commercial
development to the community swunming pool and park.The pool and park are less than
one block away.Many neighborhood children utilize the park and a high number of
children utilize the pool during the summer months.The increased traKc generated from
this development would create a hazard for kids attempting to utilize those facilities.
It appears that a commercial development of the magnitude proposed is not suitable to this
site.The existing road structure is not suf6cient to support the planned retail shops.
We had the opportunity to attend a meeting with the site's civil engineer.From the
information presented,it is clear that the developer's road improvement responsibilities
would not be efFective in overcoming any of the previously listed concerns.
We ask that you please corisider these concerns when taking into account the developer's
site development plan.
Sincerely,
Tim and Melodi Franklin
~QQU
9
Zg~To
5-rx7/
Date:January 4,2ppp
To:Little Rock Planning Commission
723 West Markham
Little Rock,Ar.72201
Lou Alice May
14207 Parkside Drive
Little Rock,Ar.72211
Sub:J:Property Development in Parkway Place
In reference to the lanneplanned commercial development of the lot bordered
Drive,&Oak Meadow,there should b
e o or ere by Chenal Pkwy.,Parkway Placeeresouesomeveryseriousconsiderationonthe
Commission before approving thi d 1seveopment.Asho in center
I h,fi 'ig r oo .'s particular area is a very bus area alrea
Meadow have always been favorit Iki
ion,c urch,convenience store all borderin this lot.P'
is ot.arkside Drive&Oak
traAic flow.Children w Ik &'d h b
n avori ewa 'ngareasforall age ou ssincethgrp ey are flat and have minimal
p ''gh o"ooarieteirikestotheoolallsum
Had there been lans forp an office bldg.,for example,there wouldn't be the traffic robl
purpose center will bring to the area &robabl h
e e ra ic problem that a multi-
some major landscaping must be required t et '
area pro a y not the longer hours that will be involv
thc stl'cct &scc dunlpstcfs &utilit connect h
equir o retain t e neighborhood atmos here.Who w
u i i y connections,among other things,staring you in the face.
Prrogress is essential,but do you think that all the stri sho in mnpoppmg alls that have been built in the areaceorRoad&continuing West on Chenal will all be occu i
Developers have been allowed to cl 1 f ll ',in ar a aceocearotsoavegetationformiles.We,inParkwa Plac
appreciate your consideration of the prop~«yprop~«y owners in this neighborhood.
,m ar ay ace,would
R~CEP/Ei3
JAN 7 7000
BY:
March 30,2.~0
ITEM NO.:E FILE NO.:LUOO-18-02
Name:Land Use Plan Amendment —Ellis Mountain
Planning District
Location:Southwest corner of Atkins Rd.and W.Markham St.
Receuest:Office to Mixed Office and Commercial
Source:Dorris Davis;Patrick M.McGetrick,Agent
PROPOSAL /REQUEST:
Land Use Plan amendment in the Ellis Mountain Planning District
from Office to Mixed Office and Commercial.Mixed Office and
Commercial provides for a mixture of office and commercial uses
to occur.The applicant wishes to develop the property for
office uses,mini warehouse,and auto-oriented commercial.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The currently vacant property is zoned 0-3 General Office and is
approximately 4.88 +acres in size.To the north is a shopping
center zoned C-3 General Commercial.To the south of the
applicant'property are houses located in an R-2 Single Family
residential zone.The property to the northeast is occupied by
an auto dealership zoned Planned Commercial District fronting
West Markham Street and a shopping center that is zoned C-2
Shopping Center and OS Open Space that fronts on Chenal Parkway.
The property to the west is occupied by two houses in R-2 Single
Family zone,an auto-oriented business in a C-3 General
Commercial C.U.P.,and a vacant tract of 0-3 General Office.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS:
On March 2,1999 various changes were made along the Kanis Road
corridor south of the applicant's property.
On December 15,1998 a change was made from Single Family to
Public Institutional at 600 Kirby Road about a half mile to the
west of the applicant's property.
On December 15,1998 a change was made form Single Family to
Public Institutional at 1 Covenant Drive about a mile northwest
of the applicant's property.
March 30,2 ~0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:E (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-18-02
On September 1,1998 a change was made from Multi-Family to
Single Family on Rahling Road about a mile northwest of the
applicant's property.
On May 6,1997 various changes were made north of Chenal Parkway
starting about a mile northwest of the applicant's property.
On November 19,1996 a change was made form Office to Commercial
and Park /Open Space east of the applicant's property.
On September 17,1996 a change was made from Public
institutional and Park /Open Space to Commercial at the
northwest corner of the Chenal Pkwy./W.Markham St.
Intersection.
The area under review is shown as Office on the Land Use plan.
The property to the north is shown as Commercial while the
property to the south is shown as Single Family on the Land Use
plan.Most of the property to the east is shown on the Land Use
Plan as Commercial with a narrow strip of Park/Open Space shown
to the southeast.All of the property to the west is shown as
Office on the land use plan.
MASTER STREET PLAN:
W.Markham Street is shown as a Collector Street and Atkins Rd.is shown as a residential street.
PARKS:
There are not any parks in the immediate area nor are any
proposed parks listed in this area.
CITY RECOGNIZED NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN:
This area is covered by the Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan.
The plan contains the goal to promote commercial and office
development that enhances the primarily residential character of
the community.The plan recommended the use of Planned ZoningDistrictsto"...influence more neighborhood-friendly and better
quality developments."The plan also recommended a policy torestricttheovergrowthofcommercialdevelopmenttoresidential
development."
2
March 30,2~~0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:E (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-18-02
BACKGROUND:
This is adjacent to a rapidly commercializing area along Chenal
Parkway.Much of the recent development in the area includes
intense commercial developments such as auto dealerships,discount
stores,and shopping centers ('arge box'etail).Intense
commercial development has spread towards the residential area.
Increased intensity of land use at this site will intrude on an
existing residential neighborhood to the south.The buffer
provided by the Office land uses protecting the existing homes in
the south from the large commercial developments in the north will
be lost.Lower scale developments,which generate less traffic,
would provide a buffer between the homes in the south from the
large commercial developments in the north.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations:
Gibraltar /Pt.West /Timber Ridge Neighborhood Association,
Parkway Place Property owners Association,Spring Valley
Property Owners Association,St.Charles Property Owners
Association and the Birchwood Neighborhood Association.
Staff has received no comments from area residents as of this
printing.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff believes the change is not appropriate.Approval of this
amendment will increase the intensity of commercial development
allowed south of Markham Street,eliminate (or reduce)the buffer
between Single Family and Commercial land uses,and generates moretraffic.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(FEBRUARY 17 g 2000)
This item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral at the
request of the applicant.The consent agenda with a vote of
9 ayes,0 noes,and 2 absent with Herb Hawn voting no on item 18
only.
3
March 30,2«0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:E (Cont.)FILE NO.:LU00-18-02
STAFF UPDATE:(MARCH 21,2000)
Staff has received a request from the applicant to amend their
request from Mixed Office Commercial,for the entire site,to
Commercial for a reduced area.The amended application area is
for the northern portion of the site only.The southern
portion is excluded from the land use plan amendment.
Staff believes that this change is not appropriate.Approval of
this amendment would introduce commercial uses that do not have
frontage on Chenal Parkway and could bring commercial typetrafficfurtherintotheneighborhood.The introduction of
Commercial in this area could start the erosion process of the
Office area that serves as the buffer to the residential areas
to the south and west.Intensification of commercial activities
along Atkins Road is not desirable.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30 g 20QQ)
Brian Minyard,of Staff,presented the item to the Commission.
Pat McGetrick spoke on behalf of the applicant.Mr.McGetrick
mentioned the original proposal for Mixed Office Commercial and
stated that the applicant decided to scale back plans to exclude
the south half of the property from the application after
meeting with the neighborhood.The applicant now wishes to
develop the north half of the property for commercial
development.Mr.McGetrick gave a brief description of the
plans to develop a shopping center on the northern portion of
the property and office complex on the southern portion.
Maury Mitchell spoke representing the property owner.Mr.
Mitchell stated that if the plan presented before the commissionisnotacceptable,the only alternative is to build an office
complex covering the entire piece of property.
Chris Larson,property owner at 215 Gamble,spoke in support of
the applicant.Mr.Larson stated that for many years a
construction company owned the property in question and stated
that the applicant's proposal would be safer and less intrusive
than previous uses.
4
March 30,2i~O
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:E (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-18-02
Mary Douglas spoke on behalf of the Gibraltar Heights
neighborhood association.Ms.Douglas stated that small scale
is not a disadvantage to the developer.The neighborhood
association is not opposed to office development,but is opposed
to commercial development.The neighborhood association does
not want to open the door to the intensity that commercial
development would bring.Ms.Douglas stated that she had more
questions about the leasing process that would take place in the
commercial development included in the proposal.Many people in
the neighborhood are worried about the potential for increasedtraffic.
June Stewart of 5 Woodview Ct.spoke in opposition to the
application.Ms.Stewart expressed complaints about the
increased traffic in the area resulting from the construction of
Chenal Parkway.An increase in commercial developments in the
neighborhood would further increase traffic.The applicant's
proposal for a commercial development would decrease the
property value of houses in the area.Ms.Stewart closed with a
statement the neighboring business to the west was a detail shop
and not a body shop.
Commissioner Muse asked if Lorena Avenue was already closed.
Monte Moore,of City Staff,stated that Lorena Avenue was not
closed.Commissioner Muse then asked about the width of a
nearby Park/Open Space strip.Tony Bozynski,City Staff,stated
that the strip of Park/Open Space was 75 feet wide.Commissioner
Muse asked how much space was between the site to the proposed
commercial development and the property line to the south.Mr.
Bozynski reminded the commission that this item,item E,was a
land use item and that the zoning issues would be addressed in
item F.
Planning Commission Chair Pam Adcock asked if there were any
more questions on item E.
Commissioner Craig Berry asked about the difference in traffic
impact of the proposed Commercial future land use and the
current Office future land use.Bob Turner,City Staff,stated
that Office generally generates less traffic per square foot
than Commercial.A conversation took place between the
Commission and City Staff about the different effects on traffic
counts resulting from different types of Office and Commercial
zonings.
5
March 30,2(r
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:E (Cont.)FILE NO.:LUOO-18-02
Commissioner Herb Hawn stated that the traffic issues were more
appropriate for a subdivision review.Commissioner Hawn stated
various risks involved when building a subdivision in a
relatively undeveloped area.
Planning Commission Chair Pam Adcock asked if there were more
questions on item E.Commissioner Bill Rector stated that he
would like to talk about item F before taking a vote on item E.
A discussion took place among the members on the merits of
hearing item F before taking a vote on item E.The
Commissioners agreed to hear item F before taking a vote on item
E.
See item F minutes for additional discussion of 'use'nd
'desi gn'.
A motion was made to approve item E as presented and was denied
with a vote of 5 ayes,4 noes and 2 absent.The item failed
because of a lack of 6 votes for the change per the commission's
bylaws.
6
Jg~c ~F
Nljiiyir4,'::::.:BI':Iiij:;
'rom:TRYANHALEYaol.corn
Sent:Sunday,February 13,2000 4:55 PM
To:bminyardlittlerock.state.ar.us
Subject:Attempt to amend land use plan in west LR
I live on the corner of Arthur and Trumpler Street in,west LR.
The property on the corner of west Markham and Atkins Street is being considered for retail use
rather than commercial use.I am opposed to this.
This action will increase the congestion of cars in the area and adversely affect the surrounding
residential areas around the site.We do not need another car dealership or another strip mall in
an already overdeveloped part of the city where retail stores are on nearly every spot of land.
When will the city put a stop to the madness?
Thank you for your consideration.
Terry Haley
515 Trumpler Street
Little Rock,Ar.72211
227-9034
i4~~~F
Mijiyei.'O':,'::.::.::Bj.':iiii,,':,.
Fiom:Mary S Douglas [persimmonplace@jurio.corn]
Sent:Sunday,February 13,2000 12:43 PM
To:bminyardlittlerock.state.ar.us
Subject:2/17 PlanCom Hearing ¹Z-3292-D
Dear Mr.Minyard,
The property in question has been zoned OFFICE-3 since 1979.The residents have participated
in 4 previous proposals for this site to enhance the primarily residential character of the
community.We met for a year to produce the Rock Creek Neighborhood Plan which states the
objective to restrict the overgrowth of COMMERCIAL zoning which would tip the fragile balance in
the area of R5,R2,03,&C.
We are already too aware of Commercial zoning 2 blocks away through Buick loud speakers,the
litter of 20-something wood pallets and dumpsters puts!de their enclosures at Office Max,neon
gaudy and amusement-park-lit-up sky,elephant-scaled retail boxes,jarring delivery sounds at 6
a.m.,and roaring traffic.
The Land Use Plan should not be amended.The current OFFICE-3 provides the minimal
transition buffer for the mixed uses to remain viablei.A tasteful ecologically-planned Office
development will benefit all concerned.
Sihcerely,
Gibraltar Heights-Timber Ridge-Point West Neighborhood Association
YOU'E PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today -there's no risk!For your FREE software,visit:
htt://dl.www.'uno.com/et/ta .
Q4~~Ed-p
IIj jib'r4:,"::::BI:Iih
From:MACLDINCcs.corn
Sent:Sunday,February 13,2000 12:16 PM
To:bminyard littlerock.state.ar.us
Subject:Land use Atkins and Markham
Mr.Minyard,
I feel the zoning for the land at Atkins and Markham should be kept as it is,Office zoning.
There are enough Commercial buildings in this arey now.
Thank you,
Aaron Crolley
12600 Valleywood Drive
Little Rock,Arkansas 72211
zk~E ~F
Fiom:Susan Johnson [mIlesusIeCIImaIl.corn]
Sent:Sunday,February 13,2000 12:21 AM
To:bminyardlittlerock.state.ar.us
Subject:Atkins at Markham rezoning
Brian,
l would like to use the phase "Just say No"a few thpusand times.Please support the Timber
Ridge neighborhood by keeping this property zonal 0-3.The area around us is saturated with
retail and auto dealerships.We do not wanted this gt the front door of our neighborhood.Stop the
commercial invasion the developers have planned for us.Keep the Office Zoning.Please!
Thank You,
Susan Johnson
Timber Ridge Neighborhood Assoication
12407 Timber Bend Drive
Little Rock,AR 72211
224-4605
iWon.corn htt://www.iwon.com why wouldn't you?
x~~E ~F
Fiom:DFunkLRaol.corn
Sent:Sunday,February 13,2000 3:19 PM
To:bminyardlittlerock.state.ar.us
Subject:Agenda Item ¹Z-3292-0
Agenda Item ¹Z-3292-0:
SW corner field at Atkins Rd &Markham (across fromm Buick &Bank of the Ozarks)from Office-3
to Commercial.
The residents on Atkins Road have been promised !that this area will not become any more
intensely commercialized.The Rock Creek Neighborhood Association has formally requested in
their Neighborhood Plan that fewer commercial sites be considered for this area and more Office
zoning be considered.
Please respond positively to the neighbors living inlthe area and not allow this to become more
commercially zoned.
Thank you.Dottie Funk
.iE CRINE 'B 1 501 221 1653 02/14 '00 10:49 Nr 11 02/02
(++~E++
P-IV.Duo o RECEIVED
FEB 1 4 2000
BY:
3-~LU~~~~P
kM-4 @ P--A
p~
[rw~++F
Iiinyard,Brian
From:Janet Patterson [jpattersonoasp.state.ar.us]
Sent:Monday,February 14,2000 4:26 PM
To:
'BMINYARD@LITTLEROCK.STATE.AR.US'ubject:
ZONING AMENDMENT-ATKINS AT MARKHAM BY:
As a resident of the Timber Hill Subdivision,I would like to respond to the notification that re
are plans to rezone the property at Atkins at Markham from Office to commercial.............the
corner of Chenal and Markham has become extremely congested over the last several years with
the building of the car dealership (large trucks parked on Atkins in an attempt to deliver new cars
creates problems)and Staples,Bed Bath and Beyond and now Old Navy,etc.Atkins is one of
two entrances into the Timber Hill Subdivision.It is a very narrow street and I do not think the
area can support the increased traffic that commercial zoning would bring.I hope the Planning
Commission will take these concerns into consideration and keep the original commercial zoning
of this property.
Thank you for allowing me to express my concerns,
Janet Patterson
529 Timber Hill Drive
Little Rock,AR 72211
ilinyard,Brian.
From:CLAYTON,PATRICIA A [PCLAYTO@entergy.corn]i~a~~&F
Sent:Monday,February 14,2000 12:23 PM RECEIVE&-To:
'bminyard@littlerock.state.ar.us'ubject:
Comments on Proposed Rezoning F 1 ZOOO
Dear Mr.Minyard,BY:
It has come to my attention that there is a proposal before the Planning Commission to rezone
the property at the corner of Markham St.and Atkins Rd.from office to commercial.
As a resident of the Gibraltar Heights area which is adjacent to this property I am opposed to this
rezoning.
The commercial development in this area has already increased the noise levels in our
neighborhoods significantly.As an example,anytime I go outside into my yard now I can hear
the loud speakers at the car dealership located at the corner of Markham and Atkins calling their
salesmen and other service personnel.It is also quite disturbing to be awakened at three or four
in the morning by the garbage trucks picking up all the dumpsters at the shopping centers in the
area.
While I understand that a property owner has every right to expect to do something productive
with their property I feel that there must be some consideration given to those people who have
made their homes in this area for several years prior to the recent boom in commercial
development along Chenal Parkway.
It is my belief that this property should remain zoned for office space.
Sincerely,
Patricia Clayton
516 Trumpler St.
Little Rock,AR 72211
FEB 14 '88 1 1:FROM COOK JEEP EAGLE PAGE.881
fk.~~B+F
Cammy Henson310AtkinsLittleRock AR 72211%$4-~
41'%ebruary 14,2000
City Planning Commission
RE:Plans to rezone area.at Atkins and Markham
l live on Atkins Road.I am very much opposed to the rezoningoftheareaatHarkhamandAtkinsfromOfficetoCommercial.I am especially concerned about noise.and bright lights at allhours,increased traf f ic,and above a11,crime that thisrezoningwouldprobablybring.
Office buildings in our neighboz'hood..wi11 be..bad..enough,-,:.but'.atleasttherewouldn'.t be increased traffic and noise at night.
I bought my home four years ago because it was located in anice,quiet,residential neighborhood.If I ever sell my homeinthefuture,I would like to make a profit,not suffer a loss,@hat prospective home buyer would choose to buy a home next doortoaminimall?
Please keep the zoning for office use,so that I and my neighborscanenjoywhat's left of our neighborhood,Thank you.
Sincerely,C~
Cammy Henson
RKCEIVED
FEB 1 4 2000
BY:
&I&&I&TOTAL PAGE.881
hhinyard,Br~an
From:Cblann@aol.corn
Sent:Monday,February 14,2000 12:54 PM RKCEIVED
Subject:Amending lane use at Atkins and Markham FE 1 4 Z000
Dear Brian,BY:
I am very concerned that the Plannin Commission m ayco si gi g
g.g bdramoacommercialzonin.Homeown
g or
b d Io d Th I A k''cunessotheirneighborhoodduetothecomm
p e 'suffer greatly if the zoning is changed.ThpeoninsRoadwillsuffer
wi e i icult enough with the office zonin .P
eir
o i g.lease consider my concerns when
Carol Blann,homeowner —Timber Ridge Subdivision
12414 Timber Bend
Little Rock,AR 72211
501-223-2062
RI .EIVED
I-~8 14 Z000
BY:
~u.e.s 3,-6-&I"-&
0a,x ~&8 -~++
~4~~~F
lYl &noh re
inc~Kh&~d,
aX ~i-m
G~~p Q -Q~~LQ~
U.~%la.~,Gk KW &s
~
~rk.'Hl~
~en&GS ISA
~~b r ~Q 9N~bq.
\"1 -lQQQ —%',(X'p~&
:-no&E p p
RE(.F;)~ED
1 4 Zoo
BY:
RE:Planning Commission Hearing,Pebruary 17,2000
Z-3292-D:SW Corner of West Markham Street &Atkins Rd
Dear City Planning Commissioners:
The property in question has been zoned OPFICE-3 since 1979.
The Gibraltar Heights-Timber Ridge-Point West residents have
participated in 4 previous proposals for this site to enhance the
primarily residential character of the community.We met for a
year to produce the Rock Creek Neighborhood Plan which states the
objective to restrict the overgrowth of COMMERCIAL zoning which
would tip the fragile balance in the area of R5,R-2,0-3,&C.
We are already too aware of Commercial zoning 2 blocks
away through Buick dealership loud speakers,the litter of
20-something wood pallets and dumpsters outside their enclosures
at Office Max,neon gaudy and amusement-park-lit-up sky,
elephant-scaled retail boxes,jarring delivery sounds at 6 a.m.,
and roaring traffic.
The Land Use Plan should not be amended.The current
OFPICE-3 provides the minimal transition buffer for the mixed
uses to remain viable.A tasteful,ecologically-planned Office
development will benefit all concerned.
Sincerely,
~F~—~5'~$
Gibraltar Heights-Timber Ridge-Point West Neighborhd Association
Minyard,Brian
From:Jeff 8 Ashley [fembomb@swbell.netI
Sent:Monday,February 14,2000 9:57 PM
To:bminyard@littlerock.state.ar.us F 1 4 2000Subject:Atkins and Markham zone meeting.
Brian,BY:
I live at 416 Atkins and have owned the property for 14 years.I love our houses and the location
we have.Unfortunately retail loves it also.I am opposed to anything other than office to border
our houses.We have to protect ourselves now or we will have no value left to our property.
More retail will kill our street.You would feel the same way if you lived here.I have not h d
pro em with any of the progress to date but I do now.I own and operate Powerhouse Gym onrobl
Merrill Drive,(227-6401),call me if I need to do anything else.Thanks,Jeff Lawrence
82/16/2888 12:85 312822546 MEDFL I GHT PAGE 81
r
LittleRock Planning Commission 16 February 2000
City Hall
Little Rock,Arkansas (T~/Y)5'gA P
RECEIVED
F 1 6 ZOO
Phnning Commission Members.'Y:
My current residence is 515 Trumpler Street,Little Rock.Arkansas.
I understand that the commission will conduct a hearing on amending the land use plan for the
property located on the corner of West Markham and Atkins Streets on February 17,2000.This
proposed amendment will change the use plan from commercial to retail.
I am opposed to this change.Retail space will lead to increased trafBc Row in the area,more
night light pollution due to mega-wattage poll lights that light up the world,and in&mgement onthenearbyresidentalareas,Commercial space is bad enough,but please put a stop to the retailghtinWestLittleRock,
Thank you for your consideration in the matter.
Terry Haley
515 Trumpler Street
Little Rock,Ar.72211
227-9034
Fax 202-2546
la+fioeea ~A~~~F
de Bapco eed Prie+
4m(i Pe&dP nzrr RECEIVED
$0f&i$4$dd FEB 2 2 PlloO
BY:
February 21,2000
Brian Minyard
Planning and Development
723 West Markham Street
Little Rock,AR 72201
Dear Mr.Minyard,
I am opposed to rezoning or any land use change to the property located at
Markham and Atkins streets from Office to Commercial.
There have been enough commercial developments and alterations to my
neighborhood in the past few years;we do not need another retail outlet,car
dealership,office supply store,or other commercial development in our
neighborhood.The property should remain zoned office.
Sincerel
Kathy Hemmer
President Parkway Place Property Owners Association
March 30,~JO
ITEM NO.:F FILE NO.:Z-3292-D
NAME:Atkins Road Partnership —Short-Form PCD
LOCATION:Southwest corner of West Markham Street and
Atkins Road
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Atkins Road Partnership McGetrick and McGetrick
920 Bowman Road 319 E.Markham St.,Suite 202
Little Rock,AR 72205 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:4.88 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:0-3 ALLOWED USES:General Office
PROPOSED USE:Commercial/Office Mix
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
BACKGROUND:
The 4.64 acre site is zoned 0-3.The southern portion of this
property (approximately 3 acres)was rezoned to 0-3 on January
16,1979 by Ordinance No.13,580.The northern portion
(approximately 1.64 acres)was zoned 0-3 prior to that date,
with the Rock Creek Zoning Plan in 1977-78.
The Planning Commission denied a proposed site plan for this
property on January 21,1999 because of site design related
issues.The previous applicant revised the site plan and
resubmitted the application which was approved on March 4,1999.
The approved site plan included a 46,200 square foot (2 story)office building,a 25,000 square foot (one story)office
building and 231 parking spaces.
March 30,~JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:F (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3292-D
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone the property at the
southwest corner West Markham Street and Atkins Road from0-3 to PCD to allow for a mixed commercial/office
development.The applicant is proposing three (3)distinct
uses for the property as follows:
1.A 2,850 square foot building (1 story)and 88 parking
spaces within the north 'w of the property.The use
proposed in this area is an auto dealership or auto
rental business.2.Three (3)mini-warehouse buildings (1 story)totaling
20,300 square feet located within the west portion of
the south 4 of the property.3.A 22,400 square foot (1 story)commercial/office
building and 45 parking spaces within the east portion
of the south 4 of the property.Uses proposed —60%
commercial,40%office.
Three (3)access points are proposed for the development,
two (2)from Atkins Road and one (1)from West Markham
Street.There is one (1)access point located along Atkins
Road near the center of the property and one (1)drive near
the southeast corner of the property.The one (1)access
point from West Markham Street is located near the
northwest corner of the property.
The proposed buildings,parking areas and drives are noted
on the attached site plan.Two (2)dumpster areas are also
noted on the proposed plan.The applicant has also filed a
Land Use Plan Amendment for the property (office to
commercial),Item 2.1 on this agenda.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The 4.64 acre site is relatively level and has been mostly
cleared of trees over the years.There are some trees
along the west property line on the northern section of
this property (between this property and the church to the
west).
The property is in an area of mixed uses and zoning.The
property north of this site,across West Markham Street,
contains a new bank office building and the Office Max/Old
Navy site.The property across Atkins Road to the east
contains an auto dealership and a commercial development.
The property to the west contains a vacant R-2 zoned strip
of property,a church,the Bale Chevrolet detail shop,one
(1)single-family residence and an undeveloped 0-3 zoned
piece of property.There is an existing single family
2
March 30,JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:F (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3292-D
neighborhood immediately south and southwest of this
property and to the southeast across Atkins Road.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received three (3)phonecallsfrompersonsrequestinginformationonthis
application.The Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge
and Parkway Place Neighborhood Associations were notifiedofthepublichearing.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Atkins Road and West Markham are listed on the Master
Street Plan as a collector streets.Dedicate right-of-
way to 30 feet from centerline.
2.A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required
at the corner of Atkins and West Markham.
3.Provide design of streets conformed to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements
to these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with
planned development.
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.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the
Little Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to
Traffic Engineering.
7.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.
8.Traffic counts on West Markham and Atkins are not
available.
9.Lorena Avenue and Malekin Street must be closed or
improved prior to permit.
10.A Grading Permit per Secs.29-186(c)and (d)will be
required with Building Permit.
11.Contact the ADPC&E for approval prior to start of
construction.
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
3
March 30,~JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:F (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3292-D
AP&L:No Comment received.
Arkla:No Comment.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:Contact the Water Works regarding meter size(s)
and location(s).The L.R.Fire Department needs to
evaluate this site to determine whether additional fire
protection will be required.An easement must be
retained for an existing water main in Lorena Dr.
Fire Department:Contact Fire Department regarding turning
radii.Place fire hydrant per city code.Contact Dennis
Free at 918-3752 for details.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Comment received.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning
District.The Land Use Plan shows Office for this location.
The proposed change from 0-3 General Office to a Planned
Commercial District for a mini-warehouse,office building
and auto-oriented business is not consistent with the
current land use category.There is an intensity change
Land Use Plan Amendment on this agenda for this site.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:The Rock Creek
Neighborhood Action Plan recommends the use of Planned
Zoning Districts to influence more neighborhood-friendly
and better quality developments.
Landsca e Issues:
The proposed buffers meet with ordinance requirements with
the transfers allowed.However,the southern buffer drops
to 18 and 24 feet in areas.The full requirement without
transfers being 28 feet.
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 western perimeters where
adjacent to residential properties.
4
March 30,~JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:F (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-3292-D
A 3 foot wide landscape strip is required between the
proposed building and public parking areas.Some
flexibility with this requirement is allowed.
At least 60 percent of the existing trees within the
required buffers to the south and west must be preserved.
Extra credit can be given when preserving existing trees of
six inch caliper or larger.The City Beautiful Commission
recommends preserving as many trees as feasible.
G.ANALYS I S:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
February 2,2000.The proposed access drive from West
Markham Street has been moved further west to provide
additional setback from the West Markham/Atkins
intersection.The applicant has also shown a 6 foot
screening fence along the west and south property
boundaries.The applicant provided staff with a proposed
use mix for the property,as noted in paragraph A.of this
report.Malekin Street and Lorena Avenue rights-of-way are
labeled on the site plan "to be closed"as part of this
application.
The applicant has not provided staff with proposed hours of
operation for the various uses or with a signage plan for
the proposed development.These are two (2)important
issues which the applicant has failed to address.
The proposed site plan shows 45 parking spaces for the
22,400 square foot commercial/office building.The
ordinance would typically require 81 parking spaces for a
building of this size with the mixture of uses proposed.
Staff feels that the proposed number of parking spaces will
not support the proposed uses.In addition to the parking
concern,staff is not supportive of the southernmost drive
location along Atkins Road.This drive is in close
proximity to the single family residences to the south.
As noted in paragraph A.of this report,the applicant has
filed a land use plan amendment for this property,from
office to commercial (Item 2.1).Staff is not in support
of the Land Use Plan change based on the fact that the
applicant is proposing an intensification of the use of the
property,which would eliminate the transition of office
from the commercial uses to the north to the single family
5
March 30,00
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:F (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3292-D
to the south.Based on this,staff also cannot support the
proposed PCD rezoning,with the intense commercial (C-4
type)uses proposed.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends denial of the proposed PCD rezoning.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(JANUARY 27,2000)
Pat McGetrick and Pete Hornibrook were present,representing the
application.Staff briefly described the proposed PCD site
plan.Staff noted that additional information was needed on the
project,including use mix for each building,hours of operation
for each use and signage.
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.It was
noted that Malekin Street and Lorena Avenue rights-of-way would
need to be abandoned as part of this application.Driveway
locations were also discussed.
The landscape requirements were also briefly discussed.It was
noted that the full buffer requirement for the southern buffer
is 28 feet.It was also noted that screening and building
landscaping needed to be shown on the site plan.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the PCD to the
full Commission for resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(FEBRUARY 17,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had submitted a
letter requesting that this item be deferred to the March 30,
2000 agenda.Staff supported the deferral request.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion
within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the March 30,2000
agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The motion passed by
a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
6
March 30,JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:F (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3292-D
STAFF UPDATE:(MARCH 9,2000)
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on March 9,
2000.The revised plan represents a complete redesign.
The applicant is now proposing an eight (8)building office park
for the southern portion of the property,each building having
3,600 square feet for a total of 28,800 square feet.A total of
93 parking spaces is proposed for the office development.
The applicant is also proposing a 21,420 square foot commercial
building with 51 parking spaces within the northern portion of
the property.
Two (2)driveways are proposed to access the property.One (1)
drive is proposed on Atkins Road,to line up with the commercial
drive on the east side of Atkins Road and one (1)drive is
proposed near the northwest corner of the property.
The proposed buildings,parking,drives,landscape areas and
dumpster location are noted on the attached site plan.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(MARCH 9,2000)
Pat McGetrick was present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the revised site plan and noted the following:
1.The west buffer must be increased to 18 feet,with at least
60 percent of the trees in this area preserved.
2.The existing trees within the Lorena Avenue right-of-way
must be preserved.
3.The street buffer must be increased.
4.Screening fences must be shown on the site plan.
5.The proposed use mix for the proposed buildings must be
submitted to staff.Staff suggested no restaurant/food
service use(s)for the proposed commercial building.
Mr.McGetrick stated that the buffer areas would be increased as
required.Bob Brown,of the Planning Staff,noted that
evergreen trees should be planted within the south buffer area.
Staff noted that there were 51 parking spaces shown for the
proposed commercial building,and that 95 spaces would typically
be required for a building of this size.The parking situation
7
March 30,.JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:F (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3292-D
was briefly discussed.Staff suggested that there be no food
service uses in the applicants proposed use mix for the
commercial building,based on the small amount of parking
proposed.
The "T"intersection at the Atkins Road drive location was
briefly discussed.Bob Turner,of Public Works,stated that
there was not a large amount of cross-traffic anticipated at
this location based on the size of the proposed development.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the PCD to the
full Commission for resolution.
STAFF UPDATE:(MARCH 15,2000)
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff,based on
the Subdivision Committee review.The revised plan addresses
some of the issues as raised by staff and the Committee.
The revised plan increases the street buffer along Atkins Road
from 10 feet to 15 feet,and the buffer along the west property
line (west of the proposed commercial building)from 9 feet to
16 feet.Staff requested that this west buffer be increased to
18 feet as shown on the previously approved site plan for this
property.
The revised plan notes a screening fence along the west property
line and a screening fence or evergreen screening along the
south property line.A dumpster is located near the center of
the property.
The plan shows 93 parking spaces for the office development,
with 70 spaces typically required by ordinance.There are 51
spaces shown to serve the proposed commercial building.The
ordinance would typically require 95 spaces for a commercial
building of this size.Staff feels that the 51 spaces will not
be sufficient to serve the commercial building.
As noted in the previous analysis,Malekin Street and Lorena
Avenue rights-of-way are proposed to be abandoned with this
development.
The applicant has not provided staff with the proposed use mix
for the various buildings,the hours of operation for the
various uses and signage locations with details,associated with
8
March 30,~&0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:F (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-3292-D
the revised plan.These are important issues which the
applicant has failed to address.
Although staff is pleased with the office park component of this
project located within the southern portion of the property,staff cannot support the commercial development proposed for the
northern portion of the property.Staff feels that commercial
uses west of Atkins Road and south of West Markham Street in
this general area are not appropriate.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends denial of the proposed PCD rezoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Pat McGetrick,Pete Hornibrook and Maury Mitchell were present,
representing the application.Staff briefly described the
proposed PCD with a recommendation of denial.Staff noted that
the applicant had not submitted a proposed use mix for the
development,hours of operation or signage details.
Pat McGetrick briefly described the project.He noted that
there would be small commercial uses within the proposed
commercial building,and that some of the parking within theofficecomponentofthedevelopmentcouldbeusedforemployee
parking for the commercial building.He noted that the office
hours would be from 8:00 a.m.to 5:00 p.m.He noted that the
overall building area was 20,000 square feet less than the
previously approved site plan.He also noted that the total
number of parking spaces had also been reduced.
Commissioner Lowry asked about the Lorena Avenue right-of-way.
Mr.McGetrick noted that the right-of-way was undeveloped and
was to be abandoned with this project.
Commissioner Earnest noted that the office designation on the
Land Use Plan for this property was to serve as a buffer between
the commercial along Chenal Parkway and the single family
residential to the south.
Mr.McGetrick noted that there was already some commercial
zoning to the west.He explained the reasons for the Land Use
Plan Amendment.
9
March 30,c.i0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:F (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-3292-D
Maury Mitchell spoke in favor of the application.He noted that
there was less building area than was previously approved.
Chris Larson spoke in favor of the application,noting that his
main concerns had been addressed by the applicant.He stated
that he needed more information regarding proposed uses and
hours of operation.
Dottie Funk addressed the Commission with landscape concerns.
She noted that trees and evergreen screening should be provided.
June Stewart addressed the Commission with concerns.She noted
that she was primarily concerned with the adjacent residential
property.
Mary Douglas also addressed the Commission with concerns.She
noted that the neighborhood had compromised with developers of
other sites in this area.She noted that all of this property
should stay zoned 0-3.She also requested more information on
uses,hours and signage.She stated that the neighborhood would
like evergreen screening instead of wood fences.She noted that
the C-3 property immediately west of this site (Bale Chevrolet
detail shop)had existed for many years.She also asked if the
proposed commercial building would be owned or leased.
Chairperson Adcock asked about the proposed use mix,hours and
signage.
Mr.McGetrick noted that there would be a monument-type sign at
each entrance which would meet city standards.He noted that
the hours for the office would be 8:00 a.m.to 5:00 p.m.and the
commercial hours would be 9:00 a.m.to 9:00 p.m.He requested0-3 permitted uses for the office area and C-2 permitted uses
(except restaurant)for the proposed commercial building.
Chairperson Adcock asked about a food delivery use.
Mr.McGetrick noted that no food service use would be requested.
He also noted that evergreen screening would be installed where
the neighborhood desired.
Chairperson Adcock asked about the size of the evergreens that
would be planted.This was briefly discussed.
10
March 30,c ~0
SUBDZVZSZON
ZTEM NO.:F (Cont.)FZLE NO.:Z-3292-D
Pete Hornibrook noted that a large quantity of landscaping would
be installed on the site.He noted that fast-growing evergreen
trees could be planted.
Leland cypress was suggested as a plant type.Mr.Hornibrook
also noted that decorative street lights would be used on thesite.He stated that the proposed office buildings would have a
similar appearance (facade)as the Ozark Bank building across
West Markham Street to the north.
Chairperson Adcock asked about the turning radii as requested by
the Fire Department.Dennis Free,of the Fire Department,noted
that the issue would be resolved.
Commissioner Muse asked about having a PK/OS strip along the
south property line.This issue was briefly discussed.Mr.
McGetrick noted that from the center of the Lorena right-of-way
to the corner of the proposed buildings was approximately 40
feet.Mrs.Douglas noted that a buffer strip along the south
property line would be desirable.
Commissioner Earnest noted that the issue of crossing Atkins
Road and West Markham Street with commercial zoning remained the
main issue.
Chairperson Adcock asked the applicant why office buildings
could not be constructed within the north portion of the
property.Mr.Hornibrook stated that the cost of the property
prohibited entirely developing the property as office.
Commissioner Downing asked what effect a land use plan change
would have on adjacent property.He discussed opening the land
use plan amendment up for a larger area.
There was additional discussion pertaining to the southern
buffer area.Staff noted that the area could be designated as a
buffer on the site plan.Mr.McGetrick noted no problem with
designating a buffer area.
There was a motion to approve the PCD subject to the conditions
as offered by the applicant.The motion was briefly discussed.
The motion failed by a vote of 5 ayes,4 noes and 2 absent.
11
March 30,2 ~0
ITEM NO.:G FILE NO.:2-2120-A
NAME:First Assembly of God-
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:2914 Cumberland Street
OWNER/APPLICANT:First Assembly of God,North Little Rock
PROPOSAL:To obtain a conditional use permit for a
new,church sponsored child-mentoring center
on property zoned R-4,Two Family
Residential,at 2914 Cumberland Street.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
This site is located on the west side of Cumberland,south
of 29th street,halfway between 29th and 31st streets.
(There is no 30th street in this area.)
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This vacant site is zoned R-4,Two Family Residential,andissurroundedonallbutthesouthbyR-2,Single Family
Residential zoning.There are two small lots to the south
which are also zoned R-4.The abutting lots to the north
and south are vacant,and houses exist to the west.Across
Cumberland to the east is a low income housing area
Staff believes the proposed use would be compatible with
this neighborhood with proper screening.
The Meadowbrook and Community Outreach Neighborhood
Associations were notified of the public hearing.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The proposed site would have one access from Cumberland.
Six parking spaces would be provided including one
handicapped accessible.The ordinance does not set specific
parking requirements for this type of use,but the six
shown should be adequate for this use.Most of the
March 30,2 JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:G FILE NO.:Z-2120-A
children would come from the local neighborhood area,so
there should not be much drive in traffic.
4 .SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
The revised site plan meets ordinance requirements for
screening and buffers.
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
a.Cumberland is classified on the Master Street Plan as a
commercial street.Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet
from centerline.
b.Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvement to
this street including 5-foot sidewalk with planned
development.c.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
d.Sidewalks shall be shown conforming to Sec.31-175 and
the "MSP".
e.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.f.A Grading Permit per Secs.29-186(c)&(d)will be
required with Building Permit.
6.UTILITY AND FIRE DEPT.COMMENTS:
Water:Contact the Water Works if additional water serviceisrequired.
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Southwestern Bell:No comments received.
ARKLA:Approved as submitted.
Entergy:Approved as submitted.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
CATA:No comments received.
2
March 30,2 JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:G FILE NO.:Z-2120-A
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has requested a conditional use permit for a
church sponsored mentoring center with accompanying parking
on vacant property zoned R-4,Two Family Residential.
The 2400 square foot building would be one story.The
operating hours would primarily be from about 2 to 9:30
p.m.Monday through Friday,Saturday 9 a.m.to 2 p.m.,and
Sunday noon to 3 p .m.during the school year,and then
possibly more hours in the summer.It would be used as a
meeting place where mentors and the children can study,
play games,and interact with other children.Most of the
users would walk to the center.The parking would be used
primarily by the mentors,(3 or 4 at any one time),plus an
occasional parent.The facility would also be available to
local neighborhood groups for pre-arranged meetings and
functions,but again intended for people in the surrounding
neighborhood.It would not be used for transient ministry
or services or overnight accommodations.
The proposed building would be setback only 15 feet from
the rear property line,but it would meet all other
setbacks.The reduced rear setback would require a
variance.Parking and access would be adequate as shown on
the site plan.The applicant has also requested a 4 foot by
8 foot wall sign on the face of the building facing
Cumberland.Since this is a residential zoned area,the
sign would have to be part of the C.U.P.The size requested
would be within standards.
Staff believes this would be a reasonable use of this
property and be compatible with the neighborhood with
proper screening.
8 .STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit,
including the proposed sign location and size,subject to
compliance with the following conditions:
a.Comply with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances.
b.Comply with Public Works Comments.
3
March 30,c 00
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:G FILE NO.:Z-2120-A
c.All exterior lighting must be low intensity and directed
downward and inward to the property and not towards any
residential zoned area.
Staff also recommends approval of the reduced rear setback
variance to 15 feet.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(JANUARY 27,2000)
Pastor Rod Loy,Jay Martin,Rick Harrell,and Bill Darby were
present representing the application.Staff gave a brief
description of the proposal.
Public Works reviewed their comments,including specific right-
of-way requirements.The screening,buffer,sign,and parking
ordinance requirements were also briefly reviewed with the
applicant.The Committee agreed that based on the intended use
and method of operation,that six parking spaces should be
sufficient.The applicant agreed to revise the site plan to meet
the Cumberland frontage 4 foot wide landscape strip requirement.
There being no further issues,the Committee accepted the
proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for final
action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(FEBRUARY 17,2000)
Jay Martin and Bill Darby were present representing the
application.There were no registered objectors present.Staff
presented the item with a recommendation for deferral due to the
applicant being unable to provide proof that all property owners
within 200 feet were properly notified.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for Deferral.The
Commission deferred the item until March 30,2000,public
hearing by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
4
March 30,-00
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:G FILE NO.:Z-2120-A
STAFF UPDATE:(MARCH 21,2000)
The applicant has made proper notice to all property owners
within 200 feet.Staff still recommends approval as stated in
paragraph 8 above.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Jay Martin and Bill Darby were present representing the
application.There were no registered objectors present,however
Staff informed the Commission that they had received one letter
in opposition.Staff presented the item with a recommendation
for approval subject to compliance with the conditions listed
under "Staff Recommendation,"paragraph 8 above.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
submitted to include staff comments and recommendations.The
vote was 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
5
March 30,2 -JO
ITEM NO.:H FILE NO.:Z-5966-B
NAME:Barrow Road Church of Christ —Revised
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:8808 Byron Street
OWNER/APPLICANT:Barrow Road Church of Christ/Pat McGetrick
PROPOSAL:To amend an existing conditional use permit
to use an existing residential house
adjacent to the south side of church
property for Sunday school classrooms and a
small youth game room,on property zoned
R-2,Single Family Residential,located at
8808 Byron Street.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
This site is located on the north side of Byron Street,
three lots from John Barrow Road,adjacent to the south
property line of the Barrow Road Church of Christ.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This site is zoned R-2,Single Family Residential,and is
surrounded by R-2 zoning and a Single Family Residential
neighborhood.The church lies to the north and there are
houses in the other three directions.Further away to the
north and east the zoning expands to 0-3,General Office,
and C-3,General Commercial.
In April,1998,the Commission approved a C.U.P.for the
house next door to the east to be used primarily as a
church office.Staff had concerns at that time about the
negative impact in allowing a nonresidential use to intrude
into this residential area and still has that concern.
The John Barrow Neighborhood Association was notified of
the Public Hearing.
March 30,2 JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:H FILE NO.:Z-5966-B
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
There is a driveway accessing the property from Byron
Street.The church has stated that the primary access would
be walking access from the church property to the north.
Parking would be on existing church property.
4 .SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
N/A
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
With Building Permit:
a.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk thatisdamagedinthepublicright-of-way prior to
occupancy.
b.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.
6.UTILITY AND FIRE DEPT.COMMENTS:
Water:Contact the Water Works if additional water serviceisrecpxired.
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
ARKLA:Approved as submitted.
Entergy:No comments received.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
CATA:No comments received.
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has recpxested a conditional use permit to use
an existing single family house for added classroom space.
The property is zoned R-2,Single Family Residential.
2
March 30,2 JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:H FILE NO.:Z-5966-B
The exterior of the house would not be changed and it would
maintain its residential character.No signage or outside
lighting is proposed.The classroom space would be used
primarily during church services on Sunday morning and
Wednesday nights.This would be a continuation of the
expansion that took place just east of this property in
April of 1998 when a C.U.P.was approved to use a house for
church offices.This latest request would allow the church
to continue to delay the more expensive expansion of adding
to the church building,but continue the intrusion into the
neighborhood.
A C.U.P.was approved in April 1995 for a two phased
expansion of church facilities.Phase I included a two
story classroom addition and remodeling of the main
sanctuary area in the church.That was accomplished in
1996.Phase 2 included construction of a fellowship
hall/family life center,further increase to the sanctuary
area,and additional parking.Phase 2 has not been
constructed.
Staff continues to have concerns about allowing a
nonresidential use to intrude into the residential
neighborhood.This is a stable single family residential
neighborhood and staff feels that allowing this
nonresidential use to further intrude would have a
destabilizing effect.The properties to the east,west and
south are occupied by single family homes.This small
residential pocket is already impacted by virtue of the
fact that it is completely surrounded by office and
commercial uses.Therefore,we do not feel this is
appropriate use within this residential area.
8.STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of this conditional use permit in
order to maintain the residential nature of this small
neighborhood and prevent a destabilizing effect.
3
March 30,2 v0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:H FILE NO.:Z-5966-B
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(JANUARY 27,2000)
Pat McGetrick was present representing the application.Staff
gave a brief description of the proposal.
Mr.McGetrick explained how the church plans to use the house.
Staff asked about the church's future plans and if they intend
to keep acquiring more houses.He couldn'answer that,and no
one from the church was present.
There being no further issues,the Committee accepted the
proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for final
action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(FEBRUARY 17,2000)
Pat McGetrick was present representing the application.There
were no registered objectors present.Staff presented the item
with a recommendation for denial as explained in the last
paragraph of the "Staff Analysis",paragraph 7 and in the "Staff
Recommendation,"paragraph 8 above.
Pat McGetrick explained that the church does not intend to
change the residential nature of the site,and would use thefacilityonlyparttimeprimarilyduringSundayandWednesdayservices.
Commissioner Nunnley asked Mr.McGetrick when would the church's
expansion into the neighborhood end.Mr.McGetrick couldn'
answer that and agreed the church should provide the Commission
some firm commitment as to what their long-range plans are.
Commissioner Nunnley stated he had the impression from the
comments from the church personnel during the discussion for the
C.U.P for the first house,that was all they needed and they
would not intrude any more into the neighborhood.
Commissioner Hawn commented that it was time for the Commission
to look harder at today'church size and activities which are
causing them to spread out much more than in the past.His main
point was that churches today might not fit into residential
neighborhoods like they used to.
4
March 30,~JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:H FILE NO.:Z-5966-B
Commissioner Berry commented that he saw vacant church property
and wondered why they weren't using it.Staff commented that the
church had submitted a master plan in the past that did show
expansion into that area,but that for monetary reasons they
have chosen this approach rather than to finish carrying out
that plan.
Commissioner Muse asked the applicant to provide information
about how many houses on Byron Street are owner-occupied,how
many are rental units,and how many are vacant.He stated he
wanted that information because he sees the church use as a
"good use"compared to what could be spreading into the
neighborhood in the form of vacant houses or houses being used
by undesirable types.He felt that could have more of a negative
impact to the neighborhood than what the church wanted to do.
Commissioner Lowry asked that Staff provide to the Commissioners
a copy of the church's master plan with the next agenda write-
up.
Mr.McGetrick asked that this item be deferred until March 30,
2000,due to the fact that there were only eight Commissioners
present.
A motion was made to defer the item until the March 30,2000
Planning Commission public hearing.The vote was 8 ayes,0 nays,
and 3 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:(MARCH 21,2000)
Staff has received no new information regarding this item.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Pat McGetrick,project engineer,and Rick Barger,church elder,
were present representing the application.There were no
registered objectors present.Staff presented the item with a
recommendation for denial of this conditional use permit in
order to maintain the residential nature of this small
neighborhood,and prevent a destabilizing effect that Staff
feels would result from the church expanding it's use of houses
for nonresidential uses.
5
March 30,2000
ITEM NO.:I FILE NO.:Z-4420-B
NAME:Greater Center Star Baptist Church—
Revised Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:800 West 33 Street
OWNER/APPLICANT:Greater Center Star Baptist Church
PROPOSAL:To amend an existing conditional use
permit to add a family life building on
the north side of the existing church
and change the parking layout located
at 800 West 33rd Street on property
zoned R-4,Two Family Residential.
ORDINANCE DES IGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
This site is located on the southeast corner of the
intersection of Izard and Short 32"Street.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This site is zoned R-4,Two Family Residential,and is
surrounded by a mix of R-4 and R-3 residential zoning.
Most of those properties have houses on them except
for some vacant land to the south across 33 Street,
to the north across Short 32"Street,and the existing
small church parking area on the northwest corner of
Izard and 33 Street.
This church has been at this location since at least
1984 and seems to have been compatible with the area.
This proposal approaches over straining the available
property,particularly along Short 32"Street.Staff
believes the proposed expansion could still be
compatible with the neighborhood.
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:I FILE NO.:Z-4420-B
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
There is one access driveway from 33'hich feeds into
the heart of the church property and to a drive past
the front entrance.There are two drives from Riffel
into the main parking area.Those will not change.The
two existing drives from Short 32"will be closed and
a new drive will be constructed into the new parkinglotonthenortheastcornerofthesiteatthe
intersection with South State Street.The new southern
most parking lot should have a single access from
South State Street.
The seating capacity of the church sanctuary is 550.
That is not changed by this proposal.That generates a
parking requirement of 137 spaces,including 5
handicapped accessible.The church currently has only
96 parking spaces,or 70%of the minimum requirement.
The new building and revised parking would result in a
net loss of 7 spaces.Staff believes this would be
detrimental to the area,especially on Sunday,and
possibly more often with the increased frequency of
use of the new facility.
4 .SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with
minimum ordinance requirements.Screening of vehicle
areas from residential zoning would still be required
to meet ordinance requirements.
5 .PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
a.Izard and Short 32"Street are classified on the
Master Street Plan as commercial streets.Dedicate
right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline on bothstreets.
b.A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is
required at all corners abutting proposed church
expansion.c.Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP"
(Master Street Plan).Construct one-half street
2
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:I FILE NO.:Z-4420-B
improvements to these streets including 5-foot
sidewalks with planned development.
d.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and
ramps brought up to the current ADA standards.
e.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk
that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to
occupancy.f.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.Close driveways,which do not comply with
above ordinance.
g.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this
property.
h.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the
Little Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded
to Traffic Engineering.i.A Grading Permit for Special Flood Hazard Area per
Sec.29-186(b)will be required with Building
Permit.j.A Development Permit for Flood Hazard Area per Sec.
8-283 will be required with Building Permit.
k.Dedicate regulatory floodway easement to the City.1.Establish minimum floor elevation one inch above
100-year base flood elevation.
6.UTILITY AND FIRE DEPT.COMMENTS:
Water:Reinforcement of mains to provide adequate
fire protection in this area may be required.
These facilities would be installed at developer's
expense.
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Southwestern Bell:No comments received.
ARKLA:Approved as submitted.
Entergy:Approved as submitted.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted,but placefirehydrantspercode.
3
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:I FILE NO.:Z-4420-B
CATA:CATA'South Main route g2 comes within 2 blocks
of this site.
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has requested to amend an existing
conditional use permit to add a family life center to
the site which is just under 2 acres and is zoned R-4,
Two Family Residential.The center would be 15,634
square feet and contain a gymnasium,locker rooms,a
computer classroom,arts and crafts rooms,conference
room,kitchen,and a upper level running track.
Staff believes this proposed building is too big for
the site.To fit it on the property the applicant has
requested a waiver to all street improvements and
right-of-way dedication including Izard,the corner
radial,and Short 32"Street.Even with a waiver the
new building would be only 13 feet from the north
property line and 17 feet from the current street
pavement.That would meet side setback requirements of
5 feet.If they were to dedicate the normal right-of-
way the new building would encroach into it along
Short 32"Street by about 2 feet.The front setback to
Izard could be met even with the additional dedication
of 5 feet,but then it would be right at 25 feet.The
rear setback would be exceeded,but if they moved the
building east it would impact the east parking lot.
The other impact of this new building to this site
would be to the parking.As described earlier,the
church currently has only 70%of the minimum required
parking,and this proposal would decrease the
available parking by at least 7 spaces,to 65%of the
required minimum.If the church kept the northern
parking lot in the plan,that would raise the
available parking by 20 spaces to still only 85%of
the required minimum.No justification was provided
for why parking should be waived other than the
previous C.U.P.didn'require it.The original C.U.P.
write-up did indicate a concern over the lack of
parking.
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:I FILE NO.:Z-4420-B
The proposed height of the building is 2 feet above
the ordinance allowed maximum of 35 feet.Another
variance would be required for the proposed height.
The applicant also submitted a drawing of a sign for
the new building.It must be part of the C.U.P.,
otherwise it would not be allowed.The size proposediswellwithinstandards.
Public Works is willing to support the waiver for
right-of-way and street improvement along Short 32"
Street only,not on Izard or 33'treet.Staff could
also support the height variance and the sign
requested.
Staff believes the proposed use is reasonable and
could be compatible with the neighborhood if either
the building size is reduced,or some other
arrangements are made to provide additional parking at
least to 85%of the required minimum,or the church
provides strong justification as to why the parking
should be reduced because of the amount of walk-in or
bus-in attendees at services.
8 .STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff is unable to make a final recommendation at this
time without a resolution of the concerns that the
proposed building is too large for the site,coupled
with the lack of parking.
Those concerns could be resolved by either submitting
a revised site plan which resolves the concerns
explained in the "Staff Analysis",or by providing
justification for reduced parking which convinces the
Commission to approve a variance to the required
parking.
If those concerns cannot be resolved.Staff would
recommend deferral until they can be resolved,or
denial of the C.U.P.at this time.
5
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:I FILE NO.:Z-4420-B
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(JANUARY 27,2000)
No one was present representing the application.Staff gave
a brief description of the proposal touching on some
concerns with the Committee.(Note:many of the particular
points made above in the analysis weren't known until at
least a week after the Subdivision Committee meeting.)
There being no further issues,the Committee accepted the
proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for
final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(FEBRUARY 17,2000)
Ron Woods was present representing the application.There
were three registered objectors present.Staff presented
the item stating the proposed use was reasonable,and could
be compatible with the neighborhood if more parking was
provided to bring the total spaces to at least 85%of the
ordinance required minimum.Staff's recommendation was
dependent on resolving the lack of parking.If the
applicant could not show how they would provide the
suggested amount of parking,Staff would recommend either
deferral to allow for submittal of a revised site plan
showing at least 85%of the required parking,or denial if
the applicant did not want to provide the additional
parking.
Ron Woods distributed to the Commissioners a pack of
drawings including a revised site plan,floor plan,and
elevation views.The revised site plan showed a new parking
area to the south across 33'treet,which contained 49
parking spaces,and an additional existing parking area
containing 20 spaces to the west across Izard Street.He
stated that the number of existing and proposed spaces
would then total 120,which would represent approximately
89%of the required amount.He added that would be more
than the current 70%parking capacity.He continued by
stating the church felt the new facility was needed to be
able to provide spiritual guidance and leadership at times,
and through functions,other than just during church
services.He also made the points that 33'treet in front
6
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:I FILE NO.:2-4420-B
of the church,was wider than a normal residential street,
and that there were other non-residential uses to the east
and southeast such as a restaurant and a boys club.
Mr.Lawson made the point that Staff felt this issue should
be deferred to provide adequate time to review the new
proposal that was just provided.Staff offices had not been
given this new plan.In addition,the area immediately to
the east of the existing church still needs to be fully
defined on the site plan.
Commissioner Muse asked if the church plans to disrupttrafficflowonRiffelAvenuetoputinthesouthern
parking lot.Mr.Woods answered no,and stated that the map
he provided was inaccurate in that Riffel Avenue south of33'treet was already closed.
Mrs.Butler spoke in opposition.Her main concerns were
that the survey done in conjunction with this proposal
showed the church owned part of her property at 807 W 32"~
Street,and the proposal showed a parking lot right next to
her property.
Janet Cobb also spoke in opposition.Her main concern was
whether rezoning requested by the church would impact her
property,which abuts the church property to the south on
State Street.Vice Chair Berry informed Mrs.Cobb that this
was not a rezoning and so there would be no zoning impact
on her property.
Henry Matthews spoke in opposition.His concern was that
the church hadn'informed people in the neighborhood what
exactly they wanted to do,but now that he had seen the
proposal,he was concerned about the lack of parking.He
stated that the church members on Sunday already fill up
the supposed 'new'arking area shown across 33'treet
with cars now.So when the new building takes away existing
parking the parking problem will be worse.
Additional questions about the accuracy of the church's
survey were brought up.Based on those questions and other
issues brought up by neighbors,Mr.Woods chose to ask for
a deferral based on the policy of allowing deferral when
eight or less Commissioners are present at the hearing.
7
March 3PJ.'2000
SUBD IVI S ION
ITEM NO.:I FILE NO.:Z-4420-B
A motion was made to defer the application to the March 30,
2000 hearing.The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes,0 nays
and 3 absent.
STAFF UPDATE:(MARCH 21,2000)
Staff did receive a revised site plan,which has been added
to the write-up.It does satisfactorily meet the ordinance
requirements and Staff's concerns.Staff noted that at the
time of the last C.U.P.approval at this location,the
parking requirement was 1 space for every 5 seats,which
would have been 110 spaces.Since this request does not
change the seating capacity,that parking requirement wouldstillstand.For that requirement,this proposal would
provide 92%with the 101 spaces proposed.The applicant
stated he and the church had meetings with the neighborhood
about their concerns.Staff is not aware if all concerns of
the neighbors that attended the last hearing have been
resolved.Staff decided to let the attendance at the March
30,2000 hearing provide that answer.If no one attends in
opposition,Staff would recommend approval of the item
subject to compliance with the following conditions:
a.Comply with the City's Landscape and Buffer
Ordinances.
b.Comply with Public Works Comments as modified
below.c.Comply with Fire Department Comment.
d.All exterior lighting must be low intensity and
directed downward and inward to the property and
not towards any residential zoned area.
Staff also recommends approval of the variances for the
proposed wall sign,and to full dedication of right-of-way
and street improvements on Short 32"and Izard Streets,but
not to a variance for street improvements on W.33 Street.
Basically Staff agrees with leaving Short 32"and Izard as
they are,except for curb cuts and dedicating enough right-
of-way on Short 32"to place the sidewalk in the right-of-
way.Full street improvements would still be required on W.
33 Street in conjunction with construction of the new
parking area.
8
March 30,c JO
ITEM NO.:1 FILE NO.:S-1240
NAME:Colonel Glenn Commercial —Preliminary Plat —Time
Extension
LOCATION:Southwest corner of Colonel Glenn Road and
Interstate 430
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Vogel Enterprise —Colonel White-Daters and Associates
Glenn Development Co.401 Victory Street
11219 Financial Center Pky.Little Rock,AR 72201
Suite 300
Little Rock,AR 72211
AREA:69.546 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:28
FT.NEW STREET:4,650 linear feet
ZONING:0-3,C-3 and C-4
PLANNING DISTRICT:12
CENSUS TRACT:24.05
A.BACKGROUND:
On April 15,1999,the Planning Commission approved a
preliminary plat for the Subdivision of 69.546 acres into
28 lots,to be final platted one (1)at a time as they aresold.The approval was subject to conditions noted bystaff,and included a variance for driveway spacing.The
applicant agreed to contribute 25%or a maximum of $25,000
toward the future traffic signal installation at Colonel
Glenn and Bowman Roads.
According to Chapter 31 of the Little Rock Code of
Ordinances Section 31-94(e),"A preliminary plat approved
March 30,~JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1240
by the Planning Commission shall be effective and binding
upon the Commission for one (1)year from the date of
approval or as long as work is actively progressing,at the
end of which time the final plat application for the
subdivision must have been submitted to the PlanningStaff."
"The Planning Commission may extend the original
preliminary approval,for a period not to exceed one (1)
year from the date of approval,when it can be demonstrated
that there are no changes in the plat design or
neighborhood that warrant a complete review."As of this
date,the final plat application for the subdivision has
not been submitted to the Planning Staff.
B.PROPOSAL:
On February 22,2000,the applicant submitted a letter tostaffrequestingaone(1)year extension for the submittal
of a final plat application.As noted earlier,the lots
are to be final platted one (1)at a time as they are sold.
The applicant has informed staff that to date,there have
been no firm offers on any of the lots,but anticipates
such within the next year.There have been no changes to
the original design as previously approved by the Planning
Commission.
C.STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the one (1)year time
extension as requested by the applicant.The preliminaryplatwillbeextendedandtheapplicantwillhaveuntil
April 15,2001 to begin work on the subdivision.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
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 Chairperson place 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 30,c JO
ITEM NO.:2 FILE NO.:S-993-F
NAME:Mabelvale Business Park —Revised Preliminary Plat
LOCATION:South side of Baseline Road at Interstate 30
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Ashley Development Co.White-Daters and Associates
2851 Lakewood Village Dr.401 S.Victory Street
No.Little Rock,AR 72116 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:61.6 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:21
FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:C-3 and I-2
PLANNING DISTRICT:15
CENSUS TRACT:41.05
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1.A variance to allow double frontage lots.
2.A variance from the ordinance required driveway spacing
standards.
BACKGROUND:
On November 16,1993,the Planning Commission approved a one lot
commercial (lease lot arrangement)subdivision for this 61.6
acre property.Internal roadways were approved as a private
street system.
On August 7,1997,the Planning Commission approved a
preliminary plat to convert the single tract lease lot
March 30,2 JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-993-F
arrangement to a conventional commercial plat.The approved
plat included seven (7)lots and three (3)large tracts,set
aside for future platting.The private street system was also
approved as part of the preliminary plat.To date,Lots 1,2A,
3,4 and 5 have been final platted and developed.
A.PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to revise the previously approved
preliminary plat by splitting Lot 2B into two (2)lots (2B
and 2C)and by proposing a lot design for the three (3)
large tracts as shown on the previous plat.A total of 21lotsisproposedforthesubdivision.The lots have been
previously final platted one (1)at a time as they are
sold.The lots range in size from 0.6 acre to 16.6 acres.
The alignment of the two (2)internal streets has been
revised slightly from the previously approved plan.The
applicant plans to maintain these streets as private.
The applicant is requesting a variance to allow double
frontage lots.The lots proposed to have double frontage
are Lots 1,2B,2C,3,4,9,12,13 and 19.The applicantisalsorequestingavariancefromtheordinancerequired
driveway spacing standards at several locations throughout
the subdivision.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
As noted earlier,Lots 1,2A,3,4 and 5 of this
subdivision are developed,with the remainder of the
property being partially wooded.There is undeveloped
property to the south,with Interstate 30 immediately
north.A service station is located immediately west of
the site along I-30 and there is a mixture of residential
structures to the west along Mabelvale Pike.The Wal-Mart
Supercenter development is located immediately east.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received one phone call from
a person requesting information on this application.The
Mavis Circle and West Baseline Neighborhood Associations
were notified of the public hearing.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Proposed driveways on Lot 1 and 2 do not conform to Sec.
2
March 30,c.i0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-993-F
31-210 or Ordinance 18,031.Eliminate driveways and use
one share driveway.
2.Proposed driveways to Lot 13,14,15 and 16 do not
conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance ¹18,031.
3.Show access easements on all shared driveways.
4.Mabelvale has a 1998 average daily traffic count of
6,400.
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements
to serve property.
AP&L:No Comment.
Arkla:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment.
Water:Water main extensions to each parcel will be
required.On site fire protection will be required.
Some existing fire service lines may cross more than one
parcel.Modifications will be required to rectify that
situation.An acreage charge of $150 per acre applies in
addition to normal charges in this area.
Fire Department:Place fire hydrants per city code.
Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752 for details.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Comment received.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:No Comment.
Landsca e Issues:No Comment.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff
on March 15,2000.The revised plat notes the zoning of
the abutting property as requested.The revised plat also
removes the drive locations from the south side of the
southern internal street and notes that these drives will
be determined with the development of Lots 14-16 and will
conform to ordinance standards.
3
March 30,~i0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-993-F
The applicant has also revised the driveway locations for
the other unplatted lots within this subdivision.The
majority of the drives are shared drives between lots.
Public Works notes that a shared drive is needed between
Lots 2B and 2C on Mabelvale Plaza Boulevard.Also,the
drive on the east side of Lot 2B needs to be removed as per
Public Works.Staff will attempt to have this issue
resolved prior to the public hearing,which should
eliminate the need for a driveway spacing variance.
As noted in paragraph A.of this report,the applicant is
requesting a variance to allow double frontage lots.The
lots proposed to have double frontage are Lots 1,3,4
(previously final platted),2B,2C,9,12,13 and 19.
Section 31-232(d)of the City's Subdivision Ordinance
prohibits double frontage lots.Based on the fact that the
internal streets within this Subdivision are private and
were approved with the original preliminary plat of the
property,staff can support the proposed variance for
double frontage lots.
To staff's knowledge there are no outstanding issues
associated with the revised preliminary plat,other than
that of driveway spacing.The revised preliminary plat
should have no adverse effect on the general area.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the revised preliminary plat
subject to the following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs D
and E of this report.2.Staff recommends approval of the requested variance for
double frontage lots.3.Staff recommends denial of the requested variance for
driveway spacing.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(MARCH 9,2000)
Tim Daters was present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the revised preliminary plat.
4
March 30,~i0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:2 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-993-F
The issue of driveway locations was briefly discussed.Mr.
Daters noted that he would meet with Public Works and revise the
driveway locations.
Staff noted that a variance had been requested to allow double
frontage lots.This was briefly discussed.
The proposed streets within this subdivision were briefly
discussed.Mr.Daters noted that he had been working with the
Highway Department for the past four years regarding the
westernmost street intersection.He noted that the Highway
Department was comfortable with this street intersection.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the revised
preliminary plat to the full Commission for final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
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 the applicant had resolved the driveway
locations with Public Works and that the variance for driveway
spacing could be eliminated.Staff also noted that the
applicant,in response to neighborhood concerns,consented to
the following:
1.Construction of a traffic signal at the Mabelvale Road
intersection on the west side of this project when warranted
and required by the Arkansas Highway Department and Public
Works.
2.That street lights would be installed at the west
intersection and the interior streets and would meet typical
city ordinance requirements.
The Chairperson place 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 30,2~~0
ZTEM NO.:3 FZLE NO.:S-1076-A
NAME:Hastings Zndustrial Park —Preliminary Plat
LOCATZON:Southeast corner of Znterstate 30 and Roosevelt Road
DEVELOPER:ENGZNEER:
Moon Realty Company The Mehlburger Firm
2800 S.Vance Street 201 S.Zzard Street
Little Rock,AR 72206 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:71.586 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:20 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONZNG:Z-2/C-3/R-3
PLANNZNG DZSTRZCT:7
CENSUS TRACT:5
VARZANCES/WAZVERS REQUESTED:None recpxested.
A.PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to subdivide 71.586 acres into 19
lots for future development.Lot 1 of the Hastings
Zndustrial Park was final platted a number of years ago for
construction of an auto parts store.The current proposed
preliminary plat includes Lots 2-20.The following final
plat phasing plan is proposed:
Phase Z —Lots 12-14
Phase ZZ —Lots 15-20
Phase ZZZ —Lots 6-11
Phase ZV —Lots 2-5
March 30,2 ~0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:3 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1076-A
The applicant has noted that the interior streets within
this subdivision will be held as private and will be gatedatsomefuturetime.There is approximately 1,700 linear
feet of internal streets.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
As noted earlier,there is an auto parts store on Lot 1 of
the Hastings Industrial Park Subdivision,with an existing
office/warehouse on Lot 17.There is an existing
industrial use on Lots 18-20 at the northwest corner of the
property.The remainder of the property is undeveloped and
grass covered.
There is railroad right-of-way immediately south of thesite,with I-30 to the west.There is a mixture of
commercial uses along Roosevelt Road to the north,with a
school across Roosevelt Road.There are residential
structures to the east.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received one (1)phone call
from a person requesting information on this application.
The Community Outreach and East of Broadway Neighborhood
Associations were notified of the public hearing.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Roosevelt Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as a
minor arterial.A dedication of right-of-way to 45 feet
from centerline is required.
2.Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
these streets including 5-foot sidewalks both sides with
planned development.Existing improvements must be
repaired to meet City Ordinance.
3.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.Close driveways,which do not meet standard.
4.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.
5.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that
is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to
occupancy.
6.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
2
March 30,c JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:3 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1076-A
approval prior to start of work.
7.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities
are required.
8.Roosevelt Road has a 1998 average daily traffic count of
15,000.
9.A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec.29-186(e)
will be required with building permit.
10.A Grading Permit for Special Flood Hazard Area per Sec.
29-186(b)will be required with building permit.
11.A Development Permit for Flood Hazard Area per Sec.
8-283 will be required with building permit.
12.Contact the ADEQ for approval prior to start work.
13.Contact the USACE-LRD for approval prior to start of
work.
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements
to serve all lots.Existing sewer on site may require
relocation.
AP&L:No Comment.
Arkla:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:Existing water mains appear to be adequate for
Phase I.Water main extensions at the developer's
expense will be required for future phases.On-site fire
protection and/or additional fire hydrants may be
required for some sites.An acreage charge of $150 per
acre applies in addition to normal charges in this area.
Any needed relocation of existing facilities will be at
the expense of the developer.
Fire Department:No Comment.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Comment received.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:No Comment.
/Landsca e Issues:No Comment.
3
March 30,c i0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:3 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1076-A
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff
on March 16,2000.The revised plat provides all of the
additional notations as required by staff.The following
items have been noted on the revised plat:
1.PAGIS Monuments
2.Proposed water supply and means of wastewater disposal.
3.Storm drainage analysis and preliminary storm drainage
plan.
4.Zoning of property and abutting property.
To staff's knowledge,there are no outstanding issues
associated with the proposed preliminary plat.The
subdividing of this industrial property should have no
adverse effect on the general area.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat subjecttocompliancewiththerequirementsasnotedinparagraphs
D and E of this report.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(MARCH 9,2000)
Frank Riggins was present,representing the application.Staff
briefly explained the proposed preliminary plat and noted
several items which needed to be shown on the plat drawing.
Mr.Riggins noted that the streets within this subdivision were
private and would be gated at some future time.Staff noted
that the lots would be final platted in phases.
Tad Borkowski,of Public Works,noted that the Public Works
Comments would be revised based on the fact that the streets
within the Subdivision would be private.This was briefly
discussed.
There being no further issues for discussion,the Committee
forwarded the preliminary plat to the full Commission for final
action.
4
March 30,2 i0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:3 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1076-A
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a
letter on March 24,2000 requesting that this application be
deferred to the May 11,2000 agenda.The required notices were
not mailed.Staff supported the deferral request.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the
May 11,2000 agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The
motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
5
March 30,2uJO
ITEM NO.:4 FILE NO.:S-1275
NAME:Hughey's Replat —Preliminary Plat
LOCATION:4808 Baseline Road
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Margaret Hughey The Mehlburger Firm
4808 Baseline Road 201 S.Izard Street
Little Rock,AR 72209 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:2.493 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:2 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:R-2/C-1
PLANNING DISTRICT:14
CENSUS TRACT:41.07
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
BACKGROUND:
The 2.493 acre property was recently illegally subdivided by
Richdale Development Co.,with the south portion of the property
being sold to Margaret Hughey.A 25 foot access and utility
easement along the west side of Lot 1 was also recorded to
provide access to Lot 2.
A.PROPOSAL:
The property owners are proposing a preliminary plat for
the property in order to resolve the illegal subdivisionissue.The south 273 feet of the property along with
Margaret Hughey's additional property (immediately east)is
proposed as Lot 1.The remaining north 347 feet is
proposed as Lot 2.
March 30,2 ~0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1275
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There is an existing structure on Lot 1 which contains a
beauty salon.The remainder of the property is undeveloped
and partially wooded.
There are existing commercial buildings east and west of
the site along the north side of Baseline Road.There are
single family residences to the south across Baseline Road,
with R-2 zoned property to the north.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received one (1)phone call
from a person requesting information on this application.
The Windamere and Upper Baseline Neighborhood Associations
were notified of the public hearing.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Baseline is listed on the Master Street Plan as a
principal arterial,dedication of right-of-way to 45 feet
from centerline will be required.
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.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.Close unused driveways.
5.Baseline Road has an average daily traffic counts of
13,000.
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
AP&L:No Comment.
Arkla:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment.
Water:This plat creates a landlocked parcel.This will
cause problems in providing water service and fire
protection in the future for any use of Lot 2.
Consideration should be given to providing for each lot
have frontage on a water main and adequate access for
fire protection.Combining Lot 2 with the property to
2
March 30,2 ~0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1275
the west and creating a single parcel would also provide
a possible solution to these problems.
Fire Department:No Comment.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Comment received.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:No Comment.
Landsca e Issues:No Comment.
G.ANALYSIS:
On March 15,2000,the applicant submitted a letter to
staff requesting that this item be deferred to the May 11,
2000 Planning Commission meeting.Staff supports the
deferral as requested.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends deferral of this item to the May 11,2000
Planning Commission meeting.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(MARCH 9,2000)
Larry Lester,Jeremy Ventress and Frank Riggins were present,
representing the application.Staff briefly described the
preliminary plat and noted several items which needed to be
shown on a revised plat drawing.
In response to a question from staff,Mr.Ventress noted that
both lots would be final platted at the same time.
Staff noted that an access drive to Lot 2 must be constructed
when Lot 2 is developed.This issue was briefly discussed.Mr.
Lester noted that he would meet with the other property owner
regarding this issue.
Tad Borkowski,of Public Works,noted that the westernmost curb
cut needed to be closed,with the only access being the existing
driveway to Lot 1 and the access easement.This issue was
3
March 30,c i0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:4 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1275
discussed.Mr.Borkowski noted that he would meet with Mr.
Lester on the site and review the driveway locations.
Staff noted that Lot 2 had no street frontage and providing
water service to this lot would be a problem.Staff suggested
creating a pipe stem for Lot 2 (Baseline frontage)or combining
Lot 2 with the property to the west,which had the same
ownership.This issue was discussed.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the preliminary
plat to the full Commission for final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a
letter on March 15,2000 recpxesting that this application be
deferred to the May 11,2000 agenda.Staff supported the
deferral recpxest.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the
May 11,2000 agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The
motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
4
March 30,~JO
ITEM NO.:5 FILE NO.:S-1276
NAME:Crestwood Corporate Center —Preliminary Plat
LOCATION:West side of Aldersgate Road,approximately 1,300
feet south of Kanis Road
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Crestwood,Inc.McGetrick and McGetrick
610 Garland Street 319 East Markham St.,Ste.202
Conway,AR 72032 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:12.5 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:8 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:POD
PLANNING DISTRICT:11
CENSUS TRACT:24.04
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
A.PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to subdivide 12.5 acres into eight
(8)lots as a component of a revised POD application (Item
5.1 on this agenda).A small office building is proposed
for each lot,with access to Lots 2-8 being gained by
utilizing access easements from Aldersgate Road.Lot 1
will have a direct access drive from Aldersgate Road.The
applicant proposes to final plat Lot 1 initially,with Lots
2-8 being final platted (as Phase II)at a later date.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site has been partially cleared,with a number of the
interior and perimeter trees being preserved.The property
slopes from Aldersgate Road downward to the Interstate 430
March 30,~a0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1276
right-of-way.Camp Aldersgate is located immediately south
of this site,with several single-family residences to the
east across Aldersgate Road.There are four single-family
residences to the north along the west side of Aldersgate
Road,with 0-3 zoned property further north and to the
northeast.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received no comment from the
neighborhood.The John Barrow and Sewer District ¹147
Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public
hearing.
D .ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Aldersgate Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as
a collector street.Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet
from centerline.
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.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.Verify sight distance for propose driveways.
4.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted
for approval prior to start of work.
5.Aldersgate Road has a 1998 average daily traffic count
5,000.
6.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the
Little Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to
Traffic Engineering.
7.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this
property.
8.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities
are required.
9.Internal streets shall be constructed to minor
commercial standards with turn around and dual
sidewalks per (Ordinance ¹18,055).
10.A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec.29-186(e)
will be required with building permit.
11.A Grading Permit per Secs.29-186(c)and (d)will be
required with building permit.
2
March 30,~&0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1276
12.Contact the ADEQ for approval before start of work if 5
acres are disturbed.
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main on site,possible relocation or
extension required.
AP&L:No Comment.
Arkla:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:An acreage charge of $150 per acre applies in
addition to normal fees.Water main extensions and on-
site fire protection will be required.Any needed
relocation of existing facilities will be at the expense
of the developer.
Fire Department:No Comment.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Comment received.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:No Comment.
Landsca e Issues:No Comment.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to staff
on March 16,2000.The revised plan provides most of the
notations as required by staff.The following items need
to be included on a revised plat drawing:
1.Storm drainage analysis and preliminary storm drainage
plan.
2.A PAGIS Monument at each Subdivision corner
3.Source of title
To staff'knowledge,there are no other outstanding issues
associated with the preliminary plat.The proposed plat
should have no adverse effect on the general area.
3
March 30,c..0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1276
H.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.The applicant must submit a revised preliminary plat
with the additional items shown as noted in paragraph
G.of this report.3.The applicant must submit a preliminary Bill of
Assurance for this subdivision.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(MARCH 9,2000)
Pat McGetrick was present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the preliminary plat,noting that several
items needed to be shown on the plat drawing.Staff also noted
that a cover letter and preliminary Bill of Assurance needed to
be submitted.
This item and item 5.1.were discussed simultaneously,with the
majority of the discussion pertaining to the revised POD site
plan.
After the discussions,the Committee forwarded the preliminary
plat to the full Commission for final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
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 Chairperson place 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 30,c JO
ITEM NO.:5.1 FILE NO.:Z-4403-F
NAME:Crestwood Corporate Center —Revised POD
LOCATION:West side of Aldersgate Road,approximately 1,300
feet south of Kanis Road
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Crestwood,Inc.McGetrick and McGetrick
610 Garland Street 319 E.Markham St.,Ste.202
Conway,AR 72032 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:12.5 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:8 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:POD ALLOWED USES:Office
PROPOSED USE:Office
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None recpxested.
BACKGROUND:
On April 20,1999,the Board of Directors passed Ordinance No.
17,999 which rezoned this property from MF-24 to POD.The
approved site plan included five (5)buildings with a total area
of 140,000 scpxare feet.The buildings range in size from 6,000
scpxare feet to 56,800 scpxare feet,with three (3)of the five
(5)buildings being two-stories in height.
A total of 422 parking spaces was shown on the approved site
plan.Three (3)access points were approved from Aldersgate
Road.A land use buffer with a minimum dimension of 32 feet was
approved along the west property line,where adjacent to the
Camp Aldersgate property.
March 30,c.JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4403-F
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to revise the previously approved
POD by subdividing the property into eight (8)lots (Item 5
on this agenda)and constructing a single office building
with associated parking on each lot.The buildings range
in size from 5,000 square feet to 19,000 square feet (Lot
1),with a total building area of 103,000 square feet,a
reduction of 37,000 square feet from the previously
approved plan.
The amount of parking on each lot ranges from 20 spaces to
60 spaces (Lot 1),with a total of 240 parking spaces,a
reduction of 182 parking spaces from the previously
approved plan.The ordinance would typically require 217
parking spaces for an office development of this size.
Three (3)access points from Aldersgate Road are proposed
as were previously approved.
The applicant is requesting 0-3 permitted uses for the
property.The proposed hours of operation will be from
7:30 a.m.to 5:30 p.m.,Monday through Friday.
The applicant has stated that a tree study will be
performed on the site in order to maintain as many of the
existing trees as possible.Existing trees,6 inches to 8
inches in caliper,will be relocated to landscape areas
around the buildings and parking areas.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site has been partially cleared,with a number of the
interior and perimeter trees being preserved.The property
slopes from Aldersgate Road downward to the Interstate 430
right-of-way.Camp Aldersgate is located immediately south
of this site,with several single-family residences to the
east across Aldersgate Road.There are four single-family
residences to the north along the west side of Aldersgate
Road,with 0-3 zoned property further north and to the
northeast.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received no comment from the
neighborhood.The John Barrow and Sewer District 5147
Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public
hearing.
2
March 30,2 ~0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4403-F
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Aldersgate Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as
a collector street.Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet
from centerline.
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.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
¹18,031.Verify sight distance for proposed driveways.
4.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted
for approval prior to start of work.
5.Aldersgate Road has a 1998 average daily traffic count
5,000.
6.Prepare a letter of pending development addressingstreetlightsasrequiredbySection31-403 of theLittleRockCode.All requests should be forwarded toTrafficEngineering.
7.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this
property.
8.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities
are required.
9.Internal streets shall be constructed to minor
commercial standards with turn around and dual
sidewalks.(Ordinance ¹18,055)
10.A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec.29-186(e)
will be required with building permit.11.A Grading Permit per Secs.29-186(c)and (d)will be
required with building permit.
12.Contact the ADEQ for approval before start of work.
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main on site,possible relocation or
extension required.
AP&L:No Comment.
Arkla:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:An acreage charge of $150 per acre applies in
addition to normal fees.Water main extensions and
on-site fire protection will be required.Any needed
3
March 30,2 ~'0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4403-F
relocation of existing facilities will be at the expense
of the developer.
Fire Department:Place fire hydrants per city code.
Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752 regarding the required
turning radii for the parking areas.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Comment received.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
The request is located in the I-430 Planning District.The
Land Use Plan shows Suburban Office for this location.The
property is currently zoned Planned Office development and
the zoning request is for a revision of the current Planned
Office Development.The revision of a Planned Office
Development for the construction of an office park is
consistent with the Land Use Plan.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:The John Barrow
Neighborhood Area Plan calls for enhancing the climate
towards encouraging new businesses to locate in the area
and encouraging the construction of new businessfacilities.The development of a POD will be compatible
with the medical related offices located to the west.
Landsca e Issues:
Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with
ordinance requirements.However,portions of the proposed
street buffer width along Aldersgate Road is considerably
less than what was previously approved by the Planning
Commission.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan and additional
information to staff on March 16,2000.The revised site
plan addresses most of the issues as raised by the staff
and Subdivision Committee.The following items have been
shown on the revised plan as requested:
4
March 30,2 i0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4403-F
1.Dumpster location
2.Screening along the south property line
3.Sign locations,one (1)at each entrance from
Aldersgate Road
4.Back-out space at the end of each parking area.
5.Increased buffer areas along Aldersgate Road and I-430
6.A bus stop along Aldersgate Road
7.Stormwater detention areas.
The applicant also needs to provide screening along the
north property line where adjacent to residential property.
One area of concern relates to the driveway locations for
Lots 3 and 6.The two drives form a "T"intersection with
the main access drive from Aldersgate Road.The applicant
needs to close the access drive median in this area or
relocate one of the two driveways.
Otherwise,staff can foresee no other outstanding issues
associated with the site plan.The revised POD site plan
provides for less building area and a smaller amount of
parking than the previously approved site plan.This
proposed development should have no adverse effect on the
general area.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the revised POD subject to the
following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D,E and F of this report.2.0-3 permitted uses shall be the approved use mix for
the development.3.The three (3)proposed ground-mounted signs must be
monument-type,with a maximum height of six (6)feet
and a maximum area of 64 square feet.4.Any site lighting should be low-level and directed away
from adjacent property.5.Required screening must be provided along the north and
south property lines.6.The dumpster areas must be enclosed on three (3)sides
with an 8 foot opaque fence or wall.7.The "T"intersection issue between Lots 3 and 6 must beresolved.
5
March 30,c ~'0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:5.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-4403-F
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(MARCH 9,2000)
Pat McGetrick was present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the revised POD site plan.Staff noted that a
cover letter (to include proposed use mix)and the following
information was needed:
1.Hours of operation
2.Dumpster location
3.Screening
4.Sign locations and details
5.Back out space for parking areas
6.Stormwater detention area
Staff noted that the minimum perimeter buffer areas and the bus
stop area which were approved on the previous plan needed to be
shown on this plan.Mr.McGetrick noted that they would be
provided.
In response to a question from staff,Mr.McGetrick noted
that existing interior and perimeter trees would be saved.
Mr.McGetrick noted that if any retaining walls were constructed
on the site,they would be very short and installed to protect
existing trees.
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.Mr.McGetrick
did not indicate any problems with these requirements.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the revised POD to
the full Commission for resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30'0QQ)
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 Chairperson place 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.
6
March 30,2.i0
ITEM NO.:6 FILE NO.:Z-6830
NAME:Folkner —Short-Form PCD
LOCATION:9125 Mann Road
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Tom Folkner Laha Engineering,Inc.
9125 Mann Road P.O.Box 190251
Little Rock,AR 72209 Little Rock,AR 72219
AREA:Approx.2.25 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1
FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:C-3/R-5/R-2 ALLOWED USES:Commercial,Multifamily
and Single Family
Residential
PROPOSED USE:Commercial
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone the property from C-3/R-
5/R-2 to PCD to allow for the development of a mini-
warehouse complex and expansion of the existing commercial
building at 9125 Mann Road.The following improvements are
proposed for the property:
~Construction of a second story to the existing commercial
(tavern)building to house an office and two (2)
apartment units.
~Parking for 13 vehicles on the south side of the
commercial building.
~Construction of five (5)mini-warehouse buildings with atotalof19,725 square feet located within the southern
portion of the property.
March 30,2 i0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:6 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6830
The existing building and parking,proposed buildings and
parking,access drives,screening fences and
landscape/buffer areas are noted on the attached site plan.
The applicant proposes the following hours of operation for
the various proposed uses:
~existing tavern —existing hours will not change(specific hours not provided to staff).
~mini-warehouse development —6:00 a.m.—6:00 p.m.,daily
~office —8:00 a.m.—5:00 p.m.—Monday-Saturday
The applicant is recpxesting C-3 permitted uses and "truck
and trailer rental"as a proposed use mix for commercial
building and property fronting Mann Road.The applicantnotesthatthetruckandtrailerrentalusewillincludeinstallationoftrailerhitches,car towing devices,etc.,but no vehicular maintenance.A truck and trailer displayareahasbeennotedonthesiteplan.
The applicant proposes the following development criteriaforthemini-warehouse buildings:
~The perimeter walls of the mini-warehouse buildingswillbeconstructedofdecorativemasonryblock.
~The perimeter sides of the mini-warehouse buildingswillhaveamansard-type,composition pitched roof.
~All door openings for the mini-warehouse structureswillbetowardtheinteriorofthesite.
The applicant has noted that there will be one (1)new
ground mounted sign located along Mann Road.The locationisshownontheattachedsiteplan.The applicant also
notes that the existing trees within the setback area alongStardustTrailwillbepreserved.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There is an existing one-story commercial building (tavern)
and parking area on the C-3 zoned portion of the property.
The southern portion of the property,where the mini-
warehouse development is proposed,is undeveloped andpartiallywooded.
There are multifamily structures to the east along Terrace
Place,with a commercial building also located to the east
on the south side of Mann Road.Single family residencesarelocatedtothewestacrossStardustTrailandtothe
south across Preston Dr.There is a City of Little RockAlertCenterimmediatelywestalongthesouthsideofMann
2
March 30,2 i0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:6 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6830
Road.Railroad right-of-way is located to the north across
Mann Road.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received one (1)phone call
from a person requesting information on this application.
The West Baseline Neighborhood Association was notified of
the public hearing.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Revise driveway location to conform to Sec.31-210 or
Ordinance 18,031 (one per 250 feet of frontage).
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.
5.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.6.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing street
lights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock
Code.All requests should be forwarded to Traffic
Engineering.
7.Show pavement areas around storage structures with
appropriate vehicle maneuvering room.
8.Verify turning radius for SUV vehicles around buildings.
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
AP&L:A 30 foot easement is requested along the north
property line,a 25 foot easement is requested along the
west and south property lines,and a 15 foot easement is
requested along the east property line.Contact utility
for details.
Arkla:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment.
Water:This area appears to be platted as Mann Terrace.
This property would have to be replatted to combine lots
or be returned to acreage in order to receive water
service.Another related problem is the existence of
utility easements along the platted lot lines.
Particularly of concern is a 10-foot easement between
3
March 30,2 ~0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:6 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6830
Lots 11 and 12.There is an 8"water main in that
easement and the proposed buildings appear to encroach on
the easement.An acreage charge of $150 per acre applies
in addition to normal charges.
Fire Department:An extra fire hydrant may be required.
Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752 for details.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Comment received.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
The request is located in the Geyer Springs West District.
The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use for this location.The
applicant's property is currently zoned C-3 General
Commercial,R-2 Single Family,and R-5 Urban Residential.
The applicant filed a zoning request for a Planned
Commercial Development to construct mini-storage warehouses
and apartments while continuing business at the existing
tavern.The resulting mix of commercial and residential
uses is consistent with the Mixed-Use category.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:The applicant's
property is located in an area covered by the Chicot
West/I-30 South Neighborhood Action Plan,which does not
contain goals or action statements relevant to this
application.
Landsca e Issues:The plan submitted is unclear
concerning areas to be landscaped.Street buffers are
required to maintain a minimum width of 6 feet.It appears
that some of the street buffers are below this requirement.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
March 16,2000.The revised plan addresses most of the
issues as raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee.
The revised plan shows the proposed dumpster and sign
locations.The revised plan also shows a fire hydrant at
the end of Terrace Place and an emergency gate/access for
the fire department.The revised plan also notes that the
4
March 30,x i0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:6 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6830
existing middle two (2)access points from Mann Road will
be eliminated.
The applicant notes that the proposed ground-mounted sign
will meet typical ordinance standards.The Zoning
Ordinance allows ground-mounted commercial signs to have a
maximum height of 36 feet and a maximum area of 160 squarefeet.
The staff recpxested (at the Subdivision Committee meeting)
that the applicant provide details related to the parking
area between the commercial building and Mann Road.The
revised plan notes that there are 70 new and existing
parking spaces in this area,with no other details
provided.Based on this,staff cannot determine whether
the parking spaces meet ordinance recpxirements or whether
there is adecpxate landscape and buffer areas between the
building and Mann Road.The applicant needs to submit a
revised site plan to address this issue.
As noted in paragraph A.,the applicant is proposing C-3
permitted uses and "truck and trailer rental"as proposed
uses for the existing commercial building and property
fronting Mann Road.Staff feels that the "truck andtrailerrental"use will not be compatible with this
general area and only supports C-3 permitted uses for the
existing commercial building.
Otherwise,staff feels that the applicant has done an
adecpxate job in addressing the site plan issues associated
with this property,with the exception of the front parking
and landscaped areas.Staff supports the development of
the property,with the elimination of "truck and trailerrental"from the proposed use mix.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the PCD rezoning subject tothefollowingconditions:
1.Compliance with the recpxirements as noted in paragraphs
D,E and F of this report.2.A revised site plan must be submitted showing the
appropriate parking,landscape and buffer areas between
the existing commercial building and Mann Road,.3.Any site lighting should be low-level and directed away
from adjacent property.
5
March 30,2 i0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:6 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6830
4.The perimeter walls of the mini-warehouse buildings must
be constructed of decorative masonry block.5.The perimeter sides of the mini-warehouse buildings must
have mansard-type,composition pitched roofs.6.The dumpster area must be enclosed on three (3)sides
with an 8 foot opaque fence or wall.7.All door openings for the mini-warehouse buildings must
be toward the interior of the site.8.Staff recommends C-3 permitted uses as alternate uses for
the existing commercial building.Staff does not support"truck and trailer rental"as a permitted use for this
development.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(MARCH 9,2000)
Allan Beasley was present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the PCD site plan and noted that the following
additional information was needed:
1.Hours of operation for the existing tavern
2.Existing parking details
3.Dumpster location,if applicable
4.Existing/proposed signage with details
5.Building heights
Staff noted that the exterior walls of the mini-warehouse
buildings (along the property perimeter)should be constructed
of decorative block and that the structures should have
composition roofs with a minimum pitch of four (4)in twelve
(12)degrees,in order to blend in with the surrounding
residential property.Mr.Beasley stated that the structures
would be of metal construction and composition roofs would bedifficulttoprovide.Staff suggested a roof with a false
mansard as an alternative.This issue was briefly discussed.
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.Mr.
Beasley noted that all but two (2)of the existing driveways to
Mann Road would be eliminated.
Mr.Beasley indicated that truck and trailer rental would be
added as a requested use for the property.Staff noted that a
revised cover letter should be submitted if this were the case.
This issue was discussed.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the PCD to the
full Commission for resolution.
6
March 30,c ~0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:6 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6830
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Alan Beasley was present,representing the application.Staff
briefly described the proposed PCD with a recommendation of
approval with conditions,without "truck and trailer rental"as
a permitted use.
Alan Beasley addressed the Commission in support of the
application.He noted that the proposed truck and trailer
rental use would involve trailer hitch installation,etc.but no
vehicular maintenance.He stated that two (2)overhead doors
would be installed on the Mann Road side of the commercial
building.
Chairperson Adcock asked about the open ditch along Mann Road.
Mr.Beasley noted that the open ditch would be filled in and the
area used as parking and landscaping.He briefly described the
parking area between the commercial building and Mann Road.
Chairperson Adcock asked if any vehicles would be left on the
property over night.Mr.Beasley noted that only trailer
hitches and brake light connections would be done and that no
vehicles would be left on the property over night.
Chairperson Adcock asked about the perimeter sides of the mini-
warehouse buildings.
Mr.Beasley explained that the perimeter walls would be
constructed of decorative block (split-face block),not cinder
blocks.The facade treatment was briefly discussed.
Mr.Beasley also noted that he anticipated a complete "face-lift"for the existing commercial building.
Norm Floyd,of the West Baseline Neighborhood Association,spoke
in support of the application.He noted that this was the best
use of the property in the long run.He supported "truck andtrailerrental"as a use for the property.
Commissioner Hawn noted that trailer hitch and brake line
installation were uses that should not effect adjacent property.
7
March 30,c.~0
SUBDZVZSZON
ZTEM NO.:6 (Cont.)FZLE NO.:Z-6830
A motion was made to approve the application subject to the
conditions as noted in paragraph H.of the agenda report and to
allow "truck and trailer rental"as a permitted use.The motion
passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
8
March 30,2 ~0
ITEM NO.:7 FILE NO.:Z-6831
NAME:Trammell —Shor t-Form PD-0
LOCATION:13608 Kanis Road
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Robert Trammell Hope Engineers
22021 Denny Road 406 West South Street
Little Rock,AR 72223 Benton,AR 72015
AREA:2.50 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:1 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:R-2 ALLOWED USES:Single Family Residential
PROPOSED USE:Office
VARIANCE S/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1.A deferral is requested for the removal of one (1)of the two
(2)existing driveways from Kanis Road.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone the property at 13608
Kanis Road from R-2 to PD-O.The applicant proposes to
convert the existing single family residence to an officeforalawfirm.The applicant,Robert Trammell,notes the
following:
"It is requested that the designation of the
referenced property be modified so as to allow
the structure thereon to be occupied by my law
firm.Including myself,we have three lawyers,
and three staff persons,doing mostlylitigation.The particular sort of litigation,
insurance defense trial work,involves
insignificant traffic and visitors.Our
engagements are more often than not via mail.
Most dealings with parties,witnesses and
March 30,2 i0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6831
opposing attorneys are downtown,and in othercounties."
"The use would seem to be compatible with theexistingcommercialandofficeactivityon
Kanis,and this area'transition makes our
move even more suitable."
"The exterior modifications will be limited to
supplemental parking hard surface,the removalofallofthefunctionallyobsolescentfencing
and outbuildings,paint,and landscapingrestoration."
The applicant notes that the hours of operation will be asfollows:
7:30 a.m.to 5:00 p.m.,Monday through Thursday8:00 a.m.to 3:00 p.m.,Friday
The applicant is proposing one (1)ground-mounted sign nearthecenteroftheproperty,to be located at least five (5)feet back from the front property line (after right-of-waydedication).It is noted that the sign will be monument-
type,with a maximum height of six (6)feet and a maximumareaof24squarefeet.
The only construction that the applicant is proposing onthesiteistheadditionofasmallparkingareaonthe
west side of the existing business.The parking area willconsistofsix(6)spaces,which will accommodate the three
(3)lawyers and three (3)staff persons who will report tothissite.The existing carport will also provide two (2)parking spaces.The proposed parking area will be screened
from the property to the west with dense evergreen
plantings.
The property currently contains two (2)access drives toKanisRoad.The Public Works Department is requiring that
one (1)of these drives be eliminated in order to complywiththeordinancerequirementsfordrivewayspacing.Theapplicantisrequestingadeferraloftherequirementto
remove one (1)driveway until Kanis Road is reconstructed.
The existing building,existing drives,proposed parkingareaandsignlocationarenotedontheattachedsiteplan.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There is an existing single family structure and accessorystructuresontheproperty.The are two (2)access pointstoKanisRoad,connecting via a circular drive.
2
March 30,~~0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6831
The property to the north contains single family
residences,as does the property to the west.There is an
auto repair shop and single family residences on large lotstothesouthacrossKanisRoad.There is undeveloped
wooded property immediately east,with the Independent Case
Management office building under construction just furthereast.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received no comment from the
neighborhood.The Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber
Ridge and Parkway Place Neighborhood Associations werenotifiedofthepublichearing.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Kanis Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as a
minor arterial.A dedication of right-of-way to 45 feet
from centerline is required.
2.Driveways shall conform to Scca 31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.Show parking for employees and
customers'.
Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).Construct one-half street improvements to
this street including 5-foot sidewalk with planned
developments4.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.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the
Little Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to
Traffic Engineering.
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer not available to this property.Sewer
main extension required with easements if service is
needed from Little Rock Wastewater Utility.
AP&L:No Comment.
Arkla:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
3
March 30,~i0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6831
Water:No objection.Contact the Water Works if
additional water service is needed.
Fire Department:No Comment.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Comment received.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
This request is located in the Ellis Mountain PlanningDistrict.The Land Use Plan shows Suburban Office for this
location.The applicant's property is located in an R-2
Single Family zoning district and the zoning request is for
a Planned Development Office for the conversion of a single
family residence into a small office building.The requestisconsistentwithSuburbanOfficelanduse.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plans contained the
commercial development goal objective of promoting
commercial and office development that enhances the
primarily residential nature of the community.
Landsca e Issues:
A 6 foot high opaque screen,either a wooden fence with its
face side directed outward or dense evergreen plantings,is
required to help screen this site from adjacent residential
properties to the east,west and north.Credit toward
fulfilling this requirement can be given for existing
vegetation preserved.
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as manyexistingtreesasfeasibleonthistreecoveredproperty.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan and additional
information to staff on March 16,2000.The revised plan
addresses all of the issues as raised by staff and the
4
March 30,~i0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6831
Subdivision Committee.The revised site plan notes the
following:
1.Sign location and details
2.Proposed parking area
3.Dense evergreen screening between the parking area and
the residential property to the west
As noted in paragraph A.,the applicant is requesting a
deferral of the requirement to remove one (1)of the two
(2)existing driveways from Kanis Road,until Kanis Road is
reconstructed.Public Works has indicated support of the
deferral for five (5)years or until Kanis Road is
reconstructed,whichever occurs first.At the end of the
five (5)year period,if the Kanis Road reconstruction is
not imminent,the applicant can request an extension for
the deferral.
The applicant has noted that the required right-of-way for
Kanis Road will be dedicated.Public Works recommends that
the applicant do a 15 percent in-lieu contribution for the
future construction of the required Kanis Road half street
improvements.The in-lieu contribution can be tied to the
proposed parking lot construction.
Otherwise,to staff's knowledge,there are no outstanding
issues associated with this application.Staff feels that
the proposed PD-0 is an appropriate development within this
area of Suburban Office along the north side of Kanis Road.
H.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 recommends approval of the deferral of the
requirement to eliminate one (1)of the two (2)existing driveways,for five (5)years or until Kanis
Road is reconstructed,whichever occurs first.3.The proposed sign will be monument-type,with a maximum
height of six (6)feet and a maximum area of 24 squarefeet.
4.Any site lighting must be low-level and directed away
from adjacent property.5.Staff supports a 15 percent in-lieu contribution for
the future improvements to Kanis Road.
5
March 30,~i0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:7 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6831
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(MARCH 9,2000)
Robert Trammell was present,representing the application.
Staff briefly described the proposed PD-O.Staff noted that
hours of operation and sign details needed to be provided.
Staff noted that parking to accommodate the six (6)employees
which would work at the site needed to be provided.The parking
design was briefly discussed.Mr.Trammell noted that he was
considering a small parking area on the west side of the
existing building.
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed.Tad
Borkowski,of Public Works,noted that one of the two existing
drives from Kanis Road needed to be closed.This issue was
discussed.Mr.Trammell indicated that a deferral of this
requirement would be requested.
Bob Brown,of the Planning Staff,noted that the business
activity (parking)would have to be screened from the adjacent
residential property.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the PD-0 to the
full Commission for resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a
letter on March 21,2000 requesting that this application be
deferred to the May 11,2000 agenda.The required notices were
not mailed.Staff supported the deferral request.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the
May 11,2000 agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The
motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
6
March 30,c JO
ITEM NO.:8 FILE NO.:Z-6832
NAME:Oak Place Court —Short-Form PRD
LOCATION:13123 Baseline Road
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Marcus Fitts/Robert McFarlane McGetrick and McGetrick
16 Perdido Cr.319 E.Markham St.,Ste.202LittleRock,AR 72211 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:4.53 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:12
FT.NEW STREET:538 linear feet
ZONING:R-2 ALLOWED USES:Single Family Residential
PROPOSED USE:Single Family Residential
and Condominiums
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to rezone the property at 13123BaselineRoadfromR-2 to PRD.The applicant proposes tocreate11singlefamilyresidentiallotswithinthewest '&
of the property,with patio homes and/or zero lot line
homes to be constructed.The applicant proposes toconstructcondominiumswithintheeasternportionof the
property.The applicant notes that the maximum height for
any of the buildings will be 32 feet.
The condominium component of this development consists offour(4)buildings and 14 units with garages.The
applicant proposes a horizontal property regime,where theindividualcondounitsaresoldandthesurrounding
property is held under a common ownership.
March 30,c ~0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6832
The applicant proposes to construct a cul-de-sac fromBaselineRoadtoaccessthisproposedproject.There will
be two (2)access points from the cul-de-sac which willaccessreargaragesforthethreenorthernmostcondo
buildings.The southernmost condo building will haveaccessfromtheendofthecul-de-sac.The individual
single family lots along the western portion of the
property will have direct access to the cul-de-sac.
The proposed site plan also notes that a six (6)foot
opacpxe fence will be constructed along all propertyboundaries.The proposed single family lots,condominiums,cul-de-sac,access drives and fencing are noted on theattachedsiteplan.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There is an existing single family residence and accessorybuildingsontheproperty.The south portion of the
property is partially wooded.
The Eagle Hill Apartment Complex and golf course is locatedacrossBaselineRoadtothenorth,with a church to thenortheast.There is a new single family residential
development to the west and single family residences onlargelotstotheeastalongthesouthsideofBaseline
Road.The golf driving range property (PCD proposed to be
revoked)is located immediately south.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received no comment from theneighborhood.The Otter Creek Homeowners Association andCrystalValleyPropertyOwnersAssociationswerenotifiedofthepublichearing.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Baseline Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as a
principal arterial,dedication of right-of-way to 55feetfromcenterlinewillberecpxired.
2.Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP"(MasterStreetPlan).Construct one-half street improvements to
these streets including 5-foot sidewalks with planned
development.Shift improvements to connect to the
existing improvements on Baseline Road.
2
March 30,i &0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6832
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
16,577.
5.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.6.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities
are required.
7.Baseline Road has an average daily traffic count 5,400.
8.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
street lights as required by Section 31-403 of theLittleRockCode.All requests should be forwarded to
Traffic Engineering.
9.A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per 29-186(e)will be
required with building permit.
10.A Grading Permit per Secs.29-186(c)and (d)will be
required with building permit.11.Contact the ADEQ for approval prior to start work.
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements
to serve property.
AP&L:No Comment.
Arkla:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:An 8"water main extension will be required.
Placement of fire hydrants should be reviewed by theLittleRockFireDepartmentandwillprobablybe
different than those locations shown on the plans.A
development fee may apply based on the size of the
connection to the water main on the north side of
Baseline Road.A legal description of the property is
needed to determine the location and charges due.
Fire Department:Place fire hydrants per city code.
Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752 for details.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Comment received.
3
March 30,c.a0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6832
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:
This request is located in the Otter Creek PlanningDistrict.The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this
location.The applicant's property is zoned R-2 Single
Family and the zoning request is for Planned Residential
Development.The applicant wishes to develop a tract of
land for single family homes and condominiums.The requestisconsistentwithSingle-Family land use.
Cit Reco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan:
The pending Otter Creek/Crystal Valley Neighborhood Action
Plan is scheduled to be heard by the Board of Directors on
April 4,2000.The pending neighborhood action plan
encourages the development of owner occupied properties for
the area.The pending plan also calls for the construction
of sidewalks and the installation of streetlights in all
new developments.
Landsca e Issues:
A six foot high opaque screen,either a wooden fence withitsfacesidedirectedoutwardordenseevergreen
plantings,is required east of the proposed condominiums.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
March 15,2000.The revised plan addresses all of the
concerns as raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee.
The revised plan moves the condominium units toward Oak
Place Court with a 20 foot setback and the garages have
been moved to the rear.Two (2)alley access points have
been shown from Oak Place Court to serve the garages for
the condo units.
The revised plan also notes all of the proposed typical
building setbacks for the single family lots and shows
typical patio home and zero lot line home placement.The
plan notes that the maximum building height for the site
will be 32 feet.Thirty-five feet is the typical maximum
building height in single family zones.
4
March 30,2 JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6832
The revised plan also shows a six (6)foot opaque fence
along all of the property boundaries and a dumpster
location for the condominiums.Two (2)ground-mounted
signs have been shown on the revised plan,one (1)on each
side of the entrance to the project.The dimension for
each sign has been noted as 4 feet by 6 inches.Staff
suggests that these signs be monument-type with a maximum
height of six (6)feet.
Otherwise,to staff'knowledge,there are no outstanding
issues associated with this application.The applicant has
done an adequate job in addressing the issues as raised bystaffandtheSubdivisionCommitteeandinrevisingthesiteplanaccordingly.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the PRD subject to the
following conditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D,E and F of this report.2.The two (2)ground-mounted signs proposed (4 feet by 6incheseach)must be monument type with a maximum heightofsix(6)feet.3.The dumpster area must be enclosed on three (3)sides
with a 8 foot fence or wall.4.The maximum building height for this project shall be 32feet.5.The structures constructed on Lots 1-11 must comply withthetypicalsetbacksasnotedonthesubmittedsiteplan.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(MARCH 9,2000)
Robert McFarlane was present,representing the application.Staff briefly described the revised proposed PRD,noting that
the following information needed to be shown on the site plan:
1.Building heights
2.Type of fence to be constructed
3.Dumpster location,if applicable
4.Platted front building lines (Lots 1-11)
5.Typical rear yard dimension (Lots 1-11)
6.Typical building placement for zero lot line residences
(Lots 1-11)
5
March 30,c.i0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:8 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6832
Staff noted that the proposed condo buildings needed to be moved
toward Oak Place Court (15-20 foot setback),with rear loaded
garages accessed by an alley(s).This was in-lieu of the
detached,front loading garages as shown on the original site
plan submitted.This issue was briefly discussed.
The Public Works requirements were briefly discussed,including
the required street improvements to Baseline Road.Mr.
McFarlane indicated that he understood the requirements.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the PRD to the
full Commission for resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted aletteronMarch24,2000 requesting that this application be
deferred to the May 11,2000 agenda.The required notices were
not mailed.Staff supported the deferral request.
The Chairperson placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the
May 11,2000 agenda.A motion to that effect was made.The
motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
6
March 30,2~JO
ITEM NO.:9 FILE NO.:S-1135-B
NAME:The Villas at Hickory Creek —Subdivision Site
Plan Review
LOCATION:West side of Hinson Road,approximately one-third
mile south of Pebble Beach Dr.
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
Tony Meredith Central Arkansas Engineering
P.O.Box 13160 1012 Autumn Rd.,Ste.2
Maumelle,AR 72113 Little Rock,AR 72211
AREA:37.53 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:2
FT.NEW STREET:Approx.2,000 linear feet
ZONING:MF-6 ALLOWED USES:Multif amily Residential
PROPOSED USE:Condominium Development
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:
1.Deferral of street improvements for the western portion of a
proposed collector street.
BACKGROUND:
The property is zoned MF-6,multifamily district (six units per
gross acre allowed).A "Declaration of Covenants"was filed and
recorded in 1981 which runs with this property.The private
covenants regulate the property's use and portion of the
property's development.
The private covenants state that the property will be developed
for condominium units developed pursuant to the Horizontal
Property Act being Act 60 of 1961 (units for sale only,no
March 30,~00
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1135-B
rental units).The covenants designate certain areas of the
property as OS (Open Space)and requires a six foot high privacy
fence be constructed at one location prior to any construction.
The covenants also state that structures built in one area of
the property not exceed one and one-half stories in height.
Based on the fact that the applicant is proposing more than one
(1)structure on the property,a multiple building subdivision
site plan must be reviewed and approved by the Planning
Commission.The residential density proposed (4.76 units per
gross acre)conforms to the MF-6 zoning.Staff reviewed the
proposed site plan based on the MF-6 ordinance development
standards,also considering the private covenant requirements.
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to construct 22 condominium
buildings within the north 18.47 acres of the property.
Each building will contain four (4)units for a total of 88
condominium units.The applicant has noted that these will
not be rental units and will be in accordance with the
Horizontal Property Act 60 of 1961.
As part of the proposed development,the applicant will
extend Dorado Beach Drive to the east to connect with
Hinson Road,as required by the Master Street Plan.Accesstothisdevelopmentwillbefromthisstreet,near its
intersection with Hinson Road.
The applicant proposes the following phases for this
development:
Phase I —Construction of the eastern section of thecollectorstreet,making connection to Hinson Road and
access to the proposed condominium development.
Phase II —Construction of the condominium development (22
buildings and associated parking and drives)and
construction of the remainder of the collector street.A
clubhouse,pool and guardhouse at the gated entrance are
also shown on the site plan as part of this phase.
Phase III —Improvements to Taylor Loop Creek,south of thecollectorstreetconnectionwithHinsonRoad.
Phase IV —Future MF-6 condominium development within the
south 14.41 acres.
2
March 30,i.JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1135-B
Although the western portion of the collector street is
noted as part of Phase II,the applicant is requesting afive(5)year deferral on these street improvements.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is currently undeveloped and heavily wooded.The
Windsor Court Condominium development and single family
residences are located to the south,with single family
residences to the north.There is undeveloped R-2 propertytothewest,with single family residences further west.
Single family residences and undeveloped R-2 property are
also located across Hinson Road to the east.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received a number of phonecallsfrompersonsrequestinginformationonthis
application.The Pleasant Valley,Hillsborough and Marlow
Manor Property Owners Associations were notified of the
public hearing.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1.Dorado Beach Drive is listed on the Master Street Plan
as a collector street.
2.Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"(Master
Street Plan).
3.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
4.Construct bridge with Phase I and connect to Hinson
Road.
5.Dedicate Regulatory Floodway easement to the City of
Little Rock.
6.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the
Little Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded to
Traffic Engineering.
7.Hinson Road has a 1998 average daily traffic count of
16,000.
8.A Grading Permit per Secs.29-186(c)and (d)will be
required with building permit.
9.A Grading Permit for Special Flood Hazard Area per Sec.
29-186(b)will be required with building permit.
10.Contact the ADEQ for approval prior to start work.
3
March 30,c JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1135-B
11.Contact the USACE-LRD for approval prior to start of
work.
E .UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements
to serve property.
AP&L:No Comment.
Arkla:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:On site fire protection will be required.On sitefacilitieswillbeprivate.A public water main adjacent
to the proposed road will be required.An acreage charge
of $300 per acre applies in addition to normal charges.
Fire Department:No Comment.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Comment received.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:No Comment.
Landsca e Issues:
Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with
ordinance requirements.
A six foot high opaque screen,either a wooden fence withitsfacesidedirectedoutwardordenseevergreen
plantings,is required north,east and west of this site.
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many
existing trees on this tree covered site as feasible.
Extra credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance
requirements can be given when preserving trees of six inch
caliper or larger.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan,building
elevations,grading plan and additional information to
staff on March 15,2000.The revised plan addresses the
issues as raised by staff and the Subdivision Committee.
4
March 30,c 00
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1135-B
The revised plan notes that the buildings will be one-story
in height,with a mean building height of 21 feet.
Screening fences have been shown on the plan as required.
The applicant has noted that each condo unit will have a
two-car garage.The applicant also notes that the project
will have private internal garbage pickup.
The building elevations submitted by the applicant show
that the buildings will be one-story in height and
constructed of a mixture of brick and siding.A copy of
the elevations submitted will be included in the
information for Planning Commission review.
The grading plan notes that the maximum cut will be
approximately 30 feet near the southwest corner of PhaseII.The area where the street is proposed will be cut and
filled downward to the north.
The "Declaration of Covenants",as referred to earlier in
this report,calls for a 100 foot "Open Space"area along
the north boundary of this property.The covenants state
that this area conform to the second purpose set forth in
the "Purpose and Intent"section of the Little Rock Zoning
Ordinance dealing with Open Space Districts,which is as
follows:
"(2)To be utilized as a buffer zone between
uses which,due to their nature,height,
siting or other circumstance,are not
compatible with each other.In this case,
no building or structure (principal or
accessory)may be erected,no trees may be
removed and no paving for wheeled vehicles
will be allowed."
A portion of the street turnabout which the applicant
proposes to construct extends into this open space area.
The applicant also proposes to do some site work within the
southern portion of this buffer area.
The covenants also call for a six foot high privacy fence
on the south side of the north open space buffer,to be
constructed at least 30 days prior to any construction.
5
March 30,~00
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1135-B
The applicant is proposing to construct the fence within
the 100 foot open space area,approximately 40 feet south
of the north property line.
To staff's knowledge,the covenant provision for the 100
foot north open space buffer is the only area of the
covenants that this site plan does not conform to.
As noted in paragraph A.of this report,the applicant is
requesting a five (5)year deferral of street improvements
for the western portion of the proposed collector street.
As of this writing,Public Works has not made a
recommendation on the deferral request.This
recommendation will be presented at the public hearing.
The site plan as proposed by the applicant conforms to the
City's Ordinances with respect to density,building
setbacks,building heights,parking,screening,
landscaping,buffers,and street construction.Although
staff is typically limited to this technical ordinance
review,staff will recommend that the developer conform to
all of the provisions as set forth in the "Declaration of
Covenants"as referred to previously,based on the long
standing history associated with this property.Staff
feels that the proposed development will have no adverse
effect on the general area.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed site plan subjecttothefollowingconditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs
D,E and F of this report.2.Any site lighting should be low-level and directed away
from adjacent property.3.Public Works will present a recommendation on the
deferral of street improvements for the west portion of
the collector street at the public hearing.4.The applicant must conform to the "Declaration of
Covenants"as signed by the previous property owner on
April 20,1981.a.The north 100 foot buffer area must remain
undisturbed.The site plan must be redesigned so
that no site work or street construction take place
within this 100 foot wide area.
6
March 30,~JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1135-B
b.The six (6)foot privacy fence must be moved to be
setback at least 100 feet from the north propertyline.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(MARCH 9,2000)
Raymond Hickey,Kay Maris and David Carpenter were present,
representing the application.Staff briefly described the
proposed site plan,noting several items which needed to be
shown on the plan.Staff noted that the proposed building
setbacks conformed to the MF-6 Zoning Ordinance requirements.
Staff also noted that typical building elevations and a grading
plan needed to be provided.
In response to a questions from staff,Mr.Hickey noted that
existing trees would be preserved within the perimeter buffer
areas.Bob Brown,of the Planning Staff,noted that at least 60
percent of the trees within these buffer areas should be
preserved.
The Public Works requirements were discussed.Bob Turner,of
Public Works,noted that access to Hinson Road (bridge)needed
to be made initially with Phase I and not a future phase.This
issue was discussed at length.A deferral of the bridge
construction was briefly discussed.Constructing the bridge and
deferring the remainder of the street construction to the west
was also discussed.The traffic volume which would be generated
by the proposed development was also briefly discussed.
The grading of the site was briefly discussed.Mr.Hickey noted
that all cuts would be 30 feet or under.
The Covenants which run with this property were discussed at
length.Staff noted in addition to the requirement that there
be no rental units on the site,the Covenants also made
provision for "open space"areas along the north,east and south
perimeters of the property,and that privacy fencing be
constructed in certain areas and that buildings constructed in a
certain area be no more than one and one-half stories in height.
After the discussion,the Committee forwarded the site plan to
the full Commission for final action.
7
March 30,c JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:9 (Cont.)FILE NO.:S-1135-B
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted aletteronMarch22,2000 requesting that this application be
withdrawn,without prejudice.Staff supported the withdrawal as
requested.
The Chairperson 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.
8
5-//S5-g
TERMITE &PEST CONTROL,INC.
P.O.Box 22115
Little Rock,Arkansas 72221-22115
ONRVN58-
g4 888&7-
Qg 0
g~s
a
u
RKCKIVKD
MAR 8 12000BY'UGS AWAY...CALL US TODAY!
March 30,2 ~0
ITEM NO.:10 FILE NO.:Z-5802-C
NAME:Chenal Place Shopping Center —Revised Zoning Site Plan
(Lots 1 and 2)
LOCATION:West side of Chenal Parkway,just south of West
Markham Street
DEVELOPER:ENGINEER:
RP Partnership White-Daters and Associates
650 S.Shackleford,Ste.320 401 Victory Street
Little Rock,AR 72211 Little Rock,AR 72201
AREA:2.5 acres NUMBER OF LOTS:4 FT.NEW STREET:0
ZONING:C-2 ALLOWED USES:Commercial
PROPOSED USE:Commercial
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED:None requested.
BACKGROUND:
On December 18,1997,the Planning Commission approved a five
(5)lot preliminary plat for this property as well as a site
plan for the largest of the five lots.
On April 30,1998,the Planning Commission approved a revised
preliminary plat and site plan for the property.The revised
preliminary plat reduced the number of lots from five (5)to
four (4),and the approved site plan included all four lots.
To date,Lots 3 and 4 have been developed according to the
approved plan.The approved plan allows the following for Lots
1 and 2:
Lot 1 —6,400 square foot restaurant building,64 parking spaces
Lot 2 —6,000 square foot restaurant building,82 parking spaces
March 30,2~~0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:10 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-5802-C
A.PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to revise the site plan for Lots 1
and 2 of this development.The developer is unsure what
type tenant he will get on these two parcels and would like
the flexibility for a retail or restaurant user.
Therefore,the developer is proposing a conceptual site
plan for the lots.The proposal includes a maximum
building area for Lots 1 and 2,which will conform to the
setbacks approved with the preliminary plat.The applicant
notes that the number of parking spaces will comply with
the minimum ordinance recpxirements based on the use of the
individual lot (restaurant and/or retail).It is also
noted that the landscape and buffer ordinances will be
complied with.The driveway locations shown on the site
plan for Lots 1 and 2 conform to the originally approvedsiteplanandplat.The applicant has also noted a ground-
mounted sign location for Lots 1 and 2.These signs must
conform to the Chenal/Financial Center Design OverlayDistrict.
B.EXISTING CONDITIONS:
Lots 3 and 4 of this subdivision are developed,with Lots 1
and 2 having been graded and prepared for buildingconstruction.The Timber Ridge Subdivision is located tothesouthwithaGMCautodealershiptothenorth.ThereiscommercialandindustrialpropertyacrossChenalParkwaytotheeastandofficezonedpropertytothewestacross
Atkins Street.
There is a 75 foot wide OS Open Space strip along the south
property line,adjacent to the Timber Ridge Subdivision.
C.NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing,staff has received no comment from the
neighborhood.The Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber
Ridge and Parkway Place Neighborhood Associations werenotifiedofthepublichearing.
D.ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
Provide easement for existing sidewalk along Chenal Parkway,
which is currently on private property.
2
March 30,2~~0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:10 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-5802-C
E.UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
AP&L:No Comment.
Arkla:No Comment received.
Southwestern Bell:No Comment received.
Water:No Comment.
Fire Department:An extra fire hydrant may be required.
Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752 for details.
Count Plannin :No Comment received.
CATA:No Comment received.
F.ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Plannin Division:No Comment.
Landsca e Issues:Areas set aside for buffers and
landscaping meet with ordinance requirements.
G.ANALYSIS:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on
March 14,2000.The revised plan is a conceptual plan for
Lots 1 and 2 as suggested by staff and the Subdivision
Committee.The conceptual plan provides for a maximum
building area of 9,870 square feet for Lot 1 and 13,029
square feet for Lot 2,which will comply with the
previously approved minimum setbacks.The conceptual planalsonotesthefollowing:
1.Parking for Lots 1 and 2 will conform to the minimum
ordinance equipment based on the use(s)of the
individual lot.
2.Lots 1 and 2 will conform to the City's Landscape andBufferOrdinances.
3.Maximum building height for Lots 1 and 2 will be 35feet.This conforms to ordinance standards (building
height of 45 feet allowed in C-2).
3
March 30,2~F0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:10 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-5802-C
4.Ground-mounted sign locations and driveway locations
for Lots 1 and 2.The driveway locations were approved
with the previous site plan and plat.
The applicant submitted a letter to staff on April 27,1998
which offered additional conditions of development of this
property and which was made part of the previously approvedsiteplan.Staff feels that these conditions should
continue to apply to development of Lots 1 and 2.The
conditions that apply are as follows:
1.Installation of an eight (8)foot high wood
privacy fence along the boundary between the OS
Buffer and the shopping center,except for the
east sixty (60)feet of this boundary nearest
Chenal Parkway where the fence will be six (6)feet high.
2.Planting twice the number of evergreens (holly or
juniper)as required by the Landscape Ordinance
along the entire length of the privacy fence.
3.Installing only the downward-facing "box"type
parking lot light fixtures,with a maximum height
of 28 feet.
4.Restrict dumpster pick-ups to the hours of
7:00 a.m.to 7:00 p.m.
5.Restrict any tenant in the center from installing
any external speakers.This restriction will not
apply to a drive-thru order speaker for a
restaurant use on an out-lot.
6.Prohibiting the following uses in the center:
a.Ambulance service post
b.Auto glass or muffler shopc.Bar,lounge or tavern (except as part of a
restaurant)
d.Adult bookstore or adult video store
e.Pawn shopf.Plumbing electrical,air conditioning or
heating shop
g.Recycling facility,automated
4
March 30,2 ~0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:10 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-5802-C
The proposed site is located within the Chenal/Financial
Center Design Overlay District.Signage,site lighting andutilitiesmustconformtothefollowingDODrequirements:
1.Ground-mounted signs must be "monument"type with a
maximum height of 8 feet and a maximum area of 100
square feet.
2.Parking lot lighting must be directed to the parking
areas and not reflected to adjacent property.
3.No overhead utilities shall be constructed within 100feetoftheChenalParkwayright-of-way.
4.All lighting and utilities in front of the rear line of
the building must be underground.
Otherwise,to staff'knowledge,there are no outstanding
issues associated with the proposed conceptual site planforLots1and2.The conceptual plan for those lots as
proposed will conform to all aspects of the City's Zoning
Ordinance and the previously approved preliminary plat of
the property.
H .STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the conceptual site plan forLots1and2subjecttothefollowingconditions:
1.Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs D
and E of this report.2.Signage,site lighting and utilities must conform withtheChenal/Financial Center Design Overlay District asnotedinparagraphG.3.Compliance with the conceptual site development criteriaasoutlinedinparagraphG.4.Compliance with the additional conditions as offered bytheapplicantinanApril27,1998 letter and required
with the previously approved site plan.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:(MARCH 9,2000)
Joe White,C.J.Cropper and Beck Kyzer were present,
representing the application.Staff gave a brief description of
the revised site plan .
5
March 30,c JO
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:10 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-5802-C
Mr.White explained that the applicant wished to have the
revised site plan approved (Lots 1 and 2)and have the
flexibility to utilize the previously approved site plan for
these lots if needed.
Staff noted that a better alternative would be to propose a
conceptual plan for Lots 1 and 2 that would conform to all
ordinance standards and allow the applicant flexibility in site
design based on future property owners or tenants.Staff noted
that the following items needed to be included within the
conceptual plan:
1.Show the minimum setbacks for Lots 1 and 2 as previously
approved with the plat of the property.
2.Note a maximum building area (square footage)for each lot.
3.Note that the minimum number of parking spaces for each lot
will conform to ordinance standards based on the use of the
property.
4.Show driveway locations for Lots 1 and 2 as previously
approved with the plat of the property.
5.Note that the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances will be
complied with.
6.Show ground-mounted sign locations and note that the signs
will conform with the Chenal Parkway/Financial Center Design
Overlay District standards.
7.Note that site lighting and utilities will conform to the DOD
standards.
The Committee members indicated endorsement of the conceptual
plan for Lots 1 and 2.After the discussion,the Committee
forwarded the revised site plan to the full Commission for final
action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30 2000)
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 Chairperson place 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.
6
March 30,2000
ITEM NO.:11 FILE NO.:2-5786-B
NAME:Southwest Christian Academy —Revised
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:11,401 Geyer Springs Road
OWNER/APPLICANT:James 6 Sharon Stewart/Phillip Lewis
PROPOSAL:To amend an existing conditional use
permit for a four phase Master Plan to
expand the size of the campus grounds,
the number of facilities,and the
maximum enrollment on property zoned
R-2,Single Family Residential,locatedat11,401 Geyer Springs Road.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
This 8-acre site is located on the east side of Geyer
Springs Road,just inside the Little Rock City limits.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This site is zoned R-2,Single Family Residential,andissurroundedbyruralR-2 zoning comprised mainly of
large tracts of vacant,heavily wooded land.The
Charity Community General Baptist Church is located
immediately north of this existing school site.There
are no other uses in the immediate vicinity.The
proposed expansion should remain compatible with the
surrounding area.
The O.U.R.Neighborhood Association and the SouthwestLittleRockUnifiedforProgressOrganizationwere
notified of the public hearing.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The current school site has a one-way driveway
entering the property near the main classroom building
and exiting through the parking lot of the adjacent
church.The new proposed development adds one two-way
driveway entering the property near the new gym and
March 30,2000
SUBD IVI S ION
ITEM NO.:11 (Cont.)FILE NO.:2-5786-B
connecting internally to the existing parking and
driveways.
Phase One would not increase the parking requirement
since no classrooms are included.However the
applicant plans to add 63 parking spaces during this
phase.Phase Two includes 8 or 9 classrooms for grades
9 through 12.That would generate a requirement for 54
parking spaces.The parking constructed during Phase
One would exceed the parking requirement for Phase Two
by 9 spaces.Phase Three would add another 58 parking
spaces.Phase Four would be a football stadium with no
additional parking spaces added.The stadium would not
add any more parking requirements according to the
ordinance because it would be a part of the school
campus.The final total of new proposed parking spaces
would be 121 spaces.
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
All parking areas must allow for 6%of their total
area to be interior landscaping.
A six foot high opaque screen,either a wooden fence
with its face side directed outward or dense evergreen
plantings,is required to help screen this site from
the residential properties to the north,south and
east.
5 .PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
a.Geyer Springs is listed on the Master Street Plan
as a minor arterial.A dedication of right-of-way
to 45 feet from centerline is required.
b.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.Eliminate driveways that do not meet
minimum requirements.(300 feet spacing)c.Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP"
(Master Street Plan).Construct one-half street
improvement to these streets including 5-foot
sidewalks with planned development and deferred
improvements.
d.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be
submitted for approval prior to start of work.e.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this
property.
2
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:11 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-5786-B
f.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the
Little Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded
to Traffic Engineering.
g.Geyer Springs has a 1998 average daily traffic
count of 3,800.
6.UTILITY AND FIRE DEPT.COMMENTS
Water:A water main extension will be required
unless property is combined into a single parcel.
The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate
this site to determine whether additional public
and/or private fire hydrant(s)will be required.
Installation of a reduced pressure zone backflow
preventer will be required on the domestic water
service to any building in this complex that
contains a science laboratory.This device shall be
installed prior to the first outlet.
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
ARKLA:No comments received.
Entergy:A 30 foot easement has been requested along
the east,west,and south property lines.Work with
Entergy regarding their request.
Fire Department:Contact Dennis Free,371-3752,at
the fire department concerning turning radii and a
requirement for a fire hydrant.
CATA:Bus service does not extend this far south on
Geyer Springs.The closest service is at Geyer Springs
and Mabelvale Cutoff,Route ¹17.
3
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:11 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-5786-B
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has requested a revised conditional use
permit to incorporate a Four Phase Master Plan
expansion of the existing school campus on this
adjoining 8-acre tract of land,and an increase in
enrollment from 444 to 700.
The Master Plan consists of the following four phases:
Phase One:Construction of a new gymnasium,asphalt
parking lots,curb cut and access,and asphalt
driveway connecting to the existing campus to the
north.Additionally,a new concrete driveway would be
constructed off of Geyer Springs road connecting to
the new parking lot near the gym.The height of the
gymnasium at its apex will be no greater than 40 feet.
The construction of the gym would be a metal building
with a sloped roof.Curb and gutter would be provided
around the asphalt parking areas.Increase enrollment
capacity from 444 to 500 students.
Phase Two:Construction of nine new classrooms
attached to the gymnasium discussed in Phase I above.
The construction type for the classrooms would be a
metal building.Increase enrollment capacity to 700
s tudents .
Phase Three:Construction of an additional 58 parking
spaces in the parking area east of the new building
constructed in Phase I.
Phase Four:Construction of a football stadium
complete with concession stand and seating capacity of
1500.
Phase One would probably expand the existing school
operating hours of normally 8 a.m.to 4 p.m.Monday
through Friday,with potentially additional activities
in the evening and on weekends using the gym facility.
The classrooms in Phase Two would add space for the
high school grades.
All siting requirements are met or exceeded.No change
to existing signage was proposed.Parking requirements
4
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:11 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-5786-B
are exceeded,especially after Phase Three,but Staff
feels they are reasonable considering all the uses
involved.Their construction would be phased with the
growth and would meet needs at the gym,and
particularly for the football stadium once it is
constructed.
The applicant feels that a previously approved
ordinance deferring boundary street improvements until
May 2004 should still apply to the existing campus and
extend to this new expansion.They feel that since itisalloneschoolcampusandnootherdevelopmenthas
occurred in the area,that the justification for that
deferral would still apply.Public Works disagrees and
feels that this development would require all street
improvements to be accomplished with this
construction.The applicant is requesting the
Commission rule on this matter of continuing the
existing deferral.If the Commission agrees with
Public Works,then the applicant requests the
Commission consider a new deferral request of all
boundary street improvements along all parts of the
school campus for five years as part of this C.U.P.
Staff believes this expansion would be a reasonable
use of the land and be compatible with the area.The
only open issue is the deferral of boundary street
improvements.
8 .STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use
permit subject to compliance with the following
conditions:
a.Comply with the City's Landscape and Buffer
Ordinances.
b.Comply with Public Works Comments.c.Comply with Fire Department Comment.
d.All exterior lighting must be low intensity and
directed downward and inward to the property and
not towards any residential zoned area.This would
include any lighting installed during Phase Four if
the surrounding area remains zoned residential.
5
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:11 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-5786-B
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(MARCH 9,2000)
Philip Lewis was present representing the application.
Staff gave a brief description of the proposal.
Public Works briefly reviewed their comments and emphasized
that this development would recpxire all street improvements
to be made for the existing and new areas.Other Staff
members reviewed the screening and buffer recpxirements,
parking recpxirements and how they were derived,and some
other minor adjustments needed on the site plan.
There being no further issues,the Committee accepted the
proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for
final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Philip Lewis,project representative,and James Stewart,
owner,were present representing the application.There
were no registered objectors present.Staff presented the
item with a recommendation for approval subject to
compliance with the conditions listed under "Staff
Recommendation,"paragraph 8 above.The Commission agreed
to apply the existing deferral of street improvements to
the expanded school campus.The deferral would continue
until May 2004.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
submitted to include staff comments and recommendations and
a deferral of street improvements until May 2004.The vote
was 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
6
March 30,2000
ITEM NO.:12 FILE NO.:Z-6817
NAME:Boone Day Care —Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:6310 Butler Road
OWNER/APPLICANT:Genois and Loronda Boone
PROPOSAL:To obtain a conditional use permit for
a day care center with a capacity of 30
children,to be located in an existing
house located at 6310 Butler Road on
property zoned R-2,Single Family
Residential.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
This site is located on the west side of Butler Road
at the intersection with Strickland Road.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This site is zoned R-2,Single Family Residential.The
properties to the north and west are also zoned R-2,
but are currently vacant.The properties to the east
across Butler,and adjacent to the south are zoned R-
5,Urban Residential,and contain apartments.
Staff believes that with proper screening from the
surrounding residential properties,the proposed use
would be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.
The Wakefield and Geyer Springs Neighborhood
Associations,as well as the Southwest Little Rock
Unified for Progress Organization were notified of the
public hearing.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
There is one existing gravel driveway accessing the
proposed site from Butler Road,and an attached open
carport on the south side of the existing house.No
changes are proposed to those features except that the
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:12 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6817
driveway would be paved and parking spaces would be
added on either side of that existing driveway.
The proposed day care would generate a requirement for
eight parking spaces based on one for every 10
children and one for each of five employees.Those can
be provided on site.
4 .SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
A six foot high opaque screen would be required to
help screen this site from the residential property to
the north and west.This screen may be a wooden fence
with its face side directed outward or dense evergreen
plantings.
5 .PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
a.Butler is classified on Master Street Plan as a
commercial street.A dedication of right-of-way to
30 feet from centerline is required.
b.Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP"
(Master Street Plan).Construct one-half street
improvements to these streets including 5 foot
sidewalks with planned development.
c.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be
submitted for approval prior to start of work.
d.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this
property.
6.UTILITY AND FIRE DEPT.COMMENTS:
Water:No objection.
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
ARKLA:No comments received.
Entergy:Approved as submitted.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
CATA:This site is served by bus Route ¹15,65
Street.
2
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:12 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6817
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has requested a conditional use permit
for The Precious Moments Christian Pre-school and
Child Development Center using an existing single
family house.The center would operate from 6 a.m.to
6 p.m.Monday through Friday.The maximum capacity
would be 30 children and would include children from
age 6 weeks to 12 years old.There would be a pre-
school development program and day care for the
children 6 weeks to 5 years old.There would be an
after-school program for the children 6 to 12 years
old.
The proposed site would be located in a mixture of
residential uses,including single family residential
a short distance to the north,and apartments to the
east and south.The abutting properties to the north
and west are currently vacant and tree covered.The
properties to the south and southeast contain active
apartment buildings.The properties to the east and
northeast contain closed apartment buildings.
No exterior construction is proposed to the structure.
A playground would be located in the rear and on the
north side of the house.No playground would be placed
on the south side of the property,which would be the
closest to the abutting apartments.The only siting
criteria question would be the parking,and that can
be provided as required.However the applicant has
requested delay of the paving of the driveway and
construction of the added parking for up to 120 days
for financial reasons.The yard area on either side of
the driveway,along with the driveway would serve as
the drop off area for the children,and the applicant
has arranged to use part of the parking area for the
closed apartments across Butler for employee parking.
Staff believes that would be a reasonable deferral.
The applicant has also included a proposed 4 foot by 6
foot sign in the front yard of this site.That would
need to be part of the C.U.P.since it would be beyond
signage allowed on residential property.In addition
the applicant has requested a deferral of the required
3
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:12 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6817
screening until those abutting properties are actually
developed.
Staff believes this would be a reasonable use of this
site and be compatible with the neighborhood.Staff
also believes the request to defer screening and
paving,and the request for the sign,are all
reasonable.
8 .STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use
permit subject to compliance with the following
conditions:
a.Comply with the City's Landscape and Buffer
Ordinances.
b.Comply with Public Works Comments.c.All exterior lighting must be low intensity and
directed downward and inward to the property and
not towards any residential zoned area.
Staff also recommends approval of the requested 4 foot
by 6 foot sign and two deferrals.The first deferral
is for screening to the north and west until those
properties are developed.The second deferral is for
120 days to accomplish the paving of the driveway and
parking.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(MARCH 9,2000)
Mr.Boone was present representing his application.Staff
gave a brief description of the proposal.
Public Works reviewed their comments and discussed the
option of a 15%in-lieu payment for boundary street
improvements.
The screening required to the north and west sides of the
proposed site was explained.In addition,Staff explained
the need to include a sign in the proposal if one was
desired.
Committee members suggested that the applicant discuss with
the Wakefield Neighborhood Association his proposal.
4
March 3G,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:12 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6817
There being no further issues,the Committee accepted the
proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for
final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 3 0 g 2 0 0 0 )
Genois Boone was present representing his application.
There were no registered objectors present.Staff presented
the item with a recommendation for approval subject to
compliance with the conditions listed under "Staff
Recommendation,"paragraph 8 above.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
submitted to include staff comments and recommendations,
and the sign variance,deferral of screening and paving as
described in paragraph 8 above.The vote was 9 ayes,0 nays
and 2 absent.
5
March 3G,2000
ITEM NO.:13 FILE NO.:Z-6821
NAME:Harold Hunter —Conditional Use Permi t
LOCATION:18,901 Colonel Glenn Road
OWNER/APPLICANT:Harold Hunter
PROPOSAL:To obtain a conditional use permit to
place a one-section manufactured home
as an accessory dwelling on R-2,Single
Family Residential zoned property at
18,901 Colonel Glenn Road.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
This site is located on the south side of Colonel
Glenn Road,at the intersection with Green Bear Road.It is outside the Little Rock City Limits,but within
the City's extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This proposed 5-acre site is zoned R-2,Single Family
Residential,and is surrounded by R-2 zoning.The area
consists of mainly large tracts of residential
property except for a church across Col.Glenn Road,
and a few businesses along Col.Glenn in PCD zoning.
There are some other manufactured homes scattered
along Col.Glenn Road.
The manufactured home is located within view of Col.
Glenn Road,but it is partially screened by natural
vegetation.Staff believes this accessory dwelling
would be compatible with the surrounding area if set
up and skirted properly.
There are no neighborhood associations serving this
area.
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:13 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6821
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The proposal includes one access drive from Green Bear
Road.However,as stated in Public Works Comment,it
should be located at least 50 feet from the
intersection of Col.Glenn and Green Bear Road.
Adequate parking for residential zoning is provided in
the proposal.
4 .SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No comments.
5 .PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
Move proposed driveway for manufactured home a minimum
of 50 feet from the intersection with Colonel Glenn.
6.UTILITY AND FIRE DEPT.COMMENTS:
Water:Execution of a Pre-annexation Agreement and
approval of the City of Little Rock will be required
prior to receiving water service.
Wastewater:Outside service boundary;no comment.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
ARKLA:No comments received.
Entergy:Approved as submitted.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
CATA:There is no bus service near this site.
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has requested a conditional use permit
for a single section,1995,16 by 80 foot manufactured
home to be located on his 5 acres of land as an
accessory dwelling.The unit is already in place and
is under initial enforcement action.
2
March 3G,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:13 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6821
Standard setbacks for R-2 zoning would be met,but the
platted building line is violated by the current
proposed location of the accessory dwelling.That
situation would have to be corrected by re-platting
the building line or moving the dwelling.In addition
the proposed driveway must be moved 50 feet from the
intersection of Col.Glenn and Green Bear Roads.The
proposal would provide adequate parking for
residential zoning.
This site is located outside the City Limits,and
therefore,no building permit would be required.Staff
recommends the applicant set up and anchor the home
according to City standards if the use is approved.
Staff believes that the proposed additional use would
be reasonable,and could be compatible with the areaifsetupandskirtedproperly.
8 .STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use
permit subject to compliance with Public Works
comment,and correcting the issue that the home was
placed across a platted building line.Staff also
recommends approval of the size variance for 1,280
square feet.
In addition,Staff recommends the home be set up and
anchored according to City Building Codes guidance,
and Little Rock City Ordinance Section 36-254 (d)(5)
as follows:
a.A pitched roof of three (3)in twelve (12)or
fourteen (14)degrees or greater.
b.Removal of all transport elements.
c.Permanent foundation.
d.Exterior wall finished so as to be compatible with
the neighborhood.
e.Orientation compatible with placement of adjacent
structures.f.Underpinning with permanent materials.
g.Off-street parking per single-family dwelling
standard.
3
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:13 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6821
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(MARCH 9,2000)
Harold Hunter was present representing his application.Staff gave a brief description of the proposal.
Staff and the Committee reviewed the following points with
the applicant:
a.The driveway would need to be located 50 from the
intersection of Col.Glenn and Green Bear Roads.
b.The accessory dwelling could not be located across
the platted building line as shown and must be
corrected by either re-platting or moving the home.c.A variance would be required for the size of the
accessory dwelling which is larger than the allowed
700 square feet.
There being no further issues,the Committee accepted the
proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for
final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
The applicant submitted a letter to Staff on March 27,2000
requesting withdrawal of this item.
No one was present representing the application.There were
no registered supporters and three registered objectors
present.Staff presented the item with a recommendation
supporting the withdrawal as requested by the applicant
except for the time requested to remove the existing
manufactured home.Staff stated that the removal deadline
would be handled through normal enforcement procedures.
A motion was made to waive the Commission's bylaws in order
to accept the request for withdrawal which had been
submitted less than five working days before the public
hearing.The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and
2 absent.
A second motion was made to approve the withdrawal of the
application as submitted except for the time requested to
remove the existing manufactured home.The motion passed by
a vote of 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
4
March 30,2000
ITEM NO.:14 FILE NO.:Z-6823
NAME:Muslim Community Center —Conditional
Use Permit
LOCATION:Northeast corner of the intersection of
Lucie and Anna Streets
OWNER/APPLICANT:The North American Islamic Trust
PROPOSAL:To obtain a conditional use permit for
a community center at the northeast
corner of the intersection of Anna and
Lucie Streets as an annex to the
existing Islamic Center.The propertyiszonedR-3,Single Family
Residential.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1 .SITE LOCATION:
This site is located on the northeast corner of Anna
Street and Lucie Street,one block east of Fairpark
Boulevard and two blocks north of Asher Avenue.The
address would be 3221 Anna Street.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This site is zoned R-3,Single Family Residential.The
property to the north and west is also zoned R-3.
Single family houses are located to the north and
northwest.The existing Islamic Center is located
across Anna Street to the west.The property
immediately to the east is zoned I-2,Light
Industrial,and contains a contractor open storage
yard.One block further to the east there is another
small church.The property to the south is zoned PRD,
Planned Residential District,and contains a large
apartment complex.
The Islamic Center has existed in this area since mid
1992 and as far as Staff is aware,it has been
compatible with the neighborhood.This proposed
structure would serve as an annex to the main worship
center across Anna Street.
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:14 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6823
Staff believes this use will continue to be compatible
with the neighborhood.
The Curran-Conway and South of Asher Neighborhood
Associations were notified of the public hearing.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The proposed site plan includes one access driveway
from Anna Street into an adjacent parking area large
enough for 12 vehicles.However,since there is no
change to the seating capacity in the main worship
center,no additional parking requirement is
generated.This new parking area,while small,would
provide additional paved parking for the main worship
center,as well as the new facility.The total
available parking would be increased to almost match
(36 vs.37 spaces)the required parking for the
seating capacity of the main worship center.
4 .SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
A six foot high opaque screen is required to help
screen this site from the residential property to the
north.This screen may be a wooden fence with its
face side directed outward or dense evergreen
plantings.
5.PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
a.Anna and Lucie are classified on the Master Street
Plan as commercial streets.Dedicate right-of-way
to 30 feet from centerline.
b.A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is
required at the corner of Anna and Lucie.c.Provide design of street conforming to "MSP"
(Master Street Plan).Construct one-half street
improvement to these streets including 5-foot
sidewalks with planned development.
d.Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be
submitted for approval prior to start of work.
e.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this
property.f.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.
2
March 30,2000
SUBDZVZSZON
ZTEM NO.:14 (Cont.)FZLE NO.:Z-6823
g.Redesign parking lot to conform to City Standards.
6.UTZLZTY AND FZRE DEPT.COMMENTS:
Water:No objection.
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
ARKLA:No comments received.
Entergy:A 15 foot easement has been requested along
the east,property line.Work with Entergy regarding
their request.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
CATA:Route ¹14,Rosedale,is only one block to the
east.
7.STAFF ANALYSZS:
The applicant has requested a conditional use permit
for a two-story,6400 square foot community center on
R-3 zoned property to serve as an annex to the
existing Zslamic Center across Anna Street.The center
would provide classroom space for Sunday school and
offices on the second floor,and a large activity hall
plus two children's areas on the first floor.Zt would
be used primarily during Friday services and Sunday
morning Sunday School.Otherwise,the use would be as
required for wedding receptions or other special
events.
The proposed plan meets front and side setbacks.The
rear setback would be only 5 feet compared to a
requirement of 25 feet.However,Staff believes that
would be reasonable considering there is a 10 foot
alley right-of-way between this site and the open
storage contractor's yard to the east.The alley is
not physically open.All other siting requirements are
met.
The applicant has requested a deferral to the
requirement for screening from the residential
3
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:14 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6823
property to the north.The Center is in final
negotiation to purchase that property.If acquired,
they would expand parking onto that property and have
to relocate a fence along the current property line.If the deal falls through,they agree to construct the
fence as requested.Staff feels that would be
reasonable.They also requested a waiver to the
requirement to widen Anna and Lucie Streets.This is
based on the nature of the area,and that Anna is a
one block street,and to match with the existing
street which already has much of the curb and gutter
and sidewalks in place.Staff believes that request is
also reasonable,as long as the required right-of-way
is dedicated.
Staff believes the Islamic Center along with the
proposed Community Center would continue to be
compatible with the neighborhood.
8 .STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use
permit subject to compliance with the following
conditions:
a.Comply with the City's Landscape and Buffer
Ordinances except as deferred.
b.Comply with Public Works Comments.c.All exterior lighting must be low intensity and
directed downward and inward to the property and
not towards any residential zoned area.
Staff also recommends approval of the reduced rear
yard setback of 5 feet,the deferral of the screening
to the north,and the variance to the width of the
street improvements.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(MARCH 9,2000)
Faizool Haniff,Ali Shaikh,and Mohammed Scahare were
present representing the application.Staff gave a brief
description of the proposal.
Public Works reviewed their comments and a discussion took
place regarding street improvements.It was decided that
4
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:14 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6823
the applicant should work with Staff on the parking lot
portion of the plan so the design will be in compliance
with City standards.
Screening was also reviewed briefly and the applicant
talked about their plans to accpxire additional properties
to the north.Staff explained the option for deferrals or
variances.
There being no further issues,the Committee accepted the
proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for
final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Faizool Haniff,Ali Shaikh,and Mohammed Scahare were
present representing the application.There were no
registered objectors present.Staff presented the item with
a recommendation for approval subject to compliance with
the conditions listed under "Staff Recommendation,"
paragraph 8 above,including the reduced rear yard setback,
the deferral of screening,and the variance to the width of
the street improvements.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
submitted to include staff comments and recommendations,
the reduced rear yard setback,the deferral of screening,
and the variance to the width of the street improvements.
The vote was 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
5
March 30,2 ~0
ITEM NO.:15 FILE NO.:Z-6825
NAME:Chalamont Park —Conditional Use Park
LOCATION:North of the intersection of Chalamont and
Chambord Drives
OWNER/APPLICANT:Deltic Timber Corporation
PROPOSAL:To obtain a conditional use permit for a
privately owned neighborhood park north of
the intersection of Chalamont and Chambord
Drives on property zoned R-2,Single Family
Residential.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
This site is located on the north side of the intersection
of Chalamont and Chambord Drives,abutting the south side
of J.T.Robinson School property.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This private 6.73 acre community park site is zoned
R-2,Single Family Residential,and is surrounded by R-2
zoning.The area is located in a new large developing
housing subdivision.School property abuts the north side
of the site.The street forms the south boundary
residential property would abut the property only on the
east and west sides.It will serve the residents of that
housing area and with proper screening to the west,it
should be compatible with the neighborhood.
The Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association was notified
of the public hearing.
3.ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
There would be one access drive from the north side of the
roundabout at the intersection of Chalamont and Chambord
Drives.The plan includes 43 parking spaces and a drop off
point near the swimming pool clubhouse.The site would
contain 2900 square feet of clubhouse,which would generate
a requirement for 29 parking spaces based on one space for
every 100 square feet of gross building floor space.
March 30,c..0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:15 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6825
4.SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with
ordinance requirements.
A six foot high opaque screen,either a wooden fence withitsfacesidedirectedoutwardordenseevergreen
plantings,should be provided along the western perimeter
of the site.
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many
existing trees as feasible.Extra credit toward fulfilling
Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when
preserving trees of six inch caliper or larger.
5 .PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
a.Provide design of round about island for Traffic
Engineer Review.
b.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.c.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities
are required.
d.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.
6.UTILITY AND FIRE DEPT.COMMENTS:
Water:Water service is not available at this time.
Completion of a water main that is under construction is
required prior to service.Work is on hold due to an
easement conflict.
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with easements
to serve property.
Southwestern Bell:No comments received.
ARKLA:No comments received.
Entergy:No comments received.
Fire Department:Place fire hydrant per code.Remove tree
in cul-de-sac.
CATA:There is no bus service in this area.
2
March 30,c.~0
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:15 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6825
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has requested a conditional use permit for a
private community park on property zoned R-2,Single Family
Residential.The site is located in a new large developing
single family subdivision and it would serve primarily the
residents of that subdivision.
The 6.73 acre park would contain a swimming pool with a
clubhouse,a parking area with 43 spaces,two tennis
courts,a picnic pavillion,and other picnic facilities,a
children's playground,plus walking paths.All siting
recpxirements are exceeded.The closest any facility would
come to a property line would be 60 feet.
The proposal also includes an 8 foot by 4 foot sign near
the entrance to the park.Since residential zoning allows
only a one foot square sign,the proposed sign must be
approved as part of the C.U.P.
Staff believes the proposed park would be compatible with
the neighborhood as long as proper screening is included
along the west property line.That would be the area with
the shortest distance between future houses and the
swimming pool.
8 .STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit
subject to compliance with the following conditions:
a.Comply with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances.b.Comply with Public Works Comments.c.Comply with Fire Department Comments.
d.All exterior lighting must be low intensity and directed
downward and inward to the property and not towards anyresidentialzonedarea.
e.Locate the sign on either side of the entrance,not in
the island in the middle of the entrance.
3
March 30,~00
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:15 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6825
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(MARCH 9,2000)
Tim Daters was present representing the application.Staff gave
a brief description of the proposal.Staff members reviewed the
Public Works,Screening and Buffer,and signage comments.
Neither the applicant nor any Committee members had any
concerns.There being no further issues,the Committee accepted
the proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for
final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Tim Daters was present representing the application.There were
no registered objectors present.Staff presented the item with a
recommendation for approval subject to compliance with the
conditions listed under "Staff Recommendation,"paragraph 8
above.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
submitted to include staff comments and recommendations.The
vote was 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
4
March 30,2000
ITEM NO.:16 FILE NO.:Z-6827
NAME:Melton Micro-brewery —Conditional Use
Permit
LOCATION:323 Cross Street
OWNER/APPLICANT:Paula Dempsey
PROPOSAL:To obtain a conditional use permit for
a micro-brewery in an existing facility
located at 323 Cross Street on property
zoned C-4,Open Display Commercial.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1 .SITE LOCATION:
This site is located on the east side of Cross Street,
on the northeast corner of Cross and 4 Streets.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This site is zoned C-4,Open Display Commercial,with
C-4 zoning to the north and east.To the south the
zoning is I-2,Light Industrial.The Capitol Zoning
District governs the properties across Cross Street to
the west.There is a variety of uses surrounding this
site ranging from offices,to commercial,to
residential,and to commercial parking lots.
There are offices with accompanying parking areas to
the south,west,and southwest.A commercial parking
area abuts this property to the east.There is a
vacant commercial building and a vacant residential
house to the north.
Staff believes this use would be compatible with the
surrounding area.
3 .ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
There are existing drives from Cross to the building
and to a parking area on the north side,as well as,to
the rear of the building from 4 Street.Twelve
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:16 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6827
parking spaces are shown in the north parking area to
be used for this business.
There is no specific ordinance parking requirement for
a micro-brewery that does not also include a
restaurant and/or lounge.Staff believes there should
be enough parking for six "visitors"plus the
employees.The parking shown would be adequate until
the number of employees is more than six.Then
additional parking would be required.
4 .SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No comments.
5 .PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
The following would be required with any building
permit request for exterior changes:
a.A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is
required at the corner of 4 and Cross.
b.Property frontage would need to have the sidewalks
and ramps brought up to the current ADA standards.
The following would be required even without
construction.c.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk
that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to
occupancy.
d.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.Close unused driveways and reestablish
curb and gutter.
6.UTILITY AND FIRE DEPT.COMMENTS:
Water:Contact the Water Works if additional water
service is needed.Due to the nature of this
facility,installation of a reduced pressure zone
backflow preventer will be required on the domestic
water service for this facility.
Wastewater:Sewer available,not adversely affected.
Southwestern Bell:Approved as submitted.
ARKLA:No comments received.
2
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:16 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6827
Entergy:Approved as submitted.
Fire Department:Approved as submitted.
CATA:This site would be served by Routes ¹1 &8
which travel 3 &4 Streets.
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has recpxested a conditional use permit
for a micro-brewery to be located in an existing
facility on property zoned C-4,Open Display
Commercial.Besides the brewing operation,the
applicant proposes to offer tours of his operation,
and to have a small souvenir/gift shop.
The ordinance does not list a micro-brewery as a use
in any zone.However,Staff felt that since
warehousing and wholesale sales are listed in C-4,
that this would be an appropriate use for this site.
Because of the added features of tours and a
souvenir/gift shop,Staff felt that some "visitor"
parking should be provided.Six spaces was considered
a reasonable minimum,plus parking for employees.That
generated a recpxirement for three employees,a minimum
of nine spaces to start.
The applicant plans to use 6,000 of the 15,000 scpxare
feet in this existing building.No exterior
construction was proposed and siting criteria was not
an issue.
Two additional issues were signage and/or a flag
display of some kind.The applicant wishes to be able
to use an existing non-conforming sign pole on Cross
Street for a lighted sign,with a marcpxee under it.
His sign would be no wider than the existing support
arm and maintain a minimum 9 foot clearance from the
ground.A variance would be recpxired since the sign
would not be set back 5 feet from the property line.
He also wishes to display national flags from the
countries whose type of beer he is producing.This
flag display would consist of the U.S.flag along with
4 or 5 other reasonably sized national flags displayed
3
March 3G,'2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:16 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6827
on metal poles angled out from the front of the
building.Staff sees no negative impact.
Staff believes the proposed use should be compatible
with the surrounding neighborhood.
8 .STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use
permit subject to compliance with the following
conditions:
a.Comply with Public Works Comments.
b.Comply with Water Works Comment.c.When the number of employees is more than six,
additional parking will need to be provided.
d.Staff also recommends approval of the variance for
the zero setback for the sign on Cross Street and
to allow a 5-flag display of national flags on the
Cross Street side of the building.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(MARCH 9,2000)
Russ Melton was present representing his application.Staff
gave a brief description of the proposal.
Public Works reviewed their comments.Staff also commented
on the Water Works comments,signage issue,and parking
space requirement and how it was derived.The requirement
for "visitor"parking was reduced to six spaces.The
applicant was asked to provide more details about proposed
signs and the flag display.
There being no further issues,the Committee accepted the
proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for
final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Russ Melton was present representing his application.There
were no registered objectors present.Staff presented the
item with a recommendation for approval subject to
compliance with the conditions listed under "Staff
Recommendation,"paragraph 8 above.
4
March 30,2000
ITEM NO.:17 FILE NO.:Z-6828
Owner:Herrington Hotel Group,LLC
Applicant:Frank Riggins,
The Mehlburger Firm
Location:1900 Peachtree Drive
Request:Rezone from 0-3 to 0-2
Purpose:Proposed new hotel (see
associated Hilton Inn C.U.P.,File No.Z-6828-A)
Size:5+acres
Existing Use:Vacant,undeveloped
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North —Westlake Corporate Park Office Development;
zoned 0-3
South —Undeveloped;zoned 0-3 and I-430 right-of-way
East —Westlake Corporate Park Office Development;
zoned 0-3
West —Undeveloped;zoned OS and 0-1 and Sandpiper
Neighborhood pool and residences;zoned R-2
PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS
With Construction:
1.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.All sidewalk
needs to be placed in right-of-way.
2.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is
damaged in the public.right-of-way prior to occupancy.3.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.Verify sight distance and spacing with existing
driveway for proposed driveways.
4.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
5.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities
are required.
6.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing street
lights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock
Code.All requests should be forwarded to Traffic
Engineering.
March 30,2000
ITEM NO.:17 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6828
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
The site is not located on a CATA bus route.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
All owners of property within 200 feet of the site,all
residents within 300 feet and the Sandpiper Neighborhood
Association were notified of the rezoning request.
LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT
The site is located in the I-430 Planning District.The
Land Use Plan recommends SO,Suburban Office,for thistractaswellastheremainderofthelargemultibuildingofficeparkdevelopmentadjacenttothesite,Westlake
Office Park.The property is being proposed for rezoning
from 0-3 General Office District to 0-2 Office and
Institutional District,a district which requires site plan
review by the Planning Commission.As such,staff believes
the zoning is appropriate and no plan change is necessary.
STAFF ANALYSIS
The request before the Commission is to rezone this
undeveloped 5.061+acre tract from "0-3"General Office to"0-2"Office and Institutional District.An associated
conditional use permit application has been filed,
proposing development of a hotel on the site.Hotels are
not a permitted use within the 0-3 district but are
permitted as a conditional use in 0-2.
The property is located at the southern edge of Westlake
Corporate Park (formerly Koger Office Park),a large,
multibuilding office development.The 0-3 zoned office
park extends to the north and generally east of this site.
Westlake currently consists of 6,large office buildingsbuiltinaparksettingaroundasmalllake.A smaller,
undeveloped 0-3 zoned parcel is located south of this site,across Peachtree Drive.The I-430 right-of-way is
immediately further south.Across Centerview Drive,to the
northwest,a wide OS zoned strip separates the Sandpiper
Neighborhood from an additional larger area of 0-1 and 0-3
zoned properties.The office zoned tracts closest to
Centerview Dr.are currently undeveloped.Immediately
across Centerview Dr.,to the southwest of the subject
2
March 30.2000
ITEM NO.:17 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6828
property,is the entrance to the Sandpiper residential
neighborhood.The neighborhood swimming pool is located at
the intersection of Peachtree and Centerview.Single
family homes are located on the properties beyond the pool.
The 0-2 zoning request is compatible with zoning and uses
in the area.0-2 requires site plan review by the Planning
Commission.This additional level of review,which the
current 0-3 zoning does not require,will prove beneficial
in determining development of the site with its sensitive
proximately to the neighborhood.
The I-430 district Land Use Plan recommends Suburban Officeforthistractandfortherestoftheexisting,0-3 zoned
Westlake Corporate Park.Rezoning the tract to 0-2,withitsrequirementofsiteplanreview,brings the propertyclosertotheintentoftheSuburbanOfficedesignation.
As such,staff believes no plan amendment is necessary.
Site plan review can be accomplished through the Planning
Commission's review of a conditional use permit.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the requested 0-2 zoning.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
The applicant was present.There were several interested
parties present,both in support and in opposition.There
were only 8 commissioners present and the applicant was
offered the opportunity to defer the item.After a brief
discussion,the applicant accepted deferral.
A motion was made to defer the item to the April 13,2000
meeting.The motion was approved by a vote of 8 ayes,
0 noes and 3 absent.
3
March 3G,2000
ITEM NO.:17.1 FILE NO.:Z-6828-A
NAME:Hilton Inn —Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION:1900 Peachtree Drive
OWNER/APPLICANT:Herrington Hotel Group LLC
PROPOSAL:To obtain a conditional use permit for
a 4-story,167 room hotel with a lounge
and restaurant on the northeast corner
of Peachtree and Centerview Drives at
1900 Peachtree Drive.The property is
proposed to be re-zoned from 0-3,
General Office to 0-2,Office and
Institutional District,by accompanying
Item 17 on this same agenda.
ORDINANCE DES I GN STANDARDS:
1.SITE LOCATION:
This site is located on the northeast corner of the
intersection of Peachtree and Centerview Drives,on
the southwest edge of a large business park
development.
2.COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This 5-acre site is currently zoned 0-3,but there is
an accompanying item on this agenda to rezone the
property to 0-2.The surrounding zoning contains a mix
of R-2 Single Family Residential to the southeast and
southwest,0-3 General Office,to the north and south,
and OS Open Space,and 0-1 Quiet Office to the west
and northwest.The Sandpiper Subdivision is located
just to the southwest of this site.Their pool and
clubhouse is located across Centerview,to the west.
There is also a large PCD for the Summit Mall site on
the south side of I-430.
Staff believes that with the amount of natural
vegetation that the applicant proposes to leave
untouched,plus the vegetation they will replant,that
the site would be compatible with the neighborhood.
March 3(,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:17.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6828-A
The Sandpiper Neighborhood Association was notified of
the public hearing.
3 .ON S ITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
There would be two access points to this site.The
main entrance would be from Peachtree,with a
secondary access from Centerview,primarily for
deliveries.
The applicant has planned for 178 parking spaces.The
proposed 167-room hotel would generate a parking
requirement of 183 spaces based on one space for each
guestroom plus 10%of that total.
4 .SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with
ordinance requirements.
Because of the grade elevation changes,cross sections
showing proposed methods to handle these changes
should be provided.
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as
many existing trees as feasible on this tree coveredsite.Extra credit toward fulfilling Landscape
Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving
trees of six inch caliper or larger.
5 .PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
a.Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and
ramps brought up to the current ADA standards.All
sidewalk needs to be place in right-of-way.
b.Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk
that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to
occupancy.c.Driveways shall conform to Sec.31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.Verify sight distance and spacing with
existing driveway for proposed driveways.(250
feet spacing)
d.Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this
property.e.Easements for proposed stormwater detention
facilities are required.
2
March 3(,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:17.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6828-A
f.Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the
Little Rock Code.All requests should be forwarded
to Traffic Engineering.
6.UTILITY AND FIRE DEPT.COMMENTS:
Water:An acreage charge of $150.00 per acre applies
in addition to normal charges.Due to the nature of
this facility,installation of a reduced pressure
zone backflow preventer will be required on the
domestic water service for this facility.
Wastewater:Sewer main extension required with
easements to serve property.Capacity analysis
required,contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for
details.
Southwestern Bell:No comments received.
ARKLA:No comments received.
Entergy:Approved as submitted.
Fire Department:Place fire hydrants per code.
CATA:There is no bus service in this area.
7.STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has requested a conditional use permit
for a 4-story,167-room hotel on property that they
expect to be zoned 0-2,Office and Institutional.
There is an accompanying item on this agenda to rezone
this property from 0-3 to 0-2.The proposed uses
include a restaurant and a lounge.
This site is located in a mixture of Office,
Residential,and Open Space zoning.It is at the
entrance to the Sandpiper Subdivision.
The proposed plan exceeds setback requirements of 25
feet on all sides,and is within the height limit of
78 feet.The amount of parking proposed is considered
adequate even though it is 5 spaces below the minimum
required.A variance would be required.
3
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:17.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Z-6828-A
The applicant has requested they be allowed to place
their sign,consisting of individual metal letters,on
the retaining wall on the southeast corner of the
property,along Peachtree.The ordinance prohibits
signs on walls,but Staff feels this would be a
reasonable variance request.
Staff believes that this would be a reasonable use of
the site,and that the site would be compatible with
the neighborhood considering the amount of natural
vegetation that the applicant proposes to leave
untouched,plus the vegetation they will replant.
8 .STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use
permit subject to compliance with the following
conditions:
a.Comply with the City's Landscape and Buffer
Ordinances.
b.Comply with Public Works Comments.c.Comply with Fire Department Comment.
d.All exterior lighting must be low intensity and
directed downward and inward to the property and
not towards any residential zoned area.
Staff also recommends approval of variances for a
reduced number of parking spaces,and a sign on the
retaining wall on the southeast corner of the
property.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:(MARCH 9,2000)
Frank Riggins was present representing the application.
Staff gave a brief description of the proposal.
Public works reviewed their comments,concentrating
particularly on the sight distance question for the
driveway on Centerview.They stated that the distance was
satisfactory,but that the driveway spacing to the next
driveway north along Centerview needed to be 275 feet to
provide the needed sight distance.
4
March 3(,2000
SUBDZVZSZON
ZTEM NO.:17.1 (Cont.)FZLE NO.:Z-6828-A
Other Staff members reviewed the signage and parking
requirements and noted the variances needed for both.The
applicant confirmed the 24-hour operation for the hotel.
Staff asked the applicant to provide the proposed square
footage for the restaurant and lounge.
There being no further issues,the Committee accepted the
proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for
final action.
PLANNZNG COMMZSSZON ACTZON:(MARCH 30,2000)
Wes Lowder,Mehlburger Firm,and Rick Martin,Herrington
Hotel Group,were present representing the application.
There were several interested parties,for and against,
present.At the request of Chairperson Adcock,Mr.Carney
of the City Planning Staff explained the Commission's
policy whenever there are eight or fewer Commissioners
present at a hearing that an applicant can request deferral
without it being counted against them.
Mr.Lowder asked for an explanation of options available to
allow those that did attend to speak and then still request
deferral.After a short discussion and comments from
Commissioners stating their preference to hear all the
comments at one hearing,Mr.Lowder chose to request
deferral until the April 13 Public Hearing.
A motion was made to defer the application until the
April 13,2000,Public Hearing.The motion passed by a
vote of 8 ayes,0 nays and 3 absent.
5
March 3t:P 2000
ITEM NO.:18 FILE NO.:G-25-176
NAME:McAlmont Street to McMath Avenue—
Street Name Change
LOCATION:9 Street to I-630
PETITIONER:UALR School of Law,Julie Speed and Ray
Pierce
PROPOSAL:To change the name of McAlmont Street
to McMath Avenue from 9 Street to
Interstate 630.
1.Abuttin Uses and Ownershi :MacArthur Park abuts the
entire west side of the street proposed to be renamed.
On the east side starting from 9 Street there is a
Shell gas station,a closed Waffle House,a Pizza Hut,
three single houses,a small 8-unit apartment
building,the "Bylites"business,and the UALR Law
School.
2.Nei hborhood Effect:No detrimental effect is
anticipated other than three address changes for the
houses facing McAlmont.
3.Nei hborhood Position:Julie Speed talked personally
with most of the affected parties.All parties except
one,whose properties are addressed on McAlmont,
signed the petition.All parties addressed on McAlmont
plus all property owners whose property abuts McAlmont
were notified by certified mail of the pending name
change.Ann Guthrie,City'contact with the Historic
District Commission has stated the Commission is not
opposed to the change.Staff is not aware of any
opposition to the proposed change.
4.Effect on Public Services:None.Neither Public Works
nor the Fire Department object to the name change.The
applicant will have to pay for the replacement of the
street name signs.
5.Utilities:Staff received no objections from Water,
Wastewater,and Entergy,and no comments from ARKLA
and Southwestern Bell.
March 3c,2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.:18 FILE NO.:G-25-176
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
Julie Speed was present representing the application.There
were no registered objectors present.Staff presented the
item with a recommendation for approval as requested.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
submitted.The vote was 9 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.
3
March 30,4000
ITEM NO.:19 FILE NO.:G-40-17
Name:Kinder Morgan Power Plant Water
Main Extension
Location:Generally parallel with Arkansas
State Highway 365,from near
Harper Road on the north to near
Arkansas Highway 386 on the
south.
Applicant:Holloway Firm/Kinder Morgan
Power Plant
Request:In accordance with Act 186
of 1957,the applicant is
requesting approval of a
24-inch water main to servethisproposedpowerplant.
PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS
No Comments.
UTILITIES
Little Rock Water Works Comments are as follow:
"There is a 24-inch water main extension
proposed to serve the Kinder-Morgan Power Plant
in Wrightsville,AR.Our hydraulic analysis
indicates that the proposed maximum flow rate
of 4 million gallons per day or 2,780 gallons
per minute will result in a residual pressure
greater than 35 p.s.i.or 20 p.s.i.under afireflowconditions.This analysis indicates
we can provide adequate service to this project
as well as to existing customers.In order to
assure that the maximum flow rate is not
exceeded,remote flow measurement equipment,to
be approved by the Water Works,will be
required at the point of metering.Approval of
final design plans by the Water Works,Arkansas
Department of Health Engineering Division,
Water Improvement District ¹99,the City of
Wrightsville,and Pulaski County will be
required in addition to the approval of the
City of Little Rock.The public waterline will
have to be installed within a waterline
March 30,2000
ITEM NO.:19 (Cont.)FILE NO.:G-40-17
easement prepared on our standard form (or
another acceptable form).The waterline can be
installed in a common 50-foot easement with a
gas line with a minimum of 25-foot separation.
All iron pipe and fittings that are used will
be polywrapped and cathodically protected.
Plans submitted to us are preliminary at this
point.However,the project is feasible from
the Water Works viewpoint and we are willing to
provide service to them with all waterfacilitiesbeinginstalledattheirexpense.
Additional Water Works Comments are presented in an
attached letter.
STAFF ANALYSIS
Pursuant to Act 186 of 1957,the applicant,through theLittleRockWaterWorks,is requesting approval of a
24-inch water main extension.The proposed water main is
to run generally parallel to Arkansas State Highway 365
from near Harper Road to south of the Wrightsville city
limits,near Arkansas State Highway 386.Any water main
extension exceeding 12-inches requires review and approval
by the Little Rock Planning Commission.
The 24-inch water main is to serve a proposed natural gasfiredpowerplantwhichistobeconstructedsouthof
Wrightsville.The new water main will be tied to existing
water mains along its length to allow the community as much
diversity as possible and to be additive to the existing
water systems.All mains will be installed at the
applicant's expense.
Little Rock Water Works has stated that the project is
feasible.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval subject to compliance with Water
Works Comments.
2
March 30,2000
ITEM NO.:19 (Cont.)FILE NO.:Q-40-17
PLANNINQ COMMISSION ACTION:(MARCH 30,2000)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors
present.Staff presented the item and a recommendation of
approval.The applicant offered no additional comments.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved by a
vote of 9 ayes,0 noes and 2 absent.
3
03/07/00 12:54 FAX 5013771244 LR MUN WATER WORKS Ql 001
W~W ~~WWWN%R R+~TNS'%8 WR%
L1TTlZ ROCK MUNICIPAL WATER WORKS
7 March 2000
FAX.31)-(9(gQ
Once of Neighborhoods and Planning I |FBpgy723WestMarkhamStreet
Little Rock,AR 72201
-'t
RE:WATER MAIN EXTENSION
KINDER MORGAN POWER PLANT -WRIGHTSVILLE UNIT
There is a 24-inch water main extension proposed to serve the Kinder Morgan Power Plant in Wrightsville,
AR.Our comments to the developer in regard to this project are as follows:
~The Water Works does not "Guarantee"pressure or continuous service.We do design our system to
meet a minimum pressure of 35 p.s.i.or 20 p.s.i under a fire flow coildition.'Ihe hydraulic analysis we
have run to study the proposed demand on our system indicates that we could expect to have average
pressures well in excess of these minimums.
This project (final plans)will require approval in addition to the Water Works &om at le~Little Rock
City Board and possibly Water Improvement District ¹99 and the City ofWrightsville.
~At this time the agreed upon Maximum Flow Rate requested is 4 million gallons per day or 2,780
gallons per minute.
~The Water Works acknowledges the request to use C-900 plastic pipe.We are still considering this and
are not ready to give a decision.
In order to assure that the maximum flow rate is not exceeded,remote flow measurement,to be
approved by the Water Works,will be required at the point of metering.
~The public waterline will have to be installed within a waterline easement prepared on our standard form
(or another acceptable form)The waterline can be installed in a conunon easement with a gas line with
a minimum of 25-foot separation.The agreed upon easement width is 50 feet (10',waterline,25',gas
line,15').The easements will have to be surveyed by an R.L.S.and a copy of the survey provided to
the Water Works.
All iron pipe and fittings that are used will bepolywrapped and cathodically protected.
Plans submitted to us are preliminary at this point.However,the project is feasible fiom our viewpoint and
we are willing to provide service to them with all mains being installed at their expense.
In compliance with the provisions of Act 186 of 1957,the enclosed plans showing the proposed mains to
serve the above-described property are submitted.Please let us know if this installation is approved.
LrITLERO K AL WATER WORKS
t
Marie .Dugan,Enginee 'ssistant
enclosures
221 EASI'AP1TOL AVENUE -POS1'FFICE BOX 1789 ~UITLE ROCK.ARKANSAS 72203 ~(501)377-1200
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
Af
a
r
'
Q
C
6
+C
D
SH
V
T
ME
M
B
E
R
9'
t
s8
c
3+
I
.
78
6
1
5
&4
&
t
~
&
&
~
&
2-
f
s
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
HA
W
N
,
HE
R
B
FA
U
S
T
,
JU
D
I
T
H
MU
S
E
,
RO
H
N
ZC
~
U
ME
M
B
E
R
5
E
FI
H
4
17
$7.
l
RE
C
T
O
R
,
BI
L
L
o
Y
8
v
DO
W
N
I
N
G
,
RI
C
H
A
R
D
0
~
0'
j
A
6:
o
em
EA
R
N
E
S
T
,
HU
G
H
~
0,
0
y''U
N
N
L
E
Y
,
OB
R
A
Y
A
BE
R
R
Y
,
CR
A
I
G
a
o
e,
V
j
AD
C
O
C
K
,
PA
M
v
o
VI
P
V
RA
H
M
A
N
,
MI
Z
A
N
A
LO
W
R
Y
,
BO
B
v'
'
'
'A
W
N
,
HE
R
B
V
y.
y
v'A
U
S
T
,
JU
D
I
T
H
~'
0
~
V'
MU
S
E
,
RO
H
N
v'
'
V
r
~
f&
Me
e
t
i
n
g
Ad
j
o
u
r
n
e
d
6
&~
P.
M
.
+
AY
E
~
NA
Y
E
A
AB
S
E
N
T
t
AB
S
T
A
I
N
4
RE
C
U
S
E
March 30,2000
SUBDIVISION MINUTES
There being no further business before the Commission,the
meeting adjourned at 6:15 p.m.
5-(s -~&
Date
PIC'hairman Se ret ry