Loading...
pc_11 21 1996subLITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION SUBDIVISION HEARING SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD NOVEMBER 21, 1996 3:30 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 Previous Meeting The Minutes of the October 10, 1996 Planning Commission meeting were approved as mailed. III. Members Present: Members Absent: Pam Adcock Craig Berry Doyle Daniel Hugh Earnest Herb Hawn Larry Lichty Bill Putnam Suzanne McCarthy Mizan Rahman Sissi Brandon Ronald Woods City Attorney: Cindy Dawson PLANNING COMMISSION Ron Woods, Chairperson Bill Putnam, Vice -Chairperson Pam Adcock Herb Hawn Sissi Brandon Lary Lichty Mizan Rahman Hugh Earnest Doyle Daniel, Jr. Suzanne McCarthy Craig Berry HEARING PROEDURE Opportunities to speak will be given to the applicant and others for or against an application. The Chairman will direct the amount of time allotted for each speaker. A spokesperson should be designated for large groups to avoid repetition and save time. Each person speaking is requested to use the microphone, giving first his or her name and address. Persons in the audience are requested to keep conversations to a minimum and to refrain from clapping or other noises. Your cooperation is appreciated. VOTING Six (6) votes are required to approve or deny issues other than procedural matters. In those instances where no action is required by the Board of Directors and the action before the Commission fails to receive the required six (6) votes, the request shall be declared to be denied. For actions requiring the City Board of Directors approval, such matters shall be forwarded to the Board of Directors with a recommendation of denial. The minute record of the hearing and the Board of Directors' communication shall reflect the motions and voting on the matter so as to fully convey to the Board the Planning Commission record for such matters. The Commission's municipal authority is final for subdivision matters, conditional use permits, special use permits and zoning site plan reviews. The Commission makes recommendations to the City Board concerning regular rezonings, planned unit developments, and right-of-way abandonments. APPROVED ZONING ITEMS Zoning matters recommended for approval are forwarded by staff to the City Clerk for placement on the agenda for the next appropriate City Board meeting, which is usually within four (4) weeks. APPEALS Denied rezonings and all conditional use permits and special use permits may be appealed to the City Board of Directors within the 30 days of Commission action. This does not include subdivision matters. Appeals of subdivision actions are to the appropriate court of jurisdiction. OFFICE For information or assistance, you may visit the Department of Planning and Development which is located at 723 West Markham, (on the southeast comer of State and Markham Streets) or call the office at 371-4790. LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION SUBDIVISION AGENDA NOVEMBER 21, 1996 I. DEFERRED ITEMS: A. StaMar Driving Range Long -Form PD-C (Z-6178) B. Pinnacle Valley Phase IV Long -Form PRD (Z-6198) C. Pinnacle Valley Phase IV Preliminary Plat (S-992-E) D. Grey Rock Long -Form PCD (Z-6199) D1. Master Parks Plan Amendment - Rock Creek E. Grey Rock Preliminary Plat (5-1111) F. Z-5987-A 10420 Helm Drive R-2 to C-4 G. Oaks Brothers Short -Form PD-I (Z-6189) H. Dillard's Executive Office Expansion -- Site Plan Review (Z-5098-B) I. Riverdale Mini -Storage -- Site Plan Review (S-1041-A) J. Z-6204 9101 Lew Drive R-2 to C-3 II. PRELIMINARY PLATS: 1. Village of Wellington Phase IV, Wellington Village Preliminary Plat (S-1118) 2. Jewel and Moser Addition Preliminary Plat (5-1119) 3. Bella Rosa Partnership Preliminary Plat (S-1117) 4. Chenal Downs Preliminary Plat (S-1116) 5. Commerce Square Preliminary Plat (S-1115) 6. Cantrell Centre Addition Preliminary Plat (S-923-A) 7. Kaufman Addition Preliminary Plat (S-1081-A) 8. Kingwood Place Preliminary/Final Plat (5-1120) 1 Agenda, Page 2 III. PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS: 9. Jewel and Moser Addition POD (Z-6220) 10. Bella Rosa Partnership POD (Z-6219) 11. Bonnie Jones PD-C (Z-6208) 12. Floateyes, Inc. PD-I (Z-6217) 13. Highland Park PRD (Z-6214) IV. SITE PLAN REVIEW: 14. Loony's Tire Service Site Plan Review (Z-6215) 15. The Pointe Apartment Community Site Plan Review (Z-6218) V. CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS: 16. Christ Lutheran Church - Conditional Use Permit (Z-1997-A) 17. Hotels of America - Conditional Use Permit (Z-2710-A) 18. Quinn-Matchet - Conditional Use Permit (Z-3202-D) 19. Bale - Conditional Use Permit (Z-3276-E) 20. Alta Mere - Conditional Use Permit (Z-3812-B) 21. Carriage Creek - Revised Conditional Use Permit (Z-5300-A) 22. Massery - Conditional Use Permit (Z-6205) 23. Holy Cross Day Care - Conditional Use Permit (Z-6216) VI. OTHER MATTERS: 24. Alley Right -of -Way Abandonment (Block 9, Pfeifer Addition) (G-23-255) 25. Alley Right -of -Way Abandonment (Block 21, Bellevue Addition) (G-23-256) 26. N. State Street Right -of -Way Abandonment (G-23-257) November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: Z-6178 NAME: STAMAR DRIVING RANGE -- PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATION: 9222 Stagecoach Road DEVELOPER: ENGINEER• Gerald Staley Michael Clayton, P.E. 14200 Wimbledon 6303 Blackhawk Little Rock, AR 72209 No. Little Rock, AR 72116 AREA: 19.2 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: "PCD" Proposed PROPOSED USES: Driving range and outdoor recreation PLANNING DISTRICT: #16 Otter Creek CENSUS TRACT: 42.08 VARIANCES REQUESTED: Deferral of road improvements on Stagecoach Road until State Highway work begins. BACKGROUND: This owner approached staff with a request for a variety of outdoor recreational uses centered around a golf driving range. Staff recommended that the land owner apply for a Planned Commercial Development designation of this 19.2 acre parcel. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: A one lot PCD consisting of a golf course driving range, practice green, pro shop, baseball batting cages, parking and landscaping. Proposed hours of operation are 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., 7 days a week. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is currently vacant. Several older dwellings were recently removed by the current owner. Three domestic water wells remain and may be used for irrigation purposes on the future driving range. A small pond consisting of .7 acres is situated in the southwest portion of the site. The property is bordered by Stagecoach Road and rural residential on the east, a 100 foot wide AP&L easement on November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6178 the south, a 40 foot Arkla easement to the west, and vacant land on the north. Stagecoach Road is a minor Street Plan but currently with open ditches. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: arterial street on the Master exist as a 24 foot asphalt road Staff has received several calls mostly from passersbys on Stagecoach Road. To date all calls have been supportive of the proposal. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: A development permit will be required prior to construction. A portion of the property is located in the flood plain. A sketch grading and drainage plan with soil loss calculations is also required. The drainage maps indicate a pond in excess of one acre, provide documentation as to Little Rock Corps of Engineers approval for draining this pond. Stagecoach is a minor arterial, thus dedicate 45 feet of right-of- way from centerline widen to 30 feet from centerline with a sidewalk or contribute in -lieu fees for like amount. Existing Stagecoach is a 24 foot asphalt lane with open ditches. Traffic Count was 7,790 ADT in 1992. E. UTILITY COMMENTS/FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Water: Service charge is $150/acre and $15/front foot. AP&L: No comment Arkla: OK Southwestern Bell: OK Fire Department: A 50 foot radius by the proposed equipment shed is required. No fire hydrants are shown on the site plan. We need a hydrant within 500 feet of all buildings. County Planning: No comment P, November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6178 F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Landscape• Areas set aside for street and land use buffers meet and exceed ordinance requirements. Six percent of the interior of the vehicular use area will be required to be landscaped with interior landscaped islands. Landscaped islands are required to be at least 100 square feet in area. Because the property to the north, south and east are zoned residential, opaque screening is required by ordinance. This screening can consist of dense evergreen plantings or six foot high wood fence with its face directed outward. Since the property to the south is used for public utilities, screening in this area may not serve much of a purpose. Curb and gutter or another approved border will be required to protect landscaped areas from vehicular traffic. Issues• The following are unresolved items on the PCD submittal. • Covered tee boxes not to exceed 12 feet in height. • Remove notation concerning "future mini -golf course". • Provide more specific details on entrance sign. • Project name on site plan to remain "StaMar Driving Range". Planning Division: The site is located in the Otter Creek District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Multifamily. At this time, Staff cannot recommend a Plan amendment to nonresidential. However if the use is limited to a driving range, it is staff's opinion that the request would not be in conflict with the adopted Plan. In other areas and in the zoning ordinance golf courses have been considered appropriate uses in a residential area. 3 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6178 G. ANALYSIS: The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Multifamily uses for this site. A golf driving range and limited batting cage area can be viewed as a transitional use in an area planned for residential development. A small Pro Shop and practice green are compatible uses with a golf driving range facility. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVAL of the PCD request (Z-6178) as illustrated on the proposed site plan. Approval is subject to the conditions and revisions listed in paragraphs D, E, F of this report. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (AUGUST 8, 1996) Gerald Staley and Stan Martin represented the project. Planning staff requested more specific information on hours of operation, lighting and signage, adjacent utility easements and the culvert under Stagecoach Road. Public Works indicated that the size of an existing pond that is to be drained needs to be determined. The developers contribution to future improvements to Stagecoach was discussed. Staff noted the Fire Departments requirement that a hydrant be provided within 500 feet of all structures. The item is to be forwarded to the full Commission for determination. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 29, 1996) After presentation of the staff report, Mr. Lawson indicated that the project as proposed is a "activity center" which is in conflict with the Land Use Plan. Mr. Lawson stated that the batting cage element of the proposal would be a C-4 use. He stated that this could result in this portion of Stagecoach Road becoming commercial. Applicant Gerald Staley indicated that the proposed uses can be considered commercial but the complex except for the structures are not permanent. He stated that his project will provide a place for the Otter Creek Community youth to go. Commissioner Brandon ask Mr. Staley why he changed the project description after the Subdivision Committee meeting. Mr. Staley stated that the civil engineer who drew the original site plan should have shown The Pro Shop as 3,000 rather than 1,800 square feet in size. 4 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6178 Commissioner Adcock asked if the applicant planned to include miniature golf in his proposal. Mr. Staley stated that if the initial elements of the facility were economically successful than he plans to have a future phase that would include miniature golf. The applicant presented a lighting plan to the Commission. He indicated the importance of lighting in respect to the golf driving range. Sonya Martin spoke in support of the project and read a letter from Coach Randy Rutherford of Fair High School. Walter Coleman IV read a letter from Coach Mike Johnson from Fair High School in support of the project. At this point in the meeting, Mr. Lawson changed the staff recommendation to denial since the proposal is in conflict with the multifamily designation on the Land Use Plan. He also stated that staff does not have a good feel for the proposal since the applicant has continually changed the project description. In response, Mr. Staley and Mr. Stan Martin stated that the proposed project is a good use for this 19 acre site. Mr. Martin said there is widespread support of this project in the Otter Creek Community. They showed to the Commission typical elevation and architectural style of the proposed Pro Shop. Commissioner Adcock and Chairman Woods asked for the neighborhood association position on the project. Commissioner Hawn would like to see staff look at the Land Use Plan for this site and area. Assistant City Attorney Cindy Dawson stated the Commission policy in this type of matter is that they discuss the land use issue at one meeting and the proposal itself at a subsequent meeting. A motion to defer the land use decision on this item to September 26, 1996 and consider the Planned Development for this site on November 21, 1996. The motion passed 8 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent and 1 open position. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) Gerald Staley represented the project before the Commission. David Scherer stated that the 15% in -lieu fee for road improvements was appropriate for this case. Mr. Staley agreed to pay the fee. No one from the public spoke about the project. A motion to approve the rezoning to PCD passed with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 5 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: B FILE NO.: Z-6198 NAME: PINNACLE VALLEY SUBDIVISION PHASE IV -- PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT LOCATION: On the south side of Pinnacle Valley Road and immediately south of the railroad tracts DEVELOPER• Andrew Schuaf 5700 Countryside Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 AREA• 3.92 ACRES ZONING• R-2 NUMBER OF UNITS• 43 PLANNING DISTRICT: CENSUS TRACT: 42.05 ENGINEER• Pat McGetrick McGetrick Engineering 11225 Huron Ln., Ste. 200 Little Rock, AR 72211 FT. NEW STREET: 0 PROPOSED USES: Multifamily Residential #1, River Mountain VARIANCES REQUESTED: A five year deferral of road improvements on Pinnacle Valley Road BACKGROUND• This item was deferred to the November 21, 1996 Planning Commission meeting to allow the applicant to redesign the project. The number of units proposed has been reduced from 65 to 43 units. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: An eleven lot PRD consisting of ten-fourplex lots and one triplex lot for a total of 43 residential rental dwellings. The development is proposed as one phase. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is currently vacant and wooded. The topography generally drops off from the roadway. A portion of the property is within the floodway. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received several calls in opposition to the density of the proposal. There has been no calls supportive of the project. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6198 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Provide documentation to pertaining to wet land delineation, tract A. Permits required prior to construction include development permits, grading permit, Department of Pollution and Control permits. Contractor and developer must provide certification of field placement prior to construction of foundations. Due to the following minimum floor elevations on the proposed site plan for Phase IV, lot 1, unfinished floor should be 265, lot 2 (265), lot 3 (265), lot 4 (265.2), lot 5 (265.4), lot 6 (265.6), lot 7 (266), lot 8 (265.6), lot 9 (265.4), lot 10 (265.2), and lot 11 (265). Traffic Engineer would like to have a profile of Pinnacle Valley Drive to ensure proper sight distance. Widening this street to where there is 36 foot of pavement with a 4 foot shoulder to provide left turn drives into both entries would be required with construction. That is an approximate widening of 24 feet from centerline with a 4 foot shoulder or 28 feet widening from centerline. However a rural standard 36 foot street with a 4 foot shoulder. Phase III which was approved by the Planning Commission and is going to the City Board on November 7, 1996 is widening Pinnacle Valley Road 18 feet from centerline with a 4 foot shoulder for its frontage and a connecting frontage of property. Construction of the connecting link between Phase III & IV provides justification for allowing less than 30 feet from centerline. Utilities/Fire Department/County Planning Wastewater: Sewer main extension and Isom fees required. Arkla: No comment Southwestern Bell: OK Water: Fire hydrants to be private Fire Department: Standard conditions County Planning: No comment F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Landscape: Areas side aside for land use and street buffers meet with ordinance requirements. The Landscape Ordinance requires a three foot wide building landscape strip between public parking areas and structures. Some flexibility with this requirement is allowed. However, the plan submitted does not allow for this requirement to be satisfied. 2 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6198 A six foot high opaque wood fence with its face directed outward or dense evergreen plantings are required to screen this development from the residential properties to the south and west. The proposed dumpsters are required to be screened with an eight foot high opaque wood fence or wall on three sides. Unless otherwise provided, one tree for every 40 feet and one shrub for every ten feet will be required along the southern and western perimeters of the site. Curb and gutter or another approved border will be required to protect landscape areas from vehicular traffic. Issues• The following are unresolved items on the PCD submittal. • Proposal requires a minor plan change to LDMF (8-10 du/ac) • Provide more detailed information on signage, architectural style, number of bedrooms, square footage et al. Planning Division: The site is in the River Mountain District. The adopted Plan recommends Single Family use. The request is for Multifamily, 43 units on less than 4 acres. This is over 10.75 units per acre. To the south and southeast is large lot single family, and all the surrounding zoning is "R-2" Single Family. The requested density is too much. Staff is willing to consider some increase of density, but only to the Low Density Multifamily level (8 to 10 units/acre). G. ANALYSIS• At the request of staff, the applicant has redesigned the site plan to include more open space and reduce the unit count from 65 to 43 units. Staff can support a plan change to Low Density Multifamily (8-10 du/ac) from single family. The project engineer cannot use "Tract A" land area in calculating project density. The applicant has removed three units from the site plan in order to reduce the total density to 10 du/ac. The applicant has requested a five year deferral of road improvements on Pinnacle Valley Road. Pat McGetrick proposes to improve the road to "rural standards" with no sidewalks, curbs, or gutter on Pinnacle valley Road. Public Works Department will address this waiver request. 3 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6198 H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVAL of the PRD request (Z-6198) as illustrated on the proposed site plan dated November 7, 1996. Approval is subject to conditions and revisions listed in paragraphs D, E, F of this report. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (SEPTEMBER 19, 1996) Mr. Pat McGetrick introduced the project which consist of 65 units on 23 lots. Larry Jones indicated that the proposed density was 16 dwelling units per acre and was therefore inconsistent with the Land Use Plan. Staff has also received no information concerning the architectural style, building heights and number of bedrooms per unit. The Committee determined that there was not enough information on this proposed PRD to forward this item to the full Commission. Mr. McGetrick was told to submit a revised plan to Planning Staff no later than 5:00 p.m. Wednesday, September 25, 1996 on the item will be deferred to the November 21, 1996 Planning Commission meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 10, 1996) The Staff relayed the applicant's request for deferral to the Planning Commission meeting on November 21, 1996. This item was included as part of the Consent Agenda for deferral. A motion to approve the Consent Agenda for deferral. The motion by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Pat McGetrick present the revised site plan which now consist of primarily fourplex units totaling 43 rental dwellings. There was a great deal of discussion concerning the request for "rural standard" improvements on Pinnacle Valley Road. Planning Staff indicated that the total number of units needed to be reduced to 40. The Committee set the item for review by the entire Planning Commission on November 21, 1996. 4 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6198 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) Larry Jones presented the staff report. He indicated that the total unit count had been reduced from 65 to 43 units. Staff requested a further reduction to 40 units total. Pat McGetrick was present to answer questions from commissioners. There was no comment from the public. A motion to approve the rezoning to PRD and change the land use plan to LDMF (8-10 du/ac) was passed with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. In respect to road improvements on Pinnacle Valley Road the applicant agreed to the following condition. The developer will taper pavement width to 36 feet with 4 foot shoulder adjacent to the project. This is to extend to the north project drive and then taper to the railroad tracts. The remainder of the Pinnacle Valley Road improvements will be deferred for five years. A motion to defer the road improvements for five years as stated above passed with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 5 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: C FILE NO.: 5-992-E NAME: PINNACLE VALLEY SUBDIVISION PHASE IV -- PRELIMINARY PLAT LOCATION: On the south side of Pinnacle Valley Road and immediately south of the railroad tracts. DEVELOPER• Andrew Schuaf 5700 Countryside Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 AREA• 3.92 ACRES ZONING• R-2 NUMBER OF LOTS• 11 PLANNING DISTRICT: CENSUS TRACT: 42.05 VARIANCES REQUESTED: Valley Road BACKGROUND• PROPOSED USES: #1, River Mountain ENGINEER• Pat McGetrick McGetrick Engineering 11225 Huron Lane, Ste. 200 Little Rock, AR 72211 FT. NEW STREET• 0 Multifamily Residential Waiver of road improvements on Pinnacle This item was deferred to the November 21, 1996 Planning Commission meeting to allow the applicant to redesign the project. A. PROPOSAWREQUEST: An eleven lot PRD consisting of ten-fourplex lots and one triplex lot for a total of 43 residential rental dwellings. The preliminary plat is proposed as one phase. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is currently vacant and wooded. The topography generally drops off from the roadway. A portion of the property is within the floodway. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received several calls in opposition to the density of the proposal. There has been no calls supportive of the project. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-992-E D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Provide documentation to pertaining to wet land delineation, tract A. Permits required prior to construction include development permits, grading permit, Department of Pollution and Control permits. Contractor and developer must provide certification of field placement prior to construction of foundations. Due to the following minimum floor elevations on the proposed site plan for Phase IV, lot 1, unfinished floor should be 265, lot 2 (265), lot 3 (265), lot 4 (265.2), lot 5 (265.4), lot 6 (265.6), lot 7 (266), lot 8 (265.6), lot 9 (265.4), lot 10 (265.2), and lot 11 (265). Traffic Engineer would like to have a profile of Pinnacle Valley Drive to ensure proper sight distance. Widening this street to where there is 36 foot of pavement with a 4 foot shoulder to provide left turn drives into both entries would be required with construction. That is an approximate widening of 24 feet from centerline with a 4 foot shoulder or 28 feet widening from centerline. However a rural standard 36 foot street with a 4 foot shoulder. Phase III which was approved by the Planning Commission and is going to the City Board on November 7, 1996 is widening Pinnacle Valley Road 18 feet from centerline with a 4 foot shoulder for its frontage and a connecting frontage of property. Construction of the connecting link between Phase III a IV provides justification for allowing less than 30 feet from centerline. Utilities/Fire Department/County Planning Wastewater: Sewer main extension and Isom fees required. Arkla: No comment Southwestern Bell: OK Water: Fire hydrants to be private Fire Department: Standard conditions County Planning: No comment F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Landscape: Areas side aside for land use and street buffers meet with ordinance requirements. The Landscape Ordinance requires a three foot wide building landscape strip between public parking areas and structures. Some flexibility with this requirement is allowed. However, the plan submitted does not allow for this requirement to be satisfied. 2 NovemDer 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO • C (Cont.) FILE NO.: 5-992-E A six foot high opaque wood fence with its face directed outward or dense evergreen plantings are required to screen this development from the residential properties to the south and west. The proposed dumpsters are required to be screened with an eight foot high opaque wood fence or wall on three sides. Unless otherwise provided, one tree for every 40 feet and one shrub for every ten feet will be required along the southern and western perimeters of the site. Curb and gutter or another approved border will be required to protect landscape areas from vehicular traffic. Issues• • Provide information on responsibility of property owners association in respect to common area maintenance. • Show all building footprints. Planning Division: The site is in the River Mountain District. The adopted Plan recommends Single Family use. The request is for Multifamily, 43 units on less than 4 acres. This is over 10.75 units per acre. To the south and southeast is large lot single family, and all the surrounding zoning is "R-2" Single Family. The requested density is too much. Staff is willing to consider some increase of density, but only to the Low Density Multifamily level (8 to 10 units/acre). G. ANALYSIS: In respect to the preliminary plat, there are few issues left to resolve. The request for waiver of sidewalk, curb, and gutter improvements on Pinnacle Valley Road will be addressed by Public Works Staff. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVAL of the Prelminary Plat (S-992-E) as shown on the revised submittal dated September 23, 1996. Approval is subject to conditions and revisions listed in paragraphs D, E, F of this report. 3 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-992-E SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (SEPTEMBER 19, 1996) Mr. Pat McGetrick introduced the project which consist of 65 units on 23 lots. Larry Jones indicated that the proposed density was 16 dwelling units per acre and was therefore inconsistent with the Land Use Plan. Staff has also received no information concerning the architectural style, building heights and number of bedrooms per unit. The Committee determined that there was not enough information on this proposed PRD to forward this item to the full Commission. Mr. McGetrick was told to submit a revised plan to Planning Staff no later than 5:00 p.m. Wednesday, September 25, 1996 on the item will be deferred to the November 21, 1996 Planning Commission meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 10, 1996) The Staff relayed the applicant's request for deferral to the Planning Commission meeting on November 21, 1996. This item was included as part of the Consent Agenda for deferral. A motion to approve the Consent Agenda for deferral. The motion by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Pat McGetrick present the revised site plan which now consist of primarily fourplex units totaling 43 rental dwellings. There was a great deal of discussion concerning the request for "rural standard" improvements on Pinnacle Valley Road. The Committee set the item for review by the entire Planning Commission on November 21, 1996. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) Larry Jones presented the staff report for the preliminary plat. Pat McGetrick was present to answer questions from commissioners. There was no public comment. A motion to approve the preliminary plat subject to conditions in the staff report passed with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. In respect to road improvements on Pinnacle Valley Road, the applicant agreed to the following condition. The developer will taper pavement width to 36 feet with 4 foot shoulder adjacent to the project. This is to extend to the north project drive and 4 Novemner 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: 5-992-E then taper to the railroad tracts. The remainder of the Pinnacle Valley Road improvements will be deferred for five years. A motion to defer the road improvements for five years as stated above passed with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 5 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: D FILE NO.: Z-6199 NAME: GREY ROCK LONG -FORM PCD (Z-6199) LOCATION: West of the intersection of West Markham and Chenal Parkway adjacent to Home Depot. DEVELOPER• Moses/Nosari Real Estate 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 10.98 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 ZONING: R-2 PROPOSED USES: PLANNING DISTRICT: 19, Chenal CENSUS TRACT: 42.06 VARIANCES REQUESTED: None BACKGROUND• ENGINEER• MCGETRICK ENGINEERING 11225 Huron Ln., Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72221 FT. NEW STREET• 0 Commercial This request was deferred to the November 21, 1996 meeting to allow the applicant to modify the application. The request for a PCD is now limited to Lot 1 of the companion preliminary plat (S-1111). A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST A one lot PCD consisting of a 123,000 square feet single uses department store. On -site parking will consist of 612 spaces. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is wooded and largely undeveloped except for an existing church and parking lot. The property will be cleared and the hill lowered to the same elevation as Home Depot. The property borders Markham Avenue. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS Staff has received no adverse comments from the public. 1 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO • D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6199 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS Public Works Comments: The proposed cross access drive appears to intersect the entrance drive shown on Chenal Parkway at less than 75 feet as required by ordinance, close the proposed target facility will required to have a detention facility, site grading, and erosion control plans. Will require a: ADPC&E permit because of the amount of acreage being disturbed. This site will require a special flood hazard permit and grading permit. Gamble Road is platted to go across the flood plain and it is unlikely that it will be built across Rock Creek to Collector Standards, recommend parks provide input as to require 1/2 street improvements versus a cul-de-sac. Access shown to Gamble Road is located too close the Chenal Parkway intersection. A collector street, Gamble Road, would be designed so that drives are back a 100 feet from Chenal Parkway right-of-way. A deceleration lane will be required for Chenal Parkway, for Gamble Road constructed to Chenal Parkway standards. As mentioned in the Traffic Engineering report, there will not be a recommendation from the Traffic Engineer to install a traffic signal at the entrance to the Target facility. The Traffic Engineer is recommending that this island in the median be closed and access restricted for eastbound movements on Chenal Parkway. Take access through the Home Depot site to get traffic light access on West Markham and Chenal intersection. A sidewalk is required on the complete frontage of Chenal Parkway and a sidewalk will be required on the Gamble Road frontages. The access drive shown to connect Lots 1, 2, and 3 should be built to commercial street standards, 36 foot wide with a sidewalk on both sides and that the back out parking shown at the front of the site prior to it intersection with the Chenal Parkway access should be removed. The connection should be closed at the shown Chenal access Drive. A new drive connecting these parcels should be located between the front of the building and Chenal. E. UTILITY COMMENTS/FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements. Arkla: No comment Southwestern Bell: OK Water: A pro rata foot change of $13/foot applies for part of the property. Special conditions apply for service across and/or relocation of 39 inch raw water main. 8 inch tie in to the east and main extension in Gamble Road may be needed. AP&L : No comment Fire Department: On site fire protection is required. Fa November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO • D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6199 F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Landscape: A portion of the land use buffer along the western perimeter drops to a width of only five feet. The full requirement is an average width of 27 feet but in no case less than six feet at any given point. The Landscape Ordinance requires a four to six foot wide landscaping strip between separate plats of property exclusive of driveways. This has not been provided for along the eastern perimeter of the parking lot. Additionally, it has not been provided for along the western perimeter of the Home Depot parking areas. A six foot high opaque wood fence with its face directed outward or dense evergreen plantings are required along the northern and western perimeters of the site. However, in areas where the floodway exists this requirement may be deemed inappropriate. Issues• The following are unresolved items on the PCD submittal. • Provide crossover easements with Home Depot. • Detail proposed signage and lighting plans. Planning Division: No land use issues G. ANALYSIS• Design changes have been made in the parking lot configuration to address staff concerns. An agreement with Home Depot to allow for crossover of traffic and parking has not been finalized. The applicant has amended the application to excluded Lots 2, 3 and 4 of the companion preliminary plat (S-1111). A part of this submittal, the applicant is requesting abandonment of a strip of right-of-way 20 feet wide by 675 feet long. This right-of-way is within the boundary of the proposed rezoning. (See enclosed exhibit.) H. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL of a one lot single use Planned Zoning District to be retitle as a PD-C. Staff also recommends approval of the 3 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6199 petition for abandonment of public right-of-way discussed above. Approval is subject to the conditions listed in paragraphs D, E, and F of this report. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (SEPTEMBER 19, 1996) Larry Jones indicated that the proposed PCD be limited to only Lot 1 of the companion preliminary plat (S-1111). Mr. Ramsey Ball represented the applicants indicated that they could not define the exact type of commercial uses desired on the property except for Lot 1. David Scherer stated that Public Works had concerns in regards to left turns from the site on two Chenal Parkway. Planning Staff showed the applicant several inconsistencies in the Target Lot 1 parking and circulation design with the approved conditional use permit for Home Depot. Pat McGetrick stated that his clients were considering a deferral in order to work with staff on the outstanding site plan issues. The Committee stated that the project applicant needed to notify Planning Staff by Wednesday, September 25, 1996 if they wanted a deferral of this item. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 10, 1996) The Staff relayed the applicant's request for deferral to the Planning Commission meeting on November 21, 1996. This item was included as part of the Consent Agenda for deferral. A motion to approve the Consent Agenda for deferral. The motion by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Mr. Jimmy Moses representing the property owners indicated they were amending the application to include only Lot 1. Mr. Pat McGetrick showed a revised plan to the Committee. The parking layout and internal circulation pattern now reflects early comments by staff. Larry Jones requested across over agreement between Target and Home Depot prior to the Planning Commission meeting. The Committee determined that the item would be scheduled for the November 21, 1996 Subdivision Agenda of the Planning Commission. 4 Novemner 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) Mr. Jimmy Moses presented the rezoning item to the Planning Commission. He indicated that his group would provide a firm letter from Home Depot agreeing to the site plan and parking configuration. Mr. Pat McGetrick, project engineer, was available to answer questions. David Scherer indicated that Public Works Department conditions included the letter from Bill Henry included in the staff report. There was no comment from the public on this item. A motion to approve the proposed Long -Form PD-C was approved by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 5 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.• D1 NAME: Parks Master Plan Amendment LOCATION: Northwest of Chenal Parkway and Markham REQUEST: Remove Community Park - Rock Creek Park Expansion SOURCE: Property Owner STAFF REPORT• On August 15 the Planning Commission discussed Land Use Plan Amendment to change an area from Park/Open Space to Commercial. At that meeting the Commission unanimously voted to change the Plan. However, the Parks Plan still shows the site for a proposed Community Park. The Parks Department is completing a report on the Rock Creek Park proposal. This report will be provided to the Commission at or before the September 26 meeting. If the Commission wishes to allow the commercial use of the property as indicated by your action on August 15, an amendment removing the park site is necessary. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: (To be given at the hearing on September 26.) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 27, 1996) Jim Lawson, Director of Planning and Development informed the Commission that the Parks Department and property owner regulations wished this item be deferred to October 10 when a plat and Planned Development Proposal for the area will be considered. By unanimous vote 10-0 the item was deferred. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 10, 1996) The Staff relayed the applicant's request for deferral to the Planning Commission meeting on November 21, 1996. This item was included as part of the Consent Agenda for deferral. Novemoer 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: D1 (Cont.) A motion to approve the Consent Agenda for deferral. The motion by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) Staff presented the issue and told the Planning Commission that only a minor plan change amendment was needed, involving a 200 foot strip of land. After a brief discussion, the Commission voted to approve the amendment. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. (See item "D" for additional information.) F November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: E FILE NO.: S-1111 NAME: GREY ROCK -- PRELIMINARY PLAT LOCATION: West of the intersection of West Markham Street and Chenal Parkway adjacent to Home Depot. DEVELOPER• Moses/Nosari Real Estate 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 19.51 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 4 ZONING: R-2 PROPOSED USES: PLANNING DISTRICT: 19, Chenal CENSUS TRACT: 42.06 VARIANCES REQUESTED: None BACKGROUND• ENGINEER• MCGETRICK ENGINEERING 11225 Huron Ln., Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72221 FT. NEW STREET• 0 Commercial This request was deferred to the November 21, 1996 meeting to allow the applicant to modify the application. The companion PCD request (Z-6199) is now limited to Lot 1 of this preliminary plat (S-1111). A. PROPOSAL REQUEST A request to divide 19.5/acres into four lots. A 123,000 square foot single use department store is planned for Lot 1. There are no immediately plans for the other lots to be platted. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is wooded and largely undeveloped except for an existing church and parking area on Lot 1. The property is wooded and has not been cleared for development. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS Staff has received no adverse comments from the public. 04 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: 5-1111 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS Public Works Comments: The proposed cross access drive appears to intersect the entrance drive shown on Chenal Parkway at less than 75 feet as required by ordinance, close the proposed target facility will required to have a detention facility, site grading, and erosion control plans. Will require a: ADPC&E permit because of the amount of acreage being disturbed. This site will require a special flood hazard permit and grading permit. Gamble Road is platted to go across the flood plain and it is unlikely that it will be built across Rock Creek to Collector Standards, recommend parks provide input as to require 1/2 street improvements versus a cul-de-sac. Access shown to Gamble Road is located too close the Chenal Parkway intersection. A collector street, Gamble Road, would be designed so that drives are back a 100 feet from Chenal Parkway right-of-way. A deceleration lane will be required for Chenal Parkway, for Gamble Road constructed to Chenal Parkway standards. As mentioned in the Traffic Engineering report, there will not be a recommendation from the Traffic Engineer to install a traffic signal at the entrance to the Target facility. The Traffic Engineer is recommending that this island in the median be closed and access restricted for eastbound movements on Chenal Parkway. Take access through the Home Depot site to get traffic light access on West Markham and Chenal intersection. A sidewalk is required on the complete frontage of Chenal Parkway and a sidewalk will be required on the Gamble Road frontages. The access drive shown to connect Lots 1, 2, and 3 should be built to commercial street standards, 36 foot wide with a sidewalk on both sides and that the back out parking shown at the front of the site prior to it intersection with the Chenal Parkway access should be removed. The connection should be closed at the shown Chenal access Drive. A new drive connecting these parcels should be located between the front of the building and Chenal. E. UTILITY COMMENTS/FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements. Arkla: No comment Southwestern Bell: OK Water: A pro rata foot change of $13/foot applies for part of the property. Special conditions apply for service across and/or relocation of 39 inch raw water main. 8 inch tie in to the east and main extension in Gamble Road may be needed. AP&L : No comment Fire Department: On site fire protection is required. Oa November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO • E (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1111 County Planning: No comment F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN Landscape: No requirements as part of Preliminary Plat. Issues• The following are unresolved items on the preliminary plat. e Cul-de-sac on Gamble Road. • Plot access easement across Lots 2 and 3. Planning Division: No land use issues G. ANALYSIS The preliminary plat was deferred in order to allow the applicant to workout concerns in respect to the PD-C request (Z-6178). H. STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL of a four lot preliminary plat subject to conditions listed in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (SEPTEMBER 19, 1996) Larry Jones indicated that the proposed PCD be limited to only Lot 1 of the companion preliminary plat (S-1111). Mr. Ramsey Ball represented the applicants indicated that they could not define the exact type of commercial uses desired on the property except for Lot 1. David Scherer stated that Public Works had concerns in regards to left turns from the site on two Chenal Parkway. Planning Staff showed the applicant several inconsistencies in the Target Lot 1 parking and circulation design with the approved conditional use permit for Home Depot. Pat McGetrick stated that his clients were considering a deferral in order to work with staff on the outstanding site plan issues. The Committee stated that the project applicant needed to notify Planning Staff by Wednesday, September 25, 1996 if they wanted a deferral of this item. 3 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1111 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 10, 1996) The Staff relayed the applicant's request for deferral to the Planning Commission meeting on November 21, 1996. This item was included as part of the Consent Agenda for deferral. A motion to approve the Consent Agenda for deferral. The motion by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Mr. Jimmy Moses representing the property owners indicated they were amending the application to include only Lot 1. Mr. Pat McGetrick showed a revised plan to the Committee. The parking layout and internal circulation pattern now reflects early comments by staff. Larry Jones requested across over agreement between Target and Home Depot prior to the Planning Commission meeting. The Committee determined that the item would be scheduled for the November 21, 1996 Subdivision Agenda of the Planning Commission. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) Larry Jones presented the preliminary plat to the Commission. Mr. Pat McGetrick, project engineer, was available to answer questions. David Scherer indicated that Public Works Department conditions included the letter from Bill Henry dated November 11, 1996. There was no comment from the public on this item. A motion to approve the preliminary plat was approved by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 4 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: F Z-5987-A Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: Janis Morehart Morrow Janis Morehart Morrow 10420 Helm Drive Rezone from R-2 to C-4 Unspecified commercial use .23 acres Vacant building (formerly used as service station) SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Vacant land; zoned C-4 South - Railroad right-of-way; zoned R-2 East - Construction company; zoned I-2 West - Residential; zoned R-2 PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS Master Street Plan right-of-way including radial dedication at intersection. With construction a contribution to the widening of the adjacent streets is required by the Boundary Street Ordinance. Items 1 to 5 from previous agenda on May 30, 1995 apply to this re -application. 1. Both Helm and Mabelvale are substandard streets and will require widening to 1/2 of 36 foot commercial street section with sidewalk. 2. Stormwater detention analysis will be required if impervious area is increased by 500 square feet. 3. Provide status of underground storage tanks before construction permit. 4. A grading permit for special flood hazard and a development permit are required. 5. Contact ADPC&E for approval prior to starting work. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F Z-5987-A (Cont.) PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT This property is located one block east of a CATA bus route which travels Mabelvale West Road and Mabelvale Main. LAND USE ELEMENT The site is located in the Geyer Springs West District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Mixed Office Commercial. The request is in conflict with the Plan. "C-4" is too intense for this classification. (If the zoning is not office, the Plan recommends mixed and/or Planned Development Process). STAFF ANALYSIS The request before the Commission is to rezone this .23± acre tract from "R-2" Single Family to "C-4" Open Display District. The site is occupied by a vacant building which once housed a service station. The applicant did not indicate a specific, proposed use for the site. The property has a history of commercial use which predates annexation. When the property was annexed, it was zoned R-2 and any nonresidential use occupying the site was rendered nonconforming. The C-4 nonconforming status was lost when the last legal permitted occupancy by an auto repair business closed in 1992. In 1995, in response to enforcement action by the City, the applicant attempted to have the property zoned C-4. The Planning Commission voted to approve the C-4 request on May 30, 1995. Staff had recommended denial. On July 18, 1995, the Board of Directors denied the C-4 request. The applicant then appealed that denial to the courts she was unsuccessful in having the Board's action reversed and has exhausted her legal remedies. The applicant has now filed an identical C- 4 rezoning application. Staff's opinion has not changed since this issue was first reviewed in 1995. The Geyer Springs West District Land Use Plan recommends Mixed Office Commercial for the site. A C-4 request is too intense for the MOC classification and is in conflict with the Plan. The MOC classification recommends a mixture of office and commercial uses through the Planned Development Process. The C-4 district is more appropriately located along heavily traveled major traffic arterials. Helm Drive is not an arterial, nor is it heavily traveled since the newly realigned Mabelvale Pike/Mabelvale West arterial was constructed one block to the north. The property is located in the block bounded by Helm Drive on the south and east, Mabelvale Main on the west and Mabelvale Pike on the north. Most of the properties within this block 2 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F Z-5987-A (Cont. are still residential, either occupied by a residence or vacant R-2 zoned lots. The C-4 zoned lot adjacent to the north is vacant. A small, R-2 zoned, nonconforming grocery store is located at the northeast corner of Helm Drive and Mabelvale Main. The C-4 request is incompatible with the surrounding land uses and is in conflict with the Land Use Plan. As such, staff cannot support the C-4 reclassification. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the requested C-4 reclassification. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 12, 1996) Janis Morrow and Herb Wright were present representing the application. There was one objector present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of denial. Mr. Wright addressed the Commission and gave a brief history of the site. He discussed the previous occupancy of the site by several auto related uses and spoke of the past attempt to have the property rezoned. Mr. Wright stated that his client was advised in 1993 that the property was zoned C-4 and had spent money improving the site before being advised that the property was actually zoned R-2. He described other nonresidential uses in the area and asked the Commission to approve the request. Ray Nutt, of 10400 Helm Drive, addressed the Commission in opposition to the rezoning. She stated that the previous use of the property as an auto sales lot was "junky and noisy". Commissioner Adcock asked why the agenda indicated the purpose of the rezoning as "unspecified commercial use". Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, responded that the application did not identify any specific proposed use for the site. Commissioner Adcock asked if the C-4 request, as filed, would allow any use permitted in the C-4 district. Mr. Carney responded that it would. Jim Lawson, Director of Planning and Development, commented that an enclosed retail or office use might be appropriate for the site but that outside uses permitted by C-4 zoning were not. In response to a question from the Commission, Mr. Lawson stated that the Codes Enforcement staff had misinterpreted C November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F Z-5987-A (Cont.) the zoning map and had incorrectly identified this site as being zoned C-4. Mr. Wright stated that the proposed use of the site was an auto repair garage with occasional car sales. He stated that the building on the site had a garage bay and a vehicle lift. Janis Morrow stated that she was trying to obtain the C-4 zoning to accommodate the present tenant of the building. Commissioner Putnam asked if the tenant could operate the business within the building. Ms. Morrow responded that the tenant needed outside display area for auto sales. After a discussion of various options for the site, Commissioner Putnam asked if the applicant could accept C-3 zoning. Ms. Morrow responded that she could. Commissioner Rahman asked how many parking spaces were on the site. The applicant responded that parking spaces as such are not designated on the property but that there was space for approximately 12 cars. Commissioner Adcock asked how any commercial zoning for the site fit within the Land Use Plan. Mr. Lawson responded that the Plan showed Mixed Office and Commercial for the site and that staff could support a Planned Development which permitted C-1 uses. Kay Nutt stated that she had to live with whatever commercial use goes on the property whereas the people working in the business would leave to go home each day. Commissioner Hawn told Ms. Nutt that the Commission was looking at a zoning that prohibited outside display. Ms. Nutt stated that she would prefer use of the property to be limited to office. Mr. Carney commented that C-1 zoning did not permit auto related uses. Commissioner Putnam asked if there was not the potential for a lawsuit since the City had erroneously informed the applicant that the property was zoned C-4. Mr. Lawson stated that he would rather face the prospect of a lawsuit than rezone the property in violation of the Land Use Plan. Cindy Dawson, of the City Attorney's Office, commented that a Planned Development permitting C-1 and perhaps office uses would not deprive the applicant of the use of her property. Mr. Lawson stated that staff was not comfortable with permitting an auto repair garage on the site at this time. N November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F Z-5987-A (Cont.) Mr. Wright stated that the building is basically only a mechanic's bay with a 250 square foot office and, as such, was not usable as only office space. He stated that he could accept C-3 zoning. In response to a question from Ms. Dawson, Ms. Morrow stated that she was unfamiliar with the list of permitted C-1 uses. Commissioner Daniel stated that he could not support the application and recommended that it be deferred. Commissioner Putnam stated that movement of Mabelvale Pike changed the neighborhood. He noted that the site is located near a mainline railroad and pointed out other nonresidential uses in the area. In response to a question from Commissioner Adcock, Mr. Lawson discussed why the Plan recommends MOC for the site. Ms. Morrow stated that those commissioners who have been to the site would agree that the property is located in a commercial area. Mr. Wright then stated that the application was amended to a C-3 request. Mr. Lawson stated that the area is changing but that there are still residential uses in the area. He stated that auto repair is too intense a use for the area. Mr. Lawson stated that, whatever use is proposed, it is important to use the existing building. A straight rezoning, he noted, would allow removal of the building. Mr. Wright stated that he agreed to defer the item and amend the application to a Planned Development. In response to a question from Chairman Woods, Mr. Carney stated that October 24, 1996 was the next scheduled rezoning hearing but that it would not allow for Subdivision Committee review of the Planned Development. During the ensuing discussion, the Commission agreed to bring the item back without requiring Subdivision Committee review. A motion was made to defer the item t Commission meeting and not to require review. The motion was approved by a 0 noes and 1 absent. o the October 24, 1996 Subdivision Committee vote of 10 ayes, 5 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F Z-5987-A (Cont.) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 24, 1996) Herb Wright was present representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had failed to submit sufficient documentation to allow for conversion of the item to a Planned Development and, as such, the item needed to be deferred. The applicant had been informed of staff s position and had agreed to the deferral. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for deferral to the November 21, 1996 Commission meeting. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) This item was included in the Consent Deferral agenda. Deferral to the January 9, 1997 Planning Commission meeting. A motion to approve the Consent Agenda was passed with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 6 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: G FILE NO.: Z-6189 NAME: OAKS BROTHERS SHORT -FORM PD-I LOCATION: 16815 Lawson Road DEVELOPER: Mike Oaks Oaks Brothers, Inc. #2 East Skyline Drive Greenbrier, AR 72058 AREA: 1.48 ACRES ZONING• R-2 PLANNING DISTRICT: CENSUS TRACT: 42.08 VARIANCES REQUESTED: BACKGROUND: NUMBER OF LOTS: PROPOSED USES: #17, Crystal Valley None 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 Contractors Storage This item was initiated as a zoning enforcement issue. The applicant converted an existing block building into storage of construction materials. A 6,000 square foot one story metal building and an 1,800 square foot pole barn were added to the property for storage purposes. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST The applicant seeks to legitimize the contractors storage yard at the subject property. He is requesting a single use PD-I. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS The applicant recently constructed a 6,000 square foot one story metal building and an 1,800 square foot pole barn. The 1,080 square foot block structure was renovated. This structure was previously used as a country store but had been vacant for several years. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS Staff has received several calls concerning this proposal. None of the responses have been in opposition to the November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6189 operation of the facility. One letter from an adjacent landowner in support of the project. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS Public Works Comments: Required right-of-way for Harkins Road would be 30 feet from centerline for this Master Street Plan collector street standard. Lawson Road is a minor arterial. A right-of-way required for a minor arterial is 90 feet. Dedicate right- of-way to 45 feet from centerline; relocate driveway 100 feet from the intersection of Harkins Road and Lawson Road and construct a concrete apron and recommend that the gravel surface be paved with hard surface as required by City ordinance. City ordinance requires that concrete aprons to be installed from the edge of pavement for commercial structures to the right-of-way line. With any planned expansion of this facility, the boundary street ordinance would come into effect including construction of minor arterial standards for Lawson Road and collector street standards for Harkins Road including sidewalks on both frontages. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING Wastewater: Outside service boundary Arkla: No comment Southwestern Bell: OK Water: Property has existing service. Fire Department: Drive width is to be no less than 20 feet in width and able to support fine apparatus. Proper hydrant placement needed. Drive must be all weather materials. County Planning: No comment F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN Landscape• A six foot high opaque wood fence with its face directed outward or dense evergreen plantings are required to screen this site from the residential properties to the south and west. A landscaping upgrade toward compliance with the Landscape Ordinance equal to the amount of building expansion proposed is required. F November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6189 Issues• • Provide signage and lighting plan. • No building materials to be stored outside structures. Planning Division: The site is in the Crystal Valley District. The adopted Plan recommends Single Family use. The request is for Industrial use. There has not been sufficient change in this area to justify such a major land use intensification. Staff cannot at this time support a Plan Amendment. G. ANALYSIS The historic land use of the site has been commercial. The immediately adjacent land uses are open space and agricultural cattle grazing. There has been no opposition to this proposal by neighbors or area residences. There is one letter in support of the project stating that the Oak's Brothers construction yard has been a good neighbor. Staff feels that this particular use of this site by this applicant is compatible with existing rural residential - agricultural - open space land uses in the area without charging the adopted Plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVAL of a one lot single use Planned Zoning District to be titled Oak's Brothers Short -Form PD-I. The approval is subject to the conditions listed in paragraphs D, E, and F of this report. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (SEPTEMBER 19, 1996) The applicant has requested a deferral due to a death in his family. The item was not discussed. The Committee recommended this matter be deferred until the November 21, 1996 Planning Commission meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 10, 1996) The Staff relayed the applicant's request for deferral to the Planning Commission meeting on November 21, 1996. This item was included as part of the Consent Agenda for deferral. 3 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6189 A motion to approve the Consent Agenda for deferral. The motion by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Larry Jones presented the project to the Committee for review. Mike Oaks indicated he would comply with all conditions listed in the staff comments. The Committee recommended this matter be placed on the Planning Commission agenda on November 21, 1996 for consideration by the full Commission. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) Larry Jones presented the proposed rezoning to the Commission. Mike Oaks stated that he agreed to the conditions and was available to answer questions from the Commission. There was no comment from the public on this item. A motion to approve the rezoning of this site to PD-I subject to conditions in the staff report passed with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 4 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: H FILE NO.: Z-5098-B NAME: DILLARD'S EXECUTIVE OFFICES EXPANSION - SITE PLAN REVIEW LOCATION: 1600 Cantrell Road DEVELOPER: Dillards 1600 Cantrell Road Little Rock, AR 72207 AREA• 17.5 ACRES ZONING: 0-2 NUMBER OF LOTS• 1 ENGINEER: Tim Daters White-Daters Engineers 401 Victory Street PROPOSED USES: Office PLANNING DISTRICT: #5 Downtown CENSUS TRACT• 9 VARIANCES REQUESTED: None at this time. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: FT. NEW STREET• 0 Staff recommends that the Planning Commission accept the applicant's request to withdraw this item. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (AUGUST 8, 1996) Staff was unable to review and comment on the submittal because it lacks a specific project description. The applicant's engineer has requested a deferral. The Committee recommended this item be deferred until the September 19, 1996 Subdivision Committee meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 29, 1996) The Staff relayed the applicant's request for deferral to the Planning Commission meeting on October 10, 1996. This item was included as part of the Consent Agenda for deferral. A motion to approve the Consent Agenda for deferral. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent and 1 open position. 1 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO • Z-5098-B SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (SEPTEMBER 19, 1996) Mr. Tim Daters, project engineer indicated that the applicant wishes to defer the Site Plan Review application. This item will be deferred to the November 21, 1996 Planning Commission agenda. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 10, 1996) The Staff relayed the applicant's request for deferral to the Planning Commission meeting on November 21, 1996. This item was included as part of the Consent Agenda for deferral. A motion to approve the Consent Agenda for deferral. The motion by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) The project engineer requested that this item be withdrawn. it was included as part of the Consent Withdrawal agenda. A motion to approve the Consent Agenda was approved with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 2 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: I FILE NO.: S-1041-A NAME: RIVERDALE MINI -STORAGE -- REVISED SUBDIVISION SITE PLAN LOCATION: 1024 Jessie Road DEVELOPER• John Haley Riverdale Mini -Storage 875 Union Building Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA• 2.91 ACRES ZONING: I-3 NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 PLANNING DISTRICT: Heights (4) CENSUS TRACT• 15 ENGINEER• BCC GBN (Blass Firm) 303 west Capitol Avenue Suite 300 Little Rock, AR 72201 FT. NEW STREET• 0 PROPOSED USES: Office Space VARIANCES REQUESTED: None at submittal - to be determined by the right-of-way abandonment. BACKGROUND• This parcel of land is partially composed of excess street right- of-way and a remnant of the mini -storage development site. The applicant has previously attempted to gain use of the excess right-of-way for development purposes, he is again on this agenda with a petition to abandon if all requirements of the filing can be met. The developer has not indicated at this time if there will be a replat to make this a separate lot. If that is done, it may relieve some problems with design. STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: To construct a 8,737 square foot two story office building with 11 parking places adjacent to the structure and 50 across Jessie Road. The mini -storage and proposed office building will share a driveway from Jessie Road. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The expansion of the project area of the mini -storage to add office space. This is being accomplished by submittal of a revised Subdivision Site Plan. The end product to be four buildings on a lot. 1 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1041-A B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: This is a rough parcel of land with drainage and flood plain problems and street problems with a private road. The abutting uses are a mix of Office, Commercial and Warehouse. Zoning is mixed in the this area ranging from Office to the north and east to Commercial and Industrial along the railroad right-of-way. C. ENGINEERING/UTILITY COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: Please note address assigned by GIS (1024 Jessie Road). The design of the building will be required to comply with FEMA regulations. The parking is in the flood plain and does not have to be constructed above the Base Flood Elevation. However, the stair towers and elevator shaft will need to be at or above BFE of 256.3, or be flood proofed to this elevation. A grading plan with a Special Flood Hazard Permit is required prior to any construction. See G-23-245-A comments (right-of-way abandonment). Respond to requirements concerning the drainageway and the reconstruction of Jessie Road to Commercial Street Standards. Also, a sidewalk on Riverfront Drive shall be constructed as a part of this project. The proposed drive is too close to existing drive recently constructed and should be a minimum of 100 feet from the intersection of Riverfront Drive (a minor arterial) per City Ordinance. Recommend combining drives and using a common access point. Utilities: Sewer/exist 10" and 27" line available, contact Wastewater. Water/A main extension will be required. Fire Department will evaluate the site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire hydrants will be required. Southwestern Bell Telephone/approved as submitted. D. ISSUES/LEGAL/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: • Redesign both Lot 1 parking spaces south of Jessie Road. • Will there be a plat with this on a separate lot? PA November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1041-A 0 Detail on plan areas for grass or landscaping. • Fully dimension all physical improvements. • Parking lot and landscape area south of Jessie Road to remain for this buildings use. The full on -site buffer width required along Riverfront Drive is 40 feet. The minimum requirement when transferring buffer area to another part of the site is 27 feet. The width of the proposed buffer cannot be determined until the right-of-way issue has been worked out. At this time, the amount of right-of-way to be added to this site from the abandonments is unknown. E. ANALYSIS• The right-of-way line and future property line require resolution prior to determining buffers, landscaping, setback, parking design, etc. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: DEFERRAL of this item until the Planning Commission meeting of January 9, 1997. This will allow the Board of Directors to act on the companion right-of-way abandonment. (G-23- 245-A) SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MAY 16, 1996) The staff presented its comments on the submittal, stating that there were too many issues unresolved and the drawing requires more information. The staff felt that it could not deal with the proposed building without knowing how much land is involved. Until such time as the City decides how much land will be turned back to this owner, the lot line on Riverfront Drive is unknown. A lengthy discussion was held on the subject of bringing all data and graphics up to date, by the Thursday, May 23 deadline. Someone raised a question about the railroad ownership and their participation. It was staff position that the railroad must sign as a participant. A general discussion then involved the right- of-way and why the abandonment issue is before the Commission. Staff question about a need for a plat produced a response from the applicant that a plat would not be done, this will be one lot. Richard Wood noted for the record that a variance will be required if this is all considered one lot, the depth of the lot east/west requires a 40 foot buffer along Riverfront Drive. The 3 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO • I (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1041-A present plan cannot handle that. A brief discussion involved sidewalk and the proposed jogging trail that Parks Department is developing. No resolution was gained at the approach to in -lieu or building it. The applicant then accepted the Committee request that the requirements noted be dealt with by next Thursday, May 23, 1996. The item was forwarded to the full Commission for consideration. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MAY 28, 1996) This applicant responded to the many unresolved issues by requesting in writing a deferral of the application to July 18th and the Subdivision Committee on June 27th. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 6, 1996) As requested by the applicant in writing, a deferral of this item was determined to be in order. The Commission placed this item on the Consent Agenda for deferral to July 18, 1996. A motion to that effect was made and passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JUNE 27, 1996) There was no discussion of this item at the Subdivision Committee meeting in as much as the applicant had not made contact with staff concerning resolution of the street abandonment or the site plan review. The Staff and Committee would suggest that the item be carried forward at least one additional review period which would place the item before the Commission on August 29, 1996. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 18, 1996) The Staff offered the applicant's request for deferral to the Planning Commission on August 29, 1996. After a brief discussion, the Commission determined it appropriate to place this item on the Consent Agenda for deferral. A motion to that effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 nays, 3 absent and 1 open position. 4 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1041-A SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (AUGUST 8, 1996) There was no committee discussion on this item. The applicant is still working to resolve the companion Riverfront Drive right-of- way abandonment (G-23-245-A). This item is to deferred until the October 10, 1996 Planning Commission meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 29, 1996) The Staff relayed the applicant's request for deferral to the Planning Commission on October 10, 1996. This item was included as part of the Consent Agenda for deferral. A motion to approve the Consent Agenda for deferral. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent and 1 open position. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (SEPTEMBER 19, 1996) A revised project was shown consisting of a two story office building with 11 spaces adjacent to the building and an additional 50 south of Jessie Road. It appears that all issues to resolve the companion Riverfront Drive right-of-way abandonment (G-23-245-A) have been solved. The item is to be forwarded to the Planning Commission for consideration. The project has no additional deferrals to use. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 10, 1996) The Planning Commission denied the companion road right-of-way abandonment (G-23-245-A). Mr. Jones suggested that this item (S-1041-A) be deferred until the Board of Directors hears item (G-23-245-A). A motion to defer this item until the Planning Commission meeting of November 21, 1996 passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 nays and 3 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) This item was included in the Consent Deferral agenda to the January 9, 1997 Planning Commission meeting. 5 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: I (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1041-A A motion to approve the Consent Agenda was passed with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: J Z-6204 Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: Cecil B. and Isabel L. Hill Herbert Wright, Attorney 9101 Lew Drive Rezone from R-2 to C-3 Unspecified commercial use .59± acres Vacant, one story building SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North - Little Rock Association of the Deaf Offices and Church; both zoned R-2 South - Apartments; zoned R-2 East - Mobile home park; zoned R-2 West - Office/warehouse and vacant property; zoned C-3 PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS Existing right-of-way is shown as 60 feet, it's a 34 foot asphalt street with curb and gutter and a 4 foot sidewalk; need to bring sidewalk to City standards. Property frontage shown has two drives; one drive is allowed by ordinance. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT The site is not located on a Central Arkansas Transit Authority Bus Route. The nearest route is located at Baseline and Geyer Springs Road, extending north on Geyer Springs and west on Baseline. LAND USE ELEMENT The site is in the Geyer Springs East District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Multifamily (MF) for the site. This C-3 request does not conform to the Plan. Staff sees no reason to amend the Plan by extending commercial any further down Lew Drive. 1 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO • J Z-6204 (Cont.) STAFF ANALYSIS The request before the Commission is to rezone this .59± acre tract from "R-2" Single Family to "C-3" General Commercial. The property is currently occupied by a one- story nonresidential style building which is located on the back (east) portion of the property. The remainder of the property is vacant although there does appear to be the vestige of a gravel parking area in front of the building. No specific use for the property has been proposed by the applicant. The site is located in an area with some mixture of zoning and uses. The properties across Lew Drive to the west are zoned C-3 and are occupied by an office/warehouse and a new auto parts store. The R-2 zoned properties directly north of this site contain a church and offices for the Little Rock Association for the Deaf. An R-2 zoned mobile home park is located on the R-2 zoned property south of the site. There are a large number of duplex and multifamily residences located farther to the south along Lew Drive, Southboro and Southwick. Although the residential style is mixed, ranging from mobile homes to duplexes, apartments and single family homes, it is apparent that the predominant land use in the area is residential. The Geyer Springs East District Land Use Plan recommends Multifamily (MF) for this site. This MF designation extends to include even a portion of the C-3 zoned property across Lew Drive. The adopted Plan recommends limiting commercial to the properties located within 500 feet of this portion of Baseline Road. Staff does not believe there is any justification for extending the commercial any further south on Lew Drive. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the requested C-3 zoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 24, 1996) Herb Wright was present representing the application. There were no objectors present. One letter of objection had been sent by the O.U.R. Neighborhood Association and presented to the Commission. Staff presented the item and informed the Commission that the applicant wished to have the item deferred to the November 21, 1996 Commission meeting. Mr. Wright confirmed that he wanted the deferral to allow him time to meet with the neighborhood association. 2 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: J Z-6204 (Cont.) A motion was made to waive the bylaws allowing for the deferral request less than 5 days prior to the public hearing. The motion was approved by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for deferral to the November 21, 1996 meeting by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had requested that the item be deferred to the January 9, 1997 Commission meeting. Staff noted that this would be the last deferral for the item. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for deferral to the January 9, 1997 meeting. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) This item was included in the Consent Deferral agenda. Deferral to the January 9, 1997 Planning Commission meeting. A motion to approve the Consent Agenda was passed with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 3 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: S-1118 NAME: VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON PHASE IV, WELLINGTON VILLAGE PRELIMINARY PLAT (S-1118) LOCATION: Due south of the intersection of Loyola Drive and Village Common Road (under construction) DEVELOPER• Winrock Development Company P. O. Box 8080 Little Rock, AR 72203 ENGINEER: Don Chambers The Mehlburger Firm P. O. Box 3837 Little Rock, AR 72203 AREA: 10.5 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 29 FT. NEW STREET: 1240 L.F. ZONING: R-2 PROPOSED USES: Single Family PLANNING DISTRICT: #19 Chenal CENSUS TRACT: 42.06 VARIANCES REQUESTED: • Waiver of street payment width • Waiver of maximum cul-de-sac length • Waiver of sidewalks on Village Grove Road • Modification of sidewalk location on Village Commons Road This proposed preliminary plat is an extension of The Villages of Wellington neighborhood. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: A 29 lot single family residential subdivision with minimum lot sizes of 8,000 square foot each. The preliminary plat includes a 2.1 acre natural open space area. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: Wooden open space area with no access or utilities. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received no responses from the public on this proposal. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: 5-1118 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: Staff also notes that Village Common Road is in conflict with a final plat for Wellington Village Road and needs to be re -platted prior to platting this subdivision. A sketch grading and drainage plan and a grading permit will be required with soil loss calculations prior to construction, if more than 5 acres are to be cleared, an NPDES permit will be required. Staff can support a 50 foot right-of-way for the entry with a 27 foot street; the first curve radius and the final curve radius for that street needs to have a minimum 75 foot centerline radius per minimum width for minor residential street standards. Staff can support the 45 foot right-of-way and 24 foot pavement for the rest of this length. Cul-de-sac requirements are 100 foot right-of- way, with 80 foot diameter cul-de-sac and no islands are permitted, if parking is to be allowed in the cul-de-sac. Right-of-way shown for Village Common Roads is in conflict with the Master Street Plan; Master Street Plan requires 60 feet of right-of-way. City ordinance 17,154 approved a 31 foot street for Village Common's Road. Note: that this variance was subject to additional widening at a later date to accommodate center left turn lanes as required when streets or drives take access from these reduced width collectors. Therefore, Village Common Road will be widening to accommodate a left turn lane with proper tapers, a 100 foot stack into Franklin Road. A 60 foot right-of-way and a four foot sidewalk with appropriate ADA ramps is required for Village Common's Road for the length of this project. City ordinance 17,155 did allow for a variance in the width of the sidewalk and in the placement of the sidewalk to vary relative to the property line. However, it still shall be consistent with ADA standards. Traffic Engineer requires an intersection sight distance of 300 feet on Village Common Road for this proposed road location. Stormwater Detention ordinance does apply to this subdivision. Recommend that the minor residential street that exceeds ordinance length requirements have a sidewalk. The Staff is recommending a waiver of the width of the road and the turn radii of the road, but not a waiver for a sidewalk. This 29 lot subdivision will generate 290 trips per day. E. UTILITY AND FIRE DEPARTMENT: Wastewater: Sewer main extension with easements Arkla: No comment Southwestern Bell: OK Water: Acreage charges apply in addition to connection charges. 2 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO • S 1118 AP&L: 10' easement on all front property lines Fire Department: No comment County Planning: No comment F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Landscape: N/A Issues: Formalize all waiver request in writing. Planning Division: No land use issues G. ANALYSIS• The applicant has requested a waiver of sidewalks on Village Grove Road and a modification to allow the placement of the Village Commons Road sidewalk in the natural open space area. The merits of this design question is left to the discretion of the Planning Commission. Staff supports the waiver request for pavement width and length of cul-de-sac. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVAL of the 29 single family lot subdivision as illustrated by the preliminary plat. Approval is subject to conditions listed in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Don Chambers presented the preliminary plat to the Subdivision Committee. The group discussed the request for waiver of sidewalks on the internal road and modification of sidewalks on Village Commons Road. The Committee determined that the request would be placed before the Planning Commission on November 21, 1996 for determination. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) This item was included in the Consent Approval agenda. There was no public comment on this item. A motion to approve the Consent Agenda was approved with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 3 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: S-1119 NAME: JEWEL AND MOSER ADDITION -- PRELIMINARY PLAT LOCATION: Southeast corner of Sam Peck Road and Highway 10 DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: JEWELL AND MOSER Pat McGetrick 111 Center Street 11225 Huron Lane Little Rock, AR 72201 Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72211 AREA: 2.4 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: 0-2 PROPOSED USES: Office PLANNING DISTRICT: #1 River Mountain District CENSUS TRACT: 42.06 VARIANCES REQUESTED: Defer improvements on Sam Peck Road until the development of Lot 2. Dedication of right-of-way to collector street due at final platting of Lot 2. All said improvements must be built within 5 years. BACKGROUND• The applicant filed this two lot preliminary plat in conjunction with a POD (Z-6220). A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: This proposal will split 2.4 acres of land designated as "office" in the Land Use Plan into two lots. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is currently vacant. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received no responses from the public on this proposal. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO • 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: 5-1119 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1. Site is located outside the limits of detailed flood study. It appears that new structure would be located very near an extended floodway area included in the next flood study by the Corp and FEMA. Provide plan which shows projected floodplain and floodway along with BFE's to match. 2. Permits required prior to construction. 3. Show minimum final floor elevation to match one foot above projected BFE for the staff. E. UTILITY COMMENTS/FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extensions with easements. Arkla: No comment Southwestern Bell: Easement required. Water: Acreage and connection charges. AP&L: Easement required. Fire Department: OK County Planning: No comment F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Landscape: N/A Issues: None in respect to the Preliminary Plat Planning Division: The site is located in the River Mountain District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Office use. There are no land use issues. G. ANALYSIS• The developer proposes to provide access from Highway 10 via a joint access which runs adjacent to Lot 1. This access point was created as an easement from Lot 44, Piedmont Subdivision Phase II. Staff does not object to this proposed access. Lot 1 of this preliminary plat has a companion POD application (Z-6220) which will also be heard by the Planning Commission on November 21, 1996. K November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1119 H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVAL of a two lot preliminary plat for office uses as illustrated on the proposed site plan. Approval is subject to conditions listed in paragraphs D and E of this report. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Pat McGetrick presented the preliminary plat to the Committee for review. The discussion also included the POD request (Z-6220). There was no discussion in respect to the preliminary plat. The Committee referred the preliminary plat to the November 21, 1996 Planning Commission meeting for determination. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) Larry Jones presented the staff report. Mr. Pat McGetrick was available to answer questions. Mr. Jim Pfeifer, a resident of the Piedmont Subdivision, spoke in opposition to the rezoning. He is concerned that the proposed building will use a shared driveway with a residential lot. He also objected to the possible development of a site less than two acres in size. Mr. Brent Peterson, a Piedmont Lane resident, stated that he was not notified of the hearing. He is concerned about traffic and flooding problems in the area. He stated that he would like a deferral to learn more about the project. Commissioner Berry asked if the two acre minimum has been bypassed through the use of Planned Development rezoning. Mr. Lawson said that a number of commercial developments less than two acres in size have been approved along Highway 10. He stated that this was the result of the type of commercial proposals requested. Commissioners Daniel and Adcock stated that they preferred a deferral of this item since Mr. Peterson said he was not noticed. Commissioner McCarthy asked a question concerning use of the residential pipe -stem lot for access of this office project. Mr. Lawson responded that this rezoning and plat was not creating the pipe -stem. Ms. Lou Teeter, a neighborhood resident, is concerned about flooding in the area. She requested a deferral of the item. q November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO • 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1119 Motion to approve the preliminary plat subject to the conditions in the staff report. Motion passed with 6 ayes, 3 nays and 2 absent. 4 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.• 3 FILE NO.• S-1117 NAME: BELLA ROSA PARTNERSHIP PRELIMINARY PLAT LOCATION: Southwest corner of Highway 10 and Bella Rosa Road DEVELOPER• Bella Rosa Partnership P. 0. Box 23120 Little Rock, AR 72221 ENGINEER• Pat McGetrick 11225 Huron Lane, Ste. 200 Little Rock, AR 72211 AREA: 7.50 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: Transition POD PROPOSED USES: Office, Conditioned Proposed Storage, & Mini -storage PLANNING DISTRICT: #1 River Mountain District CENSUS TRACT: 42.06 VARIANCES REQUESTED: None BACKGROUND• This proposal is a companion filing with the proposed Bella Rosa Partnership (Z-6217). A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: A one lot preliminary plat submittal. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is currently vacant. The parcel is isolated from neighboring properties by a creek and two roadways. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received no responses from the public on this proposal. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1117 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS: A sketch grading and drainage plan meeting the requirements of the special flood hazard area, and a development permit for flood hazard area is required. Minimum floor elevation will be required of 277 NGVD for this construction site adjacent to the regulatory floodway. No construction is allowed within the regulatory floodway limits and the building should be 25 feet from the regulatory floodway. Traffic Engineering recommends that a profile be provided to ensure sight distance availability for the driveways as shown. The northern driveway on Bella Rosa drive should a be a 100 feet edge of driveway from the right-of-way line for Arkansas Highway 10. Driveway shown on Arkansas State Highway 10 should be 100 feet from right-of-way of Bella Rosa drive right-of-way. Arkansas Highway 10 requires dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline for this principal arterial. Bella Rosa with an existing 50 foot right-of-way as shown should have a 60 foot right-of- way for this commercial frontage and the street should be widen as 18 feet from centerline with the sidewalk. Sidewalk will also be required on Arkansas State Highway 10. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this development. A radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of right-of-way from Bella Rosa Drive and the right-of-way for Arkansas State Highway 10. Bella Rosa Drive is a 27 foot chipseal with no walks and open ditches, the curve radius from Arkansas State Highway 10 into Bella Rosa is a 20 foot radius and will be required to be improved to a 31 1/2 foot curve radius with street construction. 1992 ADT for Cantrell, just west of Bella Rosa was 7,970. E. UTILITY COMMENTS/FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available Arkla: No comment Southwestern Bell: OK Water: A water main extension possibly across both lots. AP&L: Easements required. Fire Department: OK County Planning: No comment F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Landscape: N/A Issues• None 2 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1117 Planning Division: No land use issues in respect to the preliminary plat. G. ANALYSIS• In respect to the preliminary plat, there are few issues left to resolve. There are no request for waivers by the applicant. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVAL of a one lot preliminary plat as illustrated on the proposed site plan. Approval is subject to conditions listed in paragraphs D, E, and F of this report. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Pat McGetrick presented the project to the Subdivision Committee. Larry Jones asked Mr. McGetrick a number of questions concerning number of square feet allocated for office, conditioned storage, and mini -storage. After some discussion, the Subdivision Committee referred this item to the November 21, 1996 meeting of the Planning Commission for determination. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) Larry Jones briefly presented the staff report. Pat McGetrick was available to answer questions. No one spoke in respect to the preliminary plat. There was no discussion from commissioners. There had just previously been a lengthy discussion of the proposed rezoning Item 10 (Z-6219). Motion to "call the question" meaning to approve the preliminary plat as submitted. Motion failed with 3 ayes, 5 nays, 1 abstention and 2 absent. The item is denied. 3 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: S-1116 NAME: CHENAL DOWNS -- PRELIMINARY PLAT LOCATION: South of Kanis Road and north of Burlingame Road located in part of Section 34, T-2-N, R-14-W and part of Section 3, T-1-N, R-14-W, all in Pulaski County, Arkansas. DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: Deltic Farm and Timber Company White-Daters Engineering #7 Chenal Club Road 401 South Victory Street Little Rock, AR 72211 Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 4.04 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 104 FT. NEW STREET: 17,000 ZONING: R-2 PROPOSED USES: Single Family Residential PLANNING DISTRICT: CENSUS TRACT: 42.02 VARIANCES REQUESTED: #21 Burlingame Valley 1.Maximum cul-de-sac length 2.All side walk construction 3. Improvements to Kanis Road with exception of left turn lane at entrance. 4.Extension of sanitary sewer mains 5. Private streets with access and utility easements 6. Open drainage in natural draws adjacent to and across lots. 7.Lot width/depth ratio 8. Double frontage lots The applicant has submitted a proposal for 104 lots of three acres each. The project engineer has stated to staff that if the requested variances are not approved then the applicant will develop five acres lots without city review. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: To develop 104 lots of three acres each within an equestrian oriented residential community. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant and undeveloped. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1116 C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received no responses from the public on this proposal. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: The main concern with street names is the potential confusion between Chenal Downs and the Chenal Development and the fact that they are in different emergency services jurisdictions. There are also some questions about using the names of Chenal on the drives that are not connected with Chenal Parkway. Special Programs division of the Public Works Department will be working with the Pulaski County area to determine whose 911 jurisdiction will have regulatory rights of determining street names for this area, hopefully before Planning Commission, we will be able to make a determination about the appropriateness of the names for these streets within this subdivision. Sketch grading and drainage plans will be required. A grading permit will be required, ADPC&E permit will be required and an NPDES permit will be required due to this large development disturbing more than 5 acres. Traffic Engineering recommends removing small islands from the cul-de-sacs. There is a difficulty with parked vehicles and emergency vehicles and/or sanitation vehicles maneuvering with parked vehicles on island cul-de-sacs. Staff has concerns about the drive called Chenal Downs Drive due to length from its intersection with Chenal Downs Cove. This long drive that loops around and up on top of the ridge will be the only access for emergency vehicles. Recommend that there be some type of emergency access to create secondary access for this large loop street. Burlingame Road is a principal arterial on the Master Street Plan, dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline will be required. A in -lieu contribution for that portion of Burlingame Road that falls within plat boundary. Kanis Road is a minor arterial, the existing pavement is approximately 20 feet in width. There is currently a plan to do some work on Kanis Road for safety reasons with the Pulaski County Public Works Department. Recommendation that staff : Pulaski County Road Department and developer for Chenal Downs meet prior to Planning Commission and try to resolve what improvements on Kanis Road would be appropriate for this multi -lot subdivision to improve the safety for Kanis Road and what will be appropriate due to the impact of this subdivision. At this time, we are not prepared to make a decision about what improvements or what waivers or deferrals of improvements for Kanis Road will be appropriate until that meeting is K Novem.uer 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO • S-1116 held. A dedication of right-of-way on Kanis Road to 45 feet from centerline would be required. These roads within the Chenal Downs Subdivision are shown to be within an access easement and are to be private roads. The shown construction does appear to be in line with public street construction, a 4 inch thick asphaltic concrete base course is substituted for a 7 inch aggregated base and is acceptable. Staff can support a sidewalk waiver subject to City Attorney's approval with an internal combination horse and recreational trail being provided. However, plans for the construction of all private roads are to be submitted to Public Works for review and approval per City Ordinance. We would be supportive of the length of the cul-de-sacs as long as the emergency access will be provided. However, all safety standards of these roadways would be maintained, that includes sight distance, curve radii, vertical grades, vertical curves. Staff will not support the variance in the 5% grade at intersections, due to safety concerns. This 5% within the first 30 feet of an intersection is for safety reasons for stopping and starting on wet pavement. Stormwater detention ordinance does apply, staff would look at this large lot development and it's impacts on increase runoffs with development on adjacent drainage ways and adjacent areas. Some efforts must be made to control increase runoff from this large development and its impact on adjoining properties. This 104 lot subdivision will generate 1040 trips per day. 1992 ADT for Kanis Road was 1, 670. E. UTILITIES/FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Outside service boundary. Arkla: No comment Southwestern Bell: Easements required. Water: Water service to structures with floor elevations above 600 feet MSL is not available at this time. Installation of a tank in the Chenal Parkway area is required. Major off -site water main extensions will be required. An acreage charge of $300/acre applies. AP&L: 15 feet easement in front of each lot Fire Department: OK County Planning: See enclosed letter from Bob Lane. 3 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1116 F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Landscape: N/A Issues: • Tract "A" Equestrian Center will require additional discretionary review. • Define phasing plan. • Who will maintain roads, open space, drainage areas? • Who will provide garbage removal services? Planning Division: No comment G. ANALYSIS• Planning Staff is not comfortable with the magnitude of variance requested from this applicant. At the time of the preparation of this report, Public Work had not indicated there position on variances requested. Planning Staff would recommend that the Planning Commission determine the merits of the proposed variances as the focal point of the preliminary plat discussion. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: NONE. There is no staff recommendation of this preliminary plat for the reasons stated above. If the Planning Commission approves this preliminary plat, it should be based on the exhibit dated November 7, 1996 and conditions listed in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Tim Daters presented the preliminary plat for review. There was a great deal of discussion in respect to the specific waiver requested by the applicant. Planning and Public Works Staff expressed concern about approving a preliminary plat with the requested waivers. The Committee determined that the preliminary plat would be presented to the Planning Commission on November 21, 1996 for consideration. 4 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO S 1116 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) The project engineer requested that this item be withdrawn. It was included as part of the Consent Withdrawal agenda. A motion to approve the Consent Agenda was approved with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 5 COUNTPULASA Fax:501-340-6820 Oct 29 '96 8:50 P.01 Pubsild.. County PUBLIC WORKS 3200 BRIM STREET DIRECTOR ME ROCK, ARKANSM 72204 601-0eo.eeo0 October 29, 1996 Mr. Larry T. Jones Department of Neighborhoods and Planning 723 W. Markham crrles Little Rock, Ar. 72201-1334 ALE%ANOER CAMMACK WI LAGE Dear Larry, JACKSONVILLE LITTLE ROCK The purpose of this letter is to comment on a proposed subdivision development on Kanis Road uti1MELLE in Pulaski County. The subdivision is known as Chenal Downs and it falls in the extraterritorial planning area of the City of Little Rock. NOR7H LITTLE ROCK SHENVOOo Pulaski County has a federal aid road improvement project on Kanis Read from Chenal Parkway westward to Walnut Grove Road. The proposed development falls within the road improvement "AIcH sv�LLE project. The project is currently under design by Garver & Garver Engineers. The project will go to bid in late 1997 or early 1998. As-a'part of your subdivision process, request that the developer of Chenal Downs be required to dedicate right of way along their frontage in support of the Kanis Road Improvement project. I have provided preliminary plans for the project to White-Daters and Associates. At this stage of LININCOAPOAATEO AREA " the, roadway design, I would not recommend that street improvements be required along Kanis Road. An in -lieu contribution would be fine, however, the County does not have the authority to 6M SOLIARE MILES require boundary street improvements or in -lieu fees. The County does routinely require right of way dedication on boundary streets. Finally, the County prefers that internal streets be dedicated and constructed to County standards. In some instances the County approves private internal streets if they are constructed to County standards. Thank you for allowing Pulaski County to review the proposed subdivision. MILITARY BASES LAAPB Sincerely, CAMP ROBINSON Robert L. Lane, P.E. Public Works Director - cc: Maribeth Crawley November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: S-1115 NAME: COMMERCE SQUARE PRELIMINARY PLAT LOCATION: Northwest corner of South University Avenue at 65th Street DEVELOPER: James Hathaway, Jr. The Hathaway Group 100 Morgan Keegan Drive Suite 120 Little Rock, AR 72202 AREA: 6.6 ACRES ZONING• C-4 ENGINEER• Joe White, Jr. White-Daters Engineering 401 Victory Street Little Rock, AR 72201 NUMBER OF LOTS: 4 FT. NEW STREET: 0 PROPOSED USES: Commercial PLANNING DISTRICT: #13 65th Street East CENSUS TRACT: 20.02 VARIANCES REQUESTED: Waiver of curb, gutter, and sidewalk on University Avenue frontage BACKGROUND: A Fina Service Station and convenience store was developed on this site several years ago. The applicant is filing a preliminary plat to allow development on the remainder of the property. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The subdivision of 6.6 acres of commercial property in four lots. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: Proposed Lot 2 has an existing Fina Service Station and convenience store. The remainder of the site is vacant. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received no responses from the public on this proposal. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO • S-1115 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: The sketch grading and drainage plan and a grading permit will be required prior to construction. Submitted driveway plan with 5-1115 is acceptable. South University Avenue is a principal arterial on the Master Street Plan and would require a continuation of the curb, gutter and sidewalk constructed on University frontage. There currently exists a 5 foot sidewalk on 65th Street, appropriate handicap ramps per current ADA standards will be required. The shoulder on University Avenue which exist currently, does not current ADA standards for an pedestrian walkway, it has to have a vertical and horizontal separation from the drive surface. 1992 ADT for University was 34,310. 65th Street ADT was 16,490. Utilities/Fire Department/County Plannina Wastewater: Sewer available Arkla: No comment Southwestern Bell: OK Water: Lot 2 is served off a private fire line. With an easement platted and certification from the engineer the existing water line was installed to LRMWW specs, it can be converted to a public main and extended to the other lots. Fire Department approval is needed. AP&L: No comment Fire Department: OK County Plannina: No comment F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Landscape: N/A Issues: • Show adjacent land uses to north of site. • Second off -site Fina pole sign on proposed Lot 4 to be removed. Planning Division: No land use issues in respect to the preliminary plat. 2 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO • S-1115 G. ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting a gutter improvements along the Public Works will address this needs to determine if this is this area. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: waiver of sidewalk, curb and frontage of South University. request. The Commission an appropriate request for APPROVAL of a four lot commercial preliminary plat as illustrated on the proposed site plan. Approval is subject to conditions listed in paragraphs D, E, and F of this request. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Joe White, Jr. presented the item to the Committee. Jim Hathaway explained his rationalization for a request to waiver sidewalk, curb, and gutter improvements on South University. The Subdivision Committee referred the case to the November 21, 1996 meeting of the Planning Commission for determination. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) Larry Jones presented the staff report. Jim Hathaway discussed his request for waiver of sidewalk, curb, and gutter improvements on South University. He stated that there are no sidewalks on that park of University. He also stated that State Highways not the City will be responsible for improvements. Mr. Hathaway said that the City was putting in a fire station in this area without curb gutter or sidewalk. Commissioner Adcock asked Mr. Hathaway several questions in respect to the waiver request. Verlene Williamson indicated her concern about the future development of the site. In response to previous comments David Scherer stated that Public Works was asking for sidewalks as part of this plat in order to comply with ADA requirements. Richard Wood told the Commission that the existing Fina Station has two freestanding pole signs. The preliminary plat as submitted would not allow the sign fronting 65th Street. Mr. Wood indicated that the lot configuration for Lots 2 and 3 could be adjusted to allow the second sign. Joe White, project engineer, asked that the preliminary plat application be amended to conform to Mr. wood's suggestion. 3 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: 5-1115 A motion to approve the preliminary plat as amended subject to conditions in the staff report passed with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. A motion to approve the waiver of sidewalk, curb and gutter improvements on University Avenue received 0 ayes, 8 nays, 1 abstention, and 2 absent. Motion fails. 4 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: S-923-A NAME: CANTRELL CENTRE ADDITION -- PRELIMINARY PLAT LOCATION: SW corner of Cantrell Road and North Street DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: CHOO CHOO PARTNERSHIP WHITE-DATERS AND ASSOCIATES 401 West Capitol 401 Victory Suite 300 Little Rock, AR 72201 Little Rock, AR 72203 AREA: 37.6 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 11 FT. NEW STREET: 130 ZONING: I-3 PROPOSED USES: Office and Office Warehouse PLANNING DISTRICT: #5 Downtown CENSUS TRACT: 15 VARIANCES REQUESTED: Deferral of improvements to North Street for five years The applicant approached staff seeking to replat Lot 10 of preliminary plat (S-923). A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: This proposal will take 10 lots from the previous preliminary plat and create 11 total lots zoned I-3. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is currently vacant. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received no responses from the public on this proposal. Novemuer 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: 5-923-A D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS: Currently lots 5,- 6, 7, & 8 appear to be located in the regulatory floodway and construction is prohibited. However, if floodway is relocated by ditch improvements, provide construction plan and data which shows the new regulatory floodway boundaries in relationship to the aforementioned four lots. This will need to be submitted to Corps of Engineers and to FEMA for approval prior to construction on the lots. Provide plan for showing proposed improvements to existing drainage ditch, minimum floor elevations equivalent to 254 NGVD for each lot should be furnished on the plan. A sketch grading and drainage plan, a special flood hazard permit, and a special grading permit for flood hazard areas is required. Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology (ADPCE) and NPDES permit should have been issued for this work. No waiver has been granted for half street improvements on North Street. Construction of improvements on North Street should provide half of 36 foot wide commercial street with sidewalk. Temporary access to North Street is acceptable in its current condition. However, construction traffic should not be permitted on North Street, access should be taken from Cantrell due to the non-commercial nature of this street and its current condition. Complete the signal installation as requested with this development for Traffic Engineering approval. The four foot sidewalk that was approved on Cantrell Road needs to be upgraded to a five foot sidewalk or passing zones need to be installed at 200 foot maximum centers per current ADA standards. Stormwater detention ordinances apply to these projects, recommend a plan for the complete project. 1992 ADT for Cantrell was 23,050. E. UTILITY COMMENTS/FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Existing gravity sewer and force main located on site. Easements must be provided or lines relocated at Developer's expense. Sewer main extension with easements required for unsewered lots. Arkla: No comment Southwestern Bell: OK Water: Existing 14" and/or 16" water main may need to be relocated. This work is to be done at the developer's expense. Water main extensions and private fire hydrants required. AP&L: OK Fire Department: Hydrants to code Counter Planning: No comment `a November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO • S-923 A F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Landscape: N/A Issues: None Planning Division: No land use issues G. ANALYSIS• The initial phase access to Lot 1 is labeled as temporary on the preliminary plat. This access will be eliminated once a portion of the plat interior streets are constructed to provide internal access. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVAL of an 11 lot preliminary plat as illustrated on the proposal site plan. Approval is subject to conditions listed in paragraphs D and E of this report. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Joe White presented the preliminary plat to the Committee. There was little discussion on this item. The Committee referred the preliminary plat to the November 21, 1996 Planning Commission meeting for determination. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) This item was included in the Consent Approval agenda. There was no public comment on this item. A motion to approve the Consent Agenda was approve with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 3 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: S-1081-A NAME: KAUFMAN ADDITION -- PRELIMINARY PLAT LOCATION: At the southeast corner of W. 7th St. and S. Jones St. DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: KAUFMAN LUMBER CO. Joe White, Jr. 5100 Asher Ave. WHITE-DATERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. Little Rock, AR 72212 401 S. Victory St. Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 5.5 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: I-2 PROPOSED USES: PLANNING DISTRICT: #9 I-630 CENSUS TRACT• 14 VARIANCES REQUESTED: • Building setbacks to match existing structures along north, east and west lines. • 15 foot building setback line adjacent to Jones Street • Deferral of street and sidewalk improvements along Jones Street BACKGROUND• In November 1995 White-Daters filed a two lot preliminary plat on this site. The item was never heard by the Planning Commission and was withdrawn in January 1996. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant seeks to divide 5.5 acres into two lots. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: In the past the property was a building materials sales business, with outside storage, and millwork fabrication shop. There are numerous open lumber storage sheds on the property with an office and warehouse facing 7th Street. The property is now vacant except for lumber storage. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO • S-1081-A C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received no responses from the public on this proposal. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: Seventh Street is a collector street on the Master Street Plan, dedication of an additional five foot sidewalk and utility easement beyond the present right-of-way is acceptable with staff. A 42 foot asphalt curb and gutter street exists which exceeds current standards for this collector street and there does exist a five foot sidewalk on Seventh Street. Jones Street is a 27 foot chipseal street with an open ditch, on the east side. It has a ten foot turn out radius at Seventh Street. Staff is recommending improvements to Jones Street, and would recommend that commercial street improvements to 18 feet from centerline with the sidewalk as a part of this two lot commercial subdivision. Any construction due to the nature of the regulatory floodway and flood plain on these lots will need to have development permits, minimum floor elevations, etc. Any substantial reconstruction of any these building would also require development permits. 1992 ADT for 7th Street was 3,180. Utilities/Fire Department/County Planning Wastewater: Sewer available Arkla: No comment Southwestern Bell: No comment Water: The Fire Department needs to evaluate the site to determine whether additional fire protection will be required. If there any modifications to the fire protection system, installation of a backflow preventer will be required. Fire Department: Sprinkler system required? County Planning: No comment F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Landscape: N/A 2 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO • 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1081-A Issues: • will existing structures remain? • Provide a list of all structures with square footage and proposed use. • Label existing land uses on west side of Jones Street and north of 7th. Planning Division: No land use issues. G. ANALYSIS• The applicant seeks to split the 5.5 acre parcel into two industrial lots. The applicant has requested waiver of setback lines to match existing structures. Staff can support that request if the existing structures are to remain in an unaltered state. Public Works Staff will address the request for a waiver of street improvements on Jones Street. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVAL of a two lot preliminary plat as illustrated on the site plan. Approval is subject to conditions listed in paragraphs D, E, F and G of this report. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Joe White, Jr. presented the preliminary plat to the Committee. Staff summarized the waiver request from the applicant. There was little discussion on this item since the Committee review a similar proposal on this property less than a year ago. The Subdivision Committee determined that this item be placed before the full Planning Commission for consideration on November 21, 1996. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) Larry Jones presented the staff report. Commissioner Hawn asked several questions of project engineer, Joe white. Commissioner Hawn asked Mr. white why he had not met with the neighborhood association. Mr. Jones stated that the Capitol View Stifft Station associated was notified by staff. Commissioner Hawn said the engineer should have met with the neighborhood association prior to the Planning Commission meeting. 3 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1081-A Motion to approve the preliminary plat subject to staff conditions passed with 8 ayes, 0 nays, and 3 absent. Motion to defer the street and sidewalk improvements on Jones Street for a maximum of 5 years or until either lot of this plat develops. Motion passed with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 0 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.• 8 FILE NO.• 5-1120 NAME: KINGWOOD PLACE PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT LOCATION: Sunset Circle and Pine Valley Road DEVELOPER• Dr. Bud Dickson 9 Sunset Circle Little Rock, AR AREA• 4.0 ACRES ZONING• 72207 NUMBER OF LOTS• 2 PROPOSED USES: ENGINEER• White-Daters Engineering 401 Victory Street Little Rock, AR 72201 FT. NEW STREET: 0 Single Family PLANNING DISTRICT: #1 West Little Rock CENSUS TRACT: 22.01 VARIANCES RE UESTED: Waiver of improvements on Pine Valley Road BACKGROUND• The site is currently divided into two Lots "C" and "D" with a dividing line running through the primary existing structure. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: A reconfiguration of two residential lots. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: A large single family home and numerous out buildings are situated within the proposed boundaries of Lot "D". C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of November 7, 1996 staff has received no responses from the public on this proposal. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: Waste Management has been contacted to determine if sanitation pick-up can be provided for as additional November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO • 5-1120 residence at the end of this 10 foot asphalt public street, without a new turn around device to be furnished at the end. The fire department and other emergency service providers should provide input to whether it would be appropriate to construct another residence without a turn around or any widening involved. With approval of Waste Management and approval of emergency services, staff can support the construction of one additional residence at the end of this 10 foot asphalt lane. We would recommend that Pine Valley be closed and become a private drive to access these two residences rather than remaining a public street. Utilities/Fire Department/County Planning Wastewater: Sewer is available. Sewer is located along roadway and new lot would have access to it without having to extend the sewer main. Arkla: No comment Southwestern Bell: OK Water: OK AP&L: No comment Fire Department: No comment County Planning: No comment F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Landscape: N/A Issues: The project engineer submitted a revised preliminary plat on November 7, 1996 which answered Subdivision Committee concerns. Planning Division: • No land use issues G. ANALYSIS• This proposal is a reconfiguration of the common boundary line between two parcels. The site topography creates a problem in respect to providing access to Lot "C" from Pine Valley Road. E November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO • S 1120 H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVAL of a two lot preliminary plat as illustrated on the proposed site plan. Approval is subject to conditions listed in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Tim Daters presented the project to the Committee. There was a great deal of discussion in respect to the existing pavement width on that portion of Pine Valley Road. Planning staff had a number of questions in respect to access to Lot "C" from Pine valley Road. Staff request that the preliminary plat show 5 feet contours and the driveway to the existing house at end of Pine valley. The Committee forwarded this item to the full Planning Commission on November 21, 1996 for consideration. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) Larry Jones presented the staff report. He added a condition that prior to final plat that the applicant obtain a letter from the Fire Department stating that the existing improvements on Pine Valley Road met their requirements. Also a condition that the applicant agrees to take garbage service from Sunset Circle for the lot to be developed. Meredith Catlett asked that the preliminary plat be approved subject to two conditions. 1. That a private party agreement in respect to use of the property be finalized prior to this item going to the City Board. 2. That the request of waiver of improvements to Pine Valley Road be forwarded to the City Board for consideration. Tim Grooms stated he wanted to concur with the statement by Ms. Catlett. Motion to approve the preliminary plat with staff conditions as amended and statement by Ms. Catlett. Motion passed with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. Motion to approve the waiver of improvements on Pine Valley Road. Motion passed with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 3 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 9 FILE NO.: Z-6220 NAME: JEWEL AND MOSER ADDITION POD LOCATION: Southeast corner of Sam Peck Road and Highway 10 DEVELOPER• ENGINEER• JEWELL AND MOSER Pat McGetrick 111 Center Street 11225 Huron Lane Little Rock, AR 72201 Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72211 AREA: 1.4 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: 0-2 PROPOSED USES: Office PLANNING DISTRICT: #1 River Mountain District CENSUS TRACT: 42.06 VARIANCES REQUESTED: Defer improvements on Sam Peck Road until the development of Lot 2. Dedication of right-of-way to collector street standards due at final platting of Lot 2. All said improvement must be built within 5 years. BACKGROUND• The applicant filed this one lot POD in conjunction with a two lot preliminary plat (S-1119). A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: A one lot single use POD to be retitled PD-0 consisting of approximately 1.4 acres. The building will be utilized for professional offices and is a single storage building with loft storage. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received no responses from the public on this proposal. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6220 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1. Site is located outside the limits of detailed flood study. It appears that new structure would be located very near an extended floodway area included in the next flood study by the Corp and FEMA. Provide plan which shows projected floodplain and floodway along with BFE's to match. 2. Permits required prior to construction. 3. Show minimum final floor elevation to match one foot above projected BFE for the staff. E. UTILITY COMMENTS/FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extensions with easements. Arkla: No comment Southwestern Bell: Easement required. Water: Acreage and connection charges. AP&L: Easement required. Fire Department: OK County Planning: No comment F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Landscape: Areas set aside for landscaping meet with Landscape Ordinance requirements. Portions of the eastern and western landscape buffers drop below 25 feet in width but meet the Highway 10 Overlay District requirement when averaged out. A sprinkler system to water plants is required. It will be necessary to install curb and gutter or another border to protect plants from vehicular traffic. Trees with an average spacing of 20 feet are required along Highway 10 by the Overlay Ordinance. Issues• Signage to comply with overlay district guidelines. 2 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6220 Planning Division: The site is located in the River Mountain District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Office use. There are no land use issues. G. ANALYSIS• At the request of Planning Staff, the applicant has amended his request to include only Lot 1. Since the request is now one lot single use, staff recommends that the application be changed to a PD-O. The current zoning for the site is R-2; however, the Land Use Plan recommends Office use. The developer proposes to provide access from Highway 10 via a joint access which runs to the east of Lot 1. This access point was created as an easement from Lot 44, Piedmont Subdivision Phase II. Staff does not object to this proposed access. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVAL of a one lot single use PD-O as illustrated on the proposal site plan. Approval is subject to conditions listed in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Pat McGetrick presented the proposed rezoning to the Committee for review. Staff asked Mr. McGetrick to exclude,Lot 2 from the POD request since there are no specific plans for that parcel. The Committee referred the POD request to the November 21, 1996 Planning Commission meeting for determination. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) Larry Jones presented the staff report. Mr. Pat McGetrick was available to answer questions. Mr. Jim Pfeifer, a resident of the Piedmont Subdivision, spoke in opposition to the rezoning. He is concerned that the proposed building will use a shared driveway with a residential lot. He also objected to the possible development of a site less than two acres in size. Mr. Brent Peterson, a Piedmont Lane resident, stated that he was not notified of the hearing. He is concerned about traffic and 3 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6220 flooding problems in the area. He stated that he would like a deferral to learn more about the project. Commissioner Berry asked if the two acre minimum has been bypassed through the use of the Planned Development rezoning. Mr. Lawson said that a number of commercial developments less than two acres in size have been approved along Highway 10. He stated that this was the result of the type of commercial proposals requested. Commissioners Daniel and Adcock stated that they preferred a deferral of this item since Mr. Peterson said he was not notified. Commissioner McCarthy asked a question concerning use of the residential pipe -stem lot for access of this office project. Mr. Lawson responded that this rezoning and plat was not creating the pipe -stem. Ms. Lou Teeter, a neighborhood resident, is concerned about flooding in the area. She requested a deferral of the item. A motion to approve the rezoning subject to conditions in the staff report. Motion failed with 4 ayes, 5 nays and 2 absent. A motion to expunge the previous vote. Motion passed with 8 ayes, 1 nay and 2 absent. Motion to defer the item until the January 9, 1997 Planning Commission hearing. Motion passed with 8 ayes, 1 nay and 2 absent. 4 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.• 10 FILE NO.• Z-6219 NAME: BELLA ROSA PARTNERSHIP POD LOCATION: Southwest corner of Highway 10 and Bella Rosa Road DEVELOPER• I ENGINEER• Bella Rosa Partnership Pat McGetrick P. O. Box 23120 11225 Huron Lane, Ste. 200 Little Rock, AR 72221 Little Rock, AR 72211 AREA: 7.50 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: Transition POD PROPOSED USES: Office, Conditioned Proposed Storage, & Mini -storage PLANNING DISTRICT: #1 River Mountain District CENSUS TRACT: 42.06 VARIANCES REQUESTED: N/A BACKGROUND: The applicant has met several times with staff to discuss several versions of a mini -storage project. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: A one lot POD consisting of limited office space, conditioned storage and mini -storage. The primary use is mini -storage. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is currently vacant. The parcel is isolated from neighboring properties by a creek and two roadways. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received no responses from the public on this proposal. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6219 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS• A sketch grading and drainage plan meeting the requirements of the special flood hazard area, and a development permit for flood hazard area is required. Minimum floor elevation will be required of 277 NGVD for this construction site adjacent to the regulatory floodway. No construction is allowed within the regulatory floodway limits and the building should be 25 feet from the regulatory floodway. Traffic Engineering recommends that a profile be provided to ensure sight distance availability for the driveways as shown. The northern driveway on Bella Rosa drive should be a 100 feet edge of driveway from the right-of-way line for Arkansas Highway 10. Driveway shown on Arkansas State Highway 10 should be 100 feet from the right-of-way of Bella Rosa drive right-of-way. Arkansas Highway 10 requires dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet from centerline for this principal arterial. Bella Rosa with an existing 50 foot right-of-way as shown should have a 60 foot right-of- way for this commercial frontage and the street should be widen as 18 feet from centerline with the sidewalk. Sidewalk will also be required on Arkansas State Highway 10. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this development. A radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of right-of-way from Bella Rosa Drive and the right-of-way for Arkansas State Highway 10. Bella Rosa Drive is a 27 foot chipseal with no walks and open ditches, the curve radius from Arkansas State Highway 10 into Bella Rosa is a 20 foot radius and will be required to be improved to a 31 % foot curve radius with street construction. 1992 ADT for Cantrell, just west of Bella Rosa was 7,970. E. UTILITY COMMENTS/FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available Arkla: No comment Southwestern Bell: OK Water: A water main extension possibly across both lots. AP&L: Easements required. Fire Department: OK County Plannincr: No comment 2 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO • Z 6219 F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Landscar)e• A portion of the landscape buffer along Bella Rosa Drive drops below the 15 foot width requirement of the Highway 10 Overlay District by five feet. Trees with an average -spacing of 20 feet are required within the on -site landscape buffer along Highway No. 10. The zoning ordinance reguries that this site be screened with a six foot high opaque wooden fence with its face side directed outward or with dense evergreen planting from the residential properties to the south and west. Issues: The following are unresolved items on the POD submittal. • What is the proposed square footage of office use in the conditioned storage building? • Add a detailed project summary section to the site plan. Information should include: a) areas to be paved. b) square feet of landscaping c) square feet for each building d) give each building a number. e) use of parking area outside controlled access f) define outside storage areas. g) height, architectural type, color of each building h) hours of operation • Is the project to be phased? • Provide signage and lighting plan. Planning Division: The site is located in the River Mountain District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Transition. The use proposed does not meet the land use definition approved by the Planning Commission last spring. Staff would recommend that the Commission not approve the PDO based on its previous action, which excludes warehouses uses from Transition. 3 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO • Z-6219 G. ANALYSIS• The site currently has a transitional designation on the adopted Land Use Plan. The primary use of this proposal is warehousing/mini-storage which are an industrial uses and not consistent with the transition designation. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: DENIAL of the POD request (Z-6217 as illustrated on the proposed site plan. If the Planning Commission approves this submittal, then project conditions listed in paragraphs D, E and F of this report should apply. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Pat McGetrick presented the project to the Subdivision Committee. Larry Jones asked Mr. McGetrick a number of questions concerning number of square feet allocated for office, conditioned storage, and mini -storage. After some discussion, the Subdivision Committee referred this item to the November 21, 1996 meeting of the Planning Commission for determination. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) Larry Jones presented the staff report. Jim Lawson explained the possible uses available to the developer in the Transitional Zones along Highway 10. Mr. Lawson indicated that office, multifamily or single family uses would be appropriate. This site is within a transitional zone however the primary land use proposed is mini -storage. Tony Bozynski read the definition for "transition zone" from the Higway 10 Ordinance Overlay adopted in 1986. Robert Brown made the presentation for the proponents. He stated that the proposed mini -storage and conditioned warehouse was consistent with the Land Use Plan. This definition was in direct conflict to that given by Mr. Lawson. Mr. Brown went on to outline the various aspects of the proposal in great detail. Mr. Brown submitted a color rendering that specifies a mix of the land uses proposed. He asked that this be considered a part of the official application. Commissioners Adcock and Berry asked questions of staff concerning the confusion in the type of uses allowable in the transition zone along Highway 10. There was a lengthy discussion between the commissioners and Mr. Lawson. Mr. Brown also participated in the land use plan discussion. 4 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) FILE NO • Z-6219 Gene Pfeifer, area landowner, spoke in opposition to the proposed rezoning. Ruth Bell ask the Planning Commission to support the Highway 10 Plan and deny the rezoning to allow 'mini -warehouse". Commissioner Lichty made several comments concerning the land use plan and possible land uses for this site. Motion to "call the question- meaning to approve the rezoning as submitted. Motion failed with 2 ayes, 6 nays, 1 abstention and 2 absent. The item is denied. 5 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z-6208 NAME: Bonnie Jones PDC LOCATION: 1872 Schiller Avenue Bonnie Jones 1872 Schiller Ave. Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 6,600 SQ. FT. ZONING• R-4 NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 PROPOSED USES: Residential and Commercial PLANNING DISTRICT: #8 Central City CENSUS TRACT• 7 VARIANCES REQUESTED: None BACKGROUND: The applicant has met with staff several times to discuss a proposal for a beauty shop within her home. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant seeks to develop a four station beauty salon in a portion of her home. There would be three employees plus herself working 7:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m. Wednesday - Saturday. She will continue to reside in the rear portion of the dwelling which includes 2 bedroom, bath and kitchen. She proposes no signage or exterior lighting. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site consist of a single family home at the corner of 19th and Schiller Streets. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received several calls seeking information on this proposal. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO • Z-6208 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: Schiller and 19th Streets have 36 foot asphalt streets, curb and gutter, and four foot sidewalks. Improvements of the sidewalks to ADA standards would be required with this rezoning. Dedication of a 20 foot radial area at the intersection of Schiller Avenue and 19th Street to meet current city standards is required. Repair of any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of- way is responsibility of the property owner and would need to be facilitated prior to occupancy. E. UTILITIES/FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available Arkla: No comment Southwestern Bell: No comment Water: No objection AP&L: No comment Fire Department: No comment County Planning: No comment F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Landscape: No comment Issues• None Planning Division: The site is located in the Central City District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Single Family use. Currently, there is no commercial use near the site in question, which is located on the intersection of two residential neighborhood street. There has been no land use change in the area to justify commercial land use in this location. G. ANALYSIS• The applicant seeks to convert a portion of her home into a four station beauty salon. This would be the relocation of her existing business. The proposed site at 1872 Schiller Avenue is a residential neighborhood and not the proper location for such a commercial operation. 2 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO • Z-6208 H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: DENIAL of the PCD request (Z-6208) as illustrated on the proposed site plan. If the Planning Commission approves this submittal, then Planning Staff would like the opportunity to add whatever conditions that may be appropriate. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Larry Jones presented the case to the Committee for comment. Bonnie Jones (no relations to Larry Jones) was present to answer questions concerning her proposal. There was little discussion. The Subdivision Committee forwarded the item to the November 21, 1996 meeting of the Planning Commission for determination. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) This item was included in the Consent Deferral agenda. Deferral to the January 9, 1997 Planning Commission meeting. A motion to approve the Consent Agenda was passed with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 3 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.• 12 FILE NO.• Z-6217 NAME: FLOATEYES, INC. PD-I LOCATION: Located on the northwest corner of Barrett Road and State Highway 300. DEVELOPER• John Collins Rogers Northeast Mortgage Company 701 North Cedar #1-B Little Rock, AR 72205 AREA: 4.0 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: N/A FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: R-2 PROPOSED USES: Industrial PLANNING DISTRICT: #20, Pinnacle CENSUS TRACT: 42.01 VARIANCES REQUESTED: None STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: DEFERRAL of this item to the January 9, 1997 Subdivision Agenda of the Planning Commission. The applicant failed to appear at the October 31, 1996 Subdivision Committee meeting. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Larry Jones introduced the proposal to the Committee. No one was present to represent the applicant or answer questions. The Committee determined that the item would be deferred and rescheduled for the Subdivision meeting of December 12, 1996 and Planning Commission on January 9, 1997. November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 12 FILE NO.: Z-6217 NAME: FLOATEYES, INC. PD-I LOCATION: Located on the northwest corner of Barrett Road and State Highway 300. DEVELOPER• John Collins Rogers Northeast Mortgage Company 701 North Cedar #1-B Little Rock, AR 72205 AREA• 4.0 ACRES ZONING• R-2 PLANNING DISTRICT: CENSUS TRACT: 42.01 VARIANCES REQUESTED: BACKGROUND• NUMBER OF LOTS: N/A FT. NEW STREET: 0 PROPOSED USES: Industrial #20, Pinnacle None The applicant approached staff with a request to place an industrial assembly facility on the northwest corner of Barrett Road at State Highway 300. From the first meeting staff indicated to the applicants that the proposal was inconsistent with the Land Use Plan. A. PROPOSAL/REOUEST: A one lot single use PD-I consisting of approximately 4.0 acres. Two attached metal buildings are proposed. Each building would be 10,000 square feet. A circular drive and parking would be provided B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant. Surrounding land uses are single family residential with State Parks Department land situated across Highway 300. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received numerous phone calls in opposition to the proposed rezoning. We also received one letter in opposition. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6217 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: A sketch grading and drainage plan would be required. A grading permit for special flood hazard and development permit for special flood hazard will be required. A finished floor elevation for buildings one and two must be one foot above established BFE's for this site. Arkansas State Highway 300 is a minor arterial on the Master Street Plan, dedicate right-of-way to 45 feet from centerline, prior to construction permit, include a 20 foot radial dedication at the intersection and provide 30 foot of right- of-way for this commercial street frontage of Barrett Road. Barrett Road will be a collector on the Master Street Plan. Staff would recommend construction of improvements on Barrett Road to 18 feet from centerline with an improvement of Arkansas State Highway 300 to include a sidewalk at the right-of-way line for both streets. Further improvements on Arkansas State Highway 300 may be deemed necessary depending upon the amount of development cost associated with this project. We want to limit the amount of improvements relative to this construction project to 15% of the development cost. Recommend that the driveway on Arkansas State Highway 300 be closed and access be taken from Barrett Road. The drive coming from Barrett Road should be located 25 feet from the property line and does need to be a 100 feet from the right-of-way on Arkansas State Highway 300 to the closest point of the driveway. Stormwater detention ordinance does apply, and any drainage structures that are located on Barrett Road will need to be improved 100% to carry the appropriate drainage. 1992 ADT for Hwy. 300 South of Pinnacle Road was 3,240. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING Wastewater: Outside service boundary Arkla: No comment Southwestern Bell: OK Water: Service from Maumelle Water Corporation AP&L: No comment Fire Department: Fire hydrants per code Counter Planning: No comment F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN Issues• • The applicant has failed to provide staff with proof of notice mailings to adjacent property owners. 2 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6217 • No one represented the project before Subdivision Committee on October 31, 1996. • Define size, architectural style, height, parking, and color et al for structures. • Is the project phased? • How much of the property is within the 100 year floodplain. • Show adjacent homes on site plan. • Perimeter fencing and signage? • The proposal is inconsistent with Land Use Plan. Landscape: This site is required to be screened from the residential properties to the north and west. This screen should either be a wood fence with its face side directed outward or dense evergreen plantings. A three foot wide building landscape strip is required between the proposed structure and the public parking area. Some flexibility with this requirement is allowed. if there are to be over 15 parking spaces, then six percent of the paved area will be required to have interior landscaped islands. Unless otherwise present, one tree per 40 feet and one shrub per ten feet will be required within the landscape buffer along the northern and western sides of the property. Curb and gutter or another approved border is required to protect landscaped areas from vehicular traffic. Planning Division: The site is located in the Pinnacle District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Single Family use. Currently, there is no commercial use near the site in question. After much debate Barrett Road has been classified as a collector. The comments from area residents indicates this is a residential local street to them. Further they do not wish to do anything which might cause the traffic to increase. Thus no nonresidential use should be encouraged on Barrett or at the terminus to Barrett. Conditions have not changed 3 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 12 (Cont.) FILE NO • Z-6217 to justify a change in land use from Single Family to Industrial. G. ANALYSIS• The applicant has failed to provide a basic information to staff needed to review the merits of the project. The applicant has failed to attend Subdivision Committee or provide proof of noticing. The proposed industrial use of this site is inconsistent with the land use plan. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: DENIAL of the PD-I request. The application package is incomplete and the request inconsistent with the land use plan. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Larry Jones introduced the proposal to the Committee. No one was present to represent the applicant or answer questions. The Committee determined that the item would be deferred and rescheduled for the Subdivision meeting of December 12, 1996 and Planning Commission on January 9, 1997. Jim Lawson indicated that staff would take the incomplete application to the Planning Commission and request denial. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) The applicant requested that this item be withdrawn. It was included as part of the Consent withdrawal agenda. A motion to approve the Consent Agenda was approved with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 4 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 13 FILE NO.: Z-6214 NAME: HIGHLAND PARK PRD LOCATION: Southeast of the intersection of Jonesboro and West 12th Street McCormack Baron and Assoc., Inc. Hadley Square 1101 Lucas Avenue St. Louis, MO 61301-1179 AREA: 34.94 ACRES ZONING: Multifamily PLANNING DISTRICT: CENSUS TRACT• 18 VARIANCES REQUESTED: BACKGROUND• NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 ENGINEER• Tom Fennell Fennell-Purifoy 111 Center Street Suite 1520 Little Rock, AR 72201 FT. NEW STREET• 0 PROPOSED USES: Multifamily Residential #9 I-630 None This site is the former Highland Court housing development. The property is owned by the Housing Authority of the City of Little Rock. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: A one lot 292 unit multifamily housing development on approximately 35 acres. A portion of the site is reserved for future single family residential development. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The tenants have been out of the existing structures for some time. Some of the units were donated to nonprofit organizations who will relocate them to new sites. The remainder will be demolished and the land cleared. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received a number of calls from adjacent land owners seeking information on this development. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6214 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: Public Works records indicate that there are existing platted and accepted public rights -of -way within the bounds of Highland Park that would require closure prior to rededication of streets rights -of -way in construction of this project. Special Programs notes that all new street names must be approved by David Hathcock, Public Works office. NPDES and grading permits are required prior to construction, a site grading and drainage plan will need to be submitted and approved. West 12`h Street is a minor arterial on the Master Street Plan, four lane construction is required, five lanes at major intersections, right-of-way is required to be 70 feet, 35 feet from centerline, 80 feet at major intersections. Due to the density of this development and the new street, Street A as it is shown on the plan, staff recommends widening 12`h Street to provide for a left turn lane on 12`h Street into this development with an improvement of right-of-way from 35 to 40 feet to provide for the appropriate tapers and left turn stack storage from 12"' Street into this new street designated as Street A. There currently exist a 4 foot sidewalk on West 12`h Street, current ADA standards require that this sidewalk have passing zones at 200 foot intervals. Appropriate handicap ramps at each intersection will be required, all 4 foot walks in the subdivision should have passing zones at 200 foot centers per current ADA standards. The developers should do an analysis for stormwater detention and look at the density of impervious areas for this development versus what was existed prior and any increase in runoff should be accounted for in a Stormwater Management plan. All drainage that flows through this site and all street designs should be submitted for approval. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City ordinance, all public street standards should be met as noted on the plan, there does appear to be conflict with current standards and we will note those as follows: 1. The two small cul-de-sacs shown on the north end of this development are not per City standards. They are 30 feet versus 40 feet in radius and the right-of-way is shown to be 38 feet verses a 50 foot right-of-way radius per City standards for cul-de-sacs. Due to the length of these streets, if these cul-de-sacs are acceptable to the Fire department, they are acceptable to staff, but a variance would need to be requested. 2. The new street noted Jefferson, in a 50 foot right-of- way is shown to be 28 feet wide, 29 foot back of curb E November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO • Z-6214 to back of curb. At the southern end of this street there is a reverse curve and the radii do not meet residential street standards. Recommend improving the radii for these streets to the 150 foot centerline radius as required by City ordinance and the Master Street Plan and provide the tangent distance between the reverse curves as required by City ordinance to be 50 feet. 3. Street A shows a radius less than a 150 feet, recommend increasing this radius to 150 feet in both of the curves shown. Plan indicates a 20 foot pavement each side of a 16 foot median for Street A, on the southern portion of the median area. Then it transitions to a 20 foot median with 18 feet of pavement on each side. Staff recommends holding the 20 foot pavement area with the 16 foot median consistent through -out, rather than reducing it, we still recommend widening to the 25 foot back of curb to back of curb to provide for the left turn lane. The 20 foot dimension throughout provides for 8 foot of parking on the street and 12 foot drive lane. All islands should be held back from the intersection and bullet nosed to provide for a smoother transition of vehicles turning around these islands. There are many corner radii shown at the street intersections that do not indicate City standards, recommend increasing these corner radii from 20 to a minimum of 25 feet, curb radiuses at collector streets are to be 31 % feet and therefore radius for Street A at intersection with 12"' Street The curb radius shown just to the southwest of the intersection of Street A and new street C should be increased considerably beyond the 25 foot radius, recommend probably a 50 foot radius for this turn, due to the nature of the turn. 4. Staff would recommend that the 29 foot street be used with parking on one side only, if parking is planned on both sides of these streets, then we would recommend going to a 36 foot street. That would allow for two 10 .foot drive lanes and two 8 foot parking spaces with the current 28 foot street or 29 foot street it would allow for a 8 foot parking space and two 10 foot drive lanes ( minimum acceptable). All parking should be restricted according to sight distances at the intersections. E. UTILITY/FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING Wastewater: Sewer main out fall relocation is required. Sewer main extension required to serve new residences. Utility review continuing at this time. 3 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6214 Arkla: No comment Southwestern Bell: No comment Water: Installation of new facilities will be required. Approval of fire facilities by Fire Department. AP&L: No comment Fire Department: No comment County Planning: No comment F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Landscape• to serve this area protection The land use landscape buffer along the western perimeter of the site drops to a width of only four and a half feet. The minimum required is six feet in width. A six foot high opaque screen, either a wood fence with its face directed outward or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the western perimeter to screen this site from the single family zoned property to the west. If the dumpsters are to be used, they should be located on the plan and screened on three sides with an eight foot high wood fence or wall. Curb and gutter or another approved border will be required to protect landscaped areas from vehicular traffic. Screening would normally be required to screen the multifamily areas from those that are single family, however, if this site is to be another approach would be appropriate. This development is required to comply with the Landscape Ordinance. Therefore, trees and shrubs will be required in association with all on site vehicular use areas. Issues• • Reference letter from Tom Fennell dated November 7, 1996. Planning Division: No land use issues. G. ANALYSIS• The proposal is consistent with the Land Use Plan designation of multifamily residential. The project architect has answered all outstanding questions from Subdivision Committee departmental comments. 4 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO • Z-6214 H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVAL of the PRD (Z-6214) as illustrated on the proposed site plan. The approval is subject to conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E, and F of this report. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Tom Fennell and Polly Kinslowe presented the project to the Committee. There were several questions concerning the phasing of the development. Mr. Fennell indicated he would submit a letter addressing staff corners by November 7, 1996. The item was referred by the Committee to the Planning Commission for determination on November 21, 1996. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) Larry Jones presented the proposed rezoning to the Commission. Mr. Jones distributed a letter from Tim Polk, Director of the City of Little Rock Department of Housing and Neighborhood Programs in support of the project. Mr. Jones indicated that staff had received a number of calls from persons opposed to this rezoning. Tom Fennel, project architect, explained how this site will be developed. Rohn Muse, President of the Forrest Hills Neighborhood Association, requested that the item be deferred to allow input from neighborhood groups impacted by the project. Commissioner Daniel asked a question concerning the total number of units. Mr. Lawson replied that the proposed density was less than the previous Highland Court development. Commissioner Adcock asked about the rental mix proposed. Polly Kinslowe responded that 1/3 of total units will be "public housing". Commissioner Adcock objected to the proposal for a "out of state owner" and operator for Highland Park. Ms. Kinslowe stated that McCormack Baron and Associates, Inc. had good relations with City•s in which they have projects. Rick Taylor, City Housing Authority consulting attorney explained the relationship between the various partners in the development in response to a question from Commissioner Lichty. A motion to approve the proposed rezoning to PRD subject to the conditions in the staff report and the letter from Fennell Purifoy Architects dated November 7, 1996. Motion passed with 8 ayes, 1 nay and 2 absent. 5 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 14 FILE NO.: Z-6215 NAME: LOONEY TIRE SERVICE -- SITE PLAN REVIEW LOCATION: 7416 Enmar Drive ENGINEER - James Looney Sam Davis Looney's Truck Tire Center, Inc. 5301 West 8th Street 7416 Enmar Drive Little Rock, AR 72204 Little Rock, AR 72219 AREA: 3.67 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: Industrial PROPOSED USES: Warehouse and Truck Tire Service PLANNING DISTRICT: #13 65th Street East CENSUS TRACT: 20.02 VARIANCES REQUESTED: • Construction of sidewalks on Enmar Drive • Requirement to widen Enmar Drive to 18 feet from centerline • Approval for two driveways BACKGROUND• The site is a truck tire service located in an industrial area. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant seeks to enclose a canopy service area and add a warehouse to the rear of the property. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The property is used as a truck tire service facility. Existing structures include a one story metal warehouse, several sheds, and a brick office building fronting Enmar Drive. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received no public comments on this project. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO • Z-6215 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: Grading permit will be required this new development, if it disturbs more than one acre. Current ordinance limits the frontage of this property to one driveway, a variance of the current ordinance should be sought by this applicant, if plans are to leave two driveways. There does not exist a sidewalk on Enmar Drive, construction of the sidewalk is required by City ordinance. The width of Enmar Drive is a 27 foot curb and gutter street, City ordinance would require Enmar Drive widened to 18 feet from centerline. Site plan shows a plan for revised Stormwater detention to account the increased runoff, applicant should provide a contour map to show that the runoff from the site does, in fact, go to the Stormwater detention pond. E. UTILITY COMMENTS/FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Approved. Arkla: No comment Southwestern Bell: No comment Water: Approved. AP&L : No comment Fire Department: No comment County Planning: No comment F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Landscape: A landscaping upgrade toward compliance with the Landscape Ordinance equal to the building expansion proposed (61%) is required. Some flexibility as to placement and percentage is allowed. The main area to be upgraded would be toward the front of the property. Issues: • Parking spaces on south side of existing building are presently not usable. • Truck tires stored in the yard need to be properly removed or recycled. Planning Division: No land use issues E November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 14 (Cont.) FILE NO • Z-6215 G. ANALYSIS: The applicant is seeking site plan review approval to enclose a canopy area and add a second one story metal warehouse. Public Works will address the waiver requests. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVAL of the site plan review as illustrated on the proposed site plan. The approval is subject to conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Larry Jones presented the project to the Committee for comment. Jim Looney answered questions concerning current operations and planned facilities. The Committee forwarded the item to the November 21, 1996 meeting of the Planning Commission for determination. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) This item was included in the Consent Approval agenda. There was no public comment on this item. A motion to approve the Consent Agenda was approved with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 3 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 15 FILE NO.: Z-6218 NAME: "THE POINTE" APARTMENT COMMUNITY -- SITE PLAN REVIEW LOCATION: On Kanis Road west and east of Pointe West Drive DEVELOPER• Thomas E. Vogler 500 Napa Valley Drive #1316 Little Rock, AR 72211 AREA• 4.27 ACRES ZONING• MF-18 PLANNING DISTRICT: CENSUS TRACT: 42.06 VARIANCES REQUESTED: ARCHITECT: Henry B. Vogler, Jr. 2101 Gunpowder Road Little Rock, AR 72207 NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 PROPOSED USES: Multifamily Residential #18 Ellis Mountain Waiver of 25 foot setback from property line of adjoining property to rear drive. Proposed setback is 8 feet. BACKGROUND: Mr. Vogler began working with staff several months ago in developing this site plan. The developer has scheduled an evening meeting with Pointe West residents Monday, November 18, 1996 to discuss the proposed project. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The developer seeks site plan approval to construct three and two story buildings of one and two bedroom apartments. Total units proposed is 76. The zoning is MF-18 which allows a maximum of one unit per 2,400 square feet of lot area. The maximum height of structures is 35 feet. A combination office/maintenance/recreational facility is also planned. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: This wooded site is vacant. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO • Z-6218 C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received a number of calls from adjacent land owners seeking information on this development. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: A sketch plan and grading permit are required prior to construction. Driveway locations will not be approved without a profile verifying adequate site distance according to Traffic Engineer. At Point West Drive north of Kanis Road is a residential street on the Master Street Plan, it is currently a 27 foot asphalt street divided at the entrance with islands, it does contain sidewalks, it will require sidewalks on both sides of the street for this commercial construction to be permitted on each side of Pointe West Drive. The width of Pointe West Drive should be increased to collect standards 36 feet minimum and a left turn lane should be provided for turning access into these drives. A widening of Pointe West Drive may involve removing a portion of or all of the northern island. The southern island may have to be removed to facilitate a left turn lane onto Kanis Road. Right-of-way shown does appear to have adequate right-of-way to facilitate this construction. Kanis Road is a minor arterial on the Master Street Plan dedication of right-of-way to 45 feet from centerline and construction of pavement 30 feet from centerline with the sidewalk as required by City ordinance. The frontage shown does adequately have enough frontage to include a construction of drives as shown, if sight distance can be met. The northern drives entering these two complexes are located less than 25 feet from the property line as required by City ordinance, section 30-43. The 6 foot turnout radii are acceptable, however would recommend that they be increased if the drives are moved south from property line. Recommend that parking adjacent to offices be relocated. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this apartment complex. Dedication of right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline for Timber Ridge Drive is required with this permit, the sidewalk on Timber Ridge Drive will also be required. E. UTILITIES/FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer located on site. will require relocation by Developer prior to construction of apartment complex. Capacity Contribution Analysis required for this project to determine fees. 2 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO • Z-6218 Arkla: No comment Southwestern Bell: OK Water: No comment AP&L: OK Fire Department: On the the dumpster out and Timber Ridge Drive. west end of the north drive take give fire department an exit onto County Planning: No comment F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Landscape• The proposed six foot wide landscape buffer along the sites northern perimeter is two feet short of the full requirement of eight feet. A six foot high opaque screen, either a wood fence with its face directed outward or dense evergreen plantings, are required along the northern property line. Additionally, one tree for every 40 feet is required within the northern landscape buffer. All proposed vehicular use areas will be required to be landscaped in accordance with the Landscape Ordinance. Curb and gutter or another border will be required to protect all landscaped areas from vehicular traffic. Issues: None outstanding Planning Division: No land use issues G. ANALYSIS• The project density and building heights is consistent with the MF-18 Multifamily District. The developer has worked with staff to resolve all outstanding issues and incorporate changes in the site plan. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: APPROVAL of the Site Plan Review request (Z-6218) as illustrated in the revised site plan dated November 6, 1996. The approval is subject to conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E, and F of this report. 3 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6218 SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Project architect Henry "Buddy- Vogler presented the development to the Committee for review. Larry Jones asked Mr. Vogler to reduce the project density from 78 to 76 units to conform with MF-18. Staff also asked that the dumpsters be relocated and a signage/lighting plan be submitted for review. The Commission forwarded the proposal to the November 21, 1996 Planning Commission meeting for determination. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) Just before the start of the public hearing, the applicant requested a deferral to the January 9, 1997 Planning Commission meeting. This item was included in the Consent Deferral Agenda. A motion to approve the Consent Agenda was passed with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 4 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 16 FILE NO.: Z-1997-A NAME• LOCATION• OWNER/APPLICANT• Christ Lutheran Church - Temporary Conditional use Permit 6615 W. Markham Street Christ Lutheran Church/ Fred Perkins PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the temporary use of the residential structure at 6615 W. Markham Street for church program for young adults and family activities. The property is zoned R-2. ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS: 1. Site Location: The site is located on the south side of W. Markham Street, approximately 250 feet east of Hughes Street. 2. Compatibility with Neighborhood: The proposed site is located within the old Fox Orchid property (6.45 acres). The remainder of the Fox Orchid property is located to the east and south. The Christ Lutheran Church is located further south. Olivet Baptist Church is located immediately west of this site. The property to the north, across W. Markham Street, is single family residential as is the property east of the Fox Orchid property. This proposal should have no adverse effect on the surrounding properties. 3. On -Site Drives and Parking: The applicant proposes to access this site by utilizing a temporary gravel driveway from the Christ Lutheran Church property to the south. There will be no access to the site from West Markham Street at this time. No additional parking is required with this application. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1997-A 4. Screening and Buffers: No comments 5. Public Works Comments: Staff has no objection to the conditional use permit for this existing residence to be used for the church temporarily until a site plan can be developed for the use of this property. West Markham Street is a minor arterial on the Master Street Plan. A dedication of right-of-way will be required to 35 feet from the centerline for this four lane minor arterial. Recommend that the drives be closed, if its acceptable to the Fire Department. The emergency drive might be a problem with the church using these drives for church services. 6. Utility Comments: No Comments 7. Staff Analysis: The applicant, Christ Lutheran Church, is requesting a conditional use permit to allow for the temporary use of the residential structure at 6615 W. Markham Street for church programs for young adults and family activities. The property is zoned R-2. Christ Lutheran Church and school, which is located at 315 S. Hughes Street, recently purchased the adjoining 6.45 acre old Fox Orchid property. This property currently has three unoccupied residential structures and a number of greenhouses which are not in operation. The church wishes to temporarily use the westernmost residential structure (without any alterations) for church programs for young adults and family activities. Usage will be for short periods of time, approximately 3 to 4 times a week, and any night usage will conclude by 10:30 p.m. The church proposes to access this structure from the northeast corner of the existing church parking area with a temporary gravel driveway. This gravel driveway will go through an existing gate and connect to the existing gravel service drive which loops the greenhouses. All drives accessing W. Markham Street will be closed and not used. The easternmost drive will be maintained for fire/emergency vehicle access only. 2 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO • Z-1997-A The temporary use of this structure will be for 6 months. Within the next 6 months, the applicant will submit a master plan (conditional use permit) for the entire 6.45 acre property, at which time the request for a extension of temporary use of this building (and possibly one or more of the existing greenhouse structures) will probably be requested until a permanent facility is constructed. The proposed temporary use of this residential structure should have no adverse effect on the surrounding properties. 8. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the application subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the Public Works Comments 2. The conditional use permit will be limited to six months, within which time the applicant will submit a Master Plan (conditional use permit) for the entire 6.45 acre property. 3. The easternmost drive from West Markham Street will be maintained for fire/emergency vehicles only. This drive should not be used to access the Christ Lutheran Church property to the south. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Fred Perkins was present, representing the application. Mr. Perkins gave a brief description of the proposed conditional use permit. There was a brief discussion of the proposed use of the structure and the Public works Comments. The Committee accepted the presentation and forwarded the issue to the full Commission for final action. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) The staff presented a positive recommendation on this application, as there were no further issues for resolution. There were no objectors to this matter. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as 3 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1997-A recommended by staff. A motion to that effect was made. The motion was passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 4 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 17 FILE NO.: Z-2710-A NAME: Hotels of America - Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: 8115 Mitchell Drive OWNER/APPLICANT: Neal Patel/Robert Brown PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the construction of a hotel at 8115 Mitchell Drive. The property is zoned I-2. ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS: 1. Site Location: The site is located at the southwest corner of Mitchell Drive and Frenchman's Lane. Mitchell Drive runs west off of Geyer Springs Road, approximately 1 1/2 blocks south of I-30. 2. Compatibility with Neighborhood: The Clover Valley Apartment Complex is located immediately west of this site. A day care is located immediately south of this site with a church further south. The Cloverdale Neighborhood is located further to the southwest. The I-2 zoned property immediately north of this site (across Mitchell Drive) is vacant. The Hampton Inn is located immediately northeast. The Gyst House is located across Frenchmen's Lane to the east. There are mixed commercial uses slightly further east along Geyer Springs Road. The proposed hotel should not have an advance effect on the surrounding properties. 3. On -Site Drives and Parking: Two access points are proposed for this site, a 40 foot access drive from Mitchell Drive and a 30 foot access drive from Frenchman's Lane. The proposed 50-room hotel requires 55 parking spaces. There are 56 parking spaces proposed on the site plan. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2710-A 4. Screenina and Buffers: The Landscape Ordinance requires that there be a minimum four foot wide landscape strip south of the proposed southern driveway. It would require a variance from the City Beautiful Commission to delete this requirement. The landscape buffer along Mitchell Drive must not drop below a width of six feet. If dumpsters are to be used, they must be located on the site plan and screened on three sides with an eight foot high wood fence or wall. A six foot high opaque wood fence with its face side directed outward or dense evergreen plantings are required to screen this site from the apartments to the west. Credit toward fulfilling this requirement can be given for existing trees and vegetation that is to remain. It is strongly recommended that as many trees be saved along the western perimeter as possible. 5. Public Works Comments: The site is located outside the limits of a detailed flood study. It appears that the new structure would be located very near an extension of the flood way area included in the next flood study by the Corps of Engineers and FEMA. Provide plan which shows project floodplain and floodway along with BFE's to match. Permits required prior to construction include development permits for special flood hazard, a grading permit for section 29-180. Show a minimum flood elevation to match a foot above the projected BFE for the site. Any drainage structures would be required to contain 100% of the 100 year flow for this projected floodway and would require Corps approval. The building should be 25 feet back from the flood limits of the projective floodway. Frenchmen's Lane requires improvement to 18 feet from centerline with a sidewalk. City ordinance requires a 31 1/2 foot radius at intersection. Mitchell Drive is a 36 foot asphalt street, dedication of right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline for both drives will be required with construction of a sidewalk. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. 6. Utility and Fire Department Comments: L.R. Fire Department - Placement of fire hydrants must be to code requirements. K November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2710-A L.R. Water Works - On site fire protection will be required. An acreage charge of $150 per acre applies in addition to normal charges. L.R. Wastewater — Sewer available. Capacity Analysis required for this project. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for details. AP&L - A 10 foot utility easement requested around entire perimeter of property. 7. Staff Analysis: The applicant is proposing a conditional use permit to allow for the construction of a hotel at 8115 Mitchell Drive, zoned I-2. The hotel is proposed to be three stories in height with a total of 50 guestrooms. A swimming pool area will be located at the rear of the building, as noted on the site plan. There will be no meeting/conference facilities or restaurant within this hotel building. The proposed hotel building meets or exceeds the minimum I-2 zoning required setbacks with the exception of the front yard setback (along Mitchell Drive). The required front yard setback is 50 feet. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a 43.6 foot front yard setback. As a point of reference, within the C-3 zoning district (which permits a hotel/motel by right) the minimum front yard setback is 25 feet. The applicant is suggesting this as a justification for the reduced front yard setback. The applicant is also requesting a variance for the proposed ground -mounted sign. The zoning ordinance allows a ground mounted sign in an industrial zone with a maximum height of 30 feet and a maximum area of 72 square feet. The applicant is requesting a ground mounted sign for the site which will comply with the requirements for commercial zones; a maximum height of 36 feet and a maximum area of 160 square feet. Staff can support this variance request with the following conditions: 1. The 36 foot sign height shall be measured at grade. 2. The site shall be limited to only one ground -mounted sign (two ground -mounted signs are permitted by ordinance, one per street frontage). The applicant is requesting a waiver of the half -street widening of Frenchman's Lane. The Master Street Plan 3 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2710-A requires widening of Frenchman's Lane to 18 feet from centerline. This would require an additional 4 to 5 feet of pavement. Public Works is recommending denial of the waiver request. Public Works Staff indicates that, because of the type of use proposed (hotel) and the amount of undeveloped property in the area, that Frenchman's Lane should be widened. The site lighting will be designed specifically for this project. The light poles will be 25 to 30 feet in height and will have directional fixtures which will minimize bleedover and glare to adjacent properties. The proposed 50-room hotel use requires a total of 55 parking spaces (one per guestroom, plus an additional ten percent for employees and nonguest users). The applicant is proposing a total of 56 parking spaces for the site. This complies with ordinance requirements. The applicant is proposing a six foot high privacy fence to be placed along the west property line, between the hotel site and the Clover Valley Apartment Complex. The applicant is also proposing to save as many of the mature trees as possible along this property line. Staff feels that the proposed hotel is a reasonable use for this property and will have a minimal impact on the surrounding properties. 8. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the Screening and Buffers Comments 2. Compliance with Public Works Comments 3. Compliance with the utility and Fire Department Comments 4. Public Works is recommending denial of the waiver request on the half -street widening of Frenchman's Lane. 5. Staff recommends approval of the front yard setback variance (along Mitchell Drive). 6. Staff recommends approval of the variance to allow a ground -mounted sign which will conform to commercial standards, with the following conditions: 4 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2710-A a. The 36 foot sign height shall be measured at grade. b. The site shall be limited to only one ground - mounted sign. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Robert Brown and Neal Patel were present, representing the application. Staff gave a brief description of the proposal. David Scherer, of Public Works, reviewed his comments with the Committee. Issues involving the floodway were discussed. Bob Brown, Site Plan Review Specialist, reviewed his comments with the Committee. He stated that a six foot high screening fence would be required along the west property line, between the site and the multifamily use to the west. The applicant stated that as many of the mature trees as possible would be saved along the west property line. Mr. Patel stated that the hotel would be a Holiday Inn Express if he can obtain the franchise rights. Robert Brown stated that he would submit a revised site plan to staff which would include variance requests for the front building setback and the proposed ground -mounted sign. He also stated that he would request a waiver from additional widening of Frenchman's Lane. After further discussion, the presentation and forwarded the for final action. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Committee accepted the issue to the full Commission (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) Robert Brown was present, representing the application. There was one person present, wishing to speak to the item. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval. Staff added a condition to the staff recommendation. The condition reads, "7. The swimming pool hours will be limited to between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m." Troy Laha, of the Cloverdale Neighborhood Association, addressed the Commission. Mr. Laha stated that he was not opposed to the project, but he had concerns relating to the drainage. Mr. Laha stated that he would like the project 5 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 17 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-2710-A engineer to prepare an "as -built survey" to certify that the drainage improvements meet city ordinance. Mr. Laha stated that he would like this survey to be filed with the Circuit Clerk of Pulaski County. Robert Brown responded to Mr. Laha's request. Mr. Brown stated that by receiving permits from the City of Little Rock and the Corps of Engineers that the project engineer is placing their seal of approval and liability on the plan. Mr. Brown stated that the City of Little Rock would inspect the construction and certify the work. He stated that the additional requirement of an "as -built survey" would be above and beyond the city requirements. David Scherer, of Public Works, stated that this small site would comply with the detention and drainage ordinance. He stated that, in Public Works, opinion, an "as -built survey" should not be required. Mr. Scherer stated that his approval of plans and inspections are open to the public for review. A motion was made to approve the conditional use permit as recommended by staff (adding the swimming pool hours as a condition). The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 6 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 18 FILE NO.: Z-3202-D NAME• Quinn-Matchet - Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: 2217 Cottondale Lane OWNER/APPLICANT: Locaters, Inc./Walter Quinn PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the operation of a marble and natural stone fabrication business within an existing building at 2217 Cottondale Lane. The property is zoned C-3. ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS: 1. Site Location: The site is located on the west side of Cottondale Lane, just north of Jessie Road. 2. Compatibility with Neighborhood: The site is located within an area of mixed zoning and uses, ranging from Office to Industrial. The properties north and east of this site are primarily office uses, with commercial and industrial uses to the south and west. The proposed use should not have an adverse effect on the surrounding properties. 3. On -Site Drives and Parking: Access to the site is gained by utilizing an existing driveway from Cottondale Lane. Twenty-nine parking spaces are required for this complex. Thirty-one parking spaces are provided on the site plan. The proposed use will not effect this number. 4. Screening and Buffers: No comments November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO • Z-3202-D 5. Public works Comments: Structure has been constructed under another permit, there are no Public works issues associated with this Conditional Use Permit. 6. Utility Comments: No Comments 7. Staff Analysis: The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow for the operation of a marble and natural stone fabrication business within an existing building at 2217 Cottondale Lane. The property is zoned C-3. The property contains two office/warehouse buildings and related parking lot. The proposed marble and natural stone business will occupy 4,300 square feet of the southernmost building as noted on the site plan. There is an insulated wall between the uses within this building for sound baffling. The other building on this site is near completion. The proposed marble and natural stone fabrication use consists of utilizing a wet saw to cut the stones (the wet saw eliminates dust). The stones are then polished and taken to the job site. The proposed use will be kept entirely within the enclosed structure. The proposed hours of operation will be from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Given the fact that the proposed use will be within the enclosed building and a minimum amount of dust will be produced, the proposed use should not have an adverse effect on the other businesses within this complex or the surrounding properties. 8. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit subject to all business activities being kept within the enclosed structure. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Walter Quinn was present, representing the application. Mr. Quinn gave a brief description of the proposal. Mr. Quinn November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3202-D stated that the hours of operation would be 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. After a brief discussion regarding the proposed use, the Committee accepted the presentation and forwarded the issue to the full Commission for final action. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) The staff presented a positive recommendation on this application, as there were no further issues for resolution. There were no objectors to this matter. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff. A motion to that effect was made. The motion was passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 3 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 19 FILE NO.: Z-3276-E NAME: Bale - Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: 125 Gamble Road OWNER/APPLICANT: Ms. Dorif Davis/Bale Chevrolet by Tim Daters PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the operation of an auto detail shop for Bale Chevrolet within the existing building at 125 Gamble Road. The property is zoned C-3. ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS: 1. Site Location: The site is located on the east side of Gamble Road, approximately one block south of W. Markham Street. 2. Compatibility with Neighborhood: The property immediately west of this site is zoned 0-3 and contains the Bale Chevrolet -Honda employee parking lot and the access drive to this property. The property to the north is zoned R-2 and contains a church. The 0-3 zoned property to the east is vacant and undeveloped. Immediately south is a single family residence, zoned R-2, with more single family residences further south and to the southwest. A mixture of office and residential uses exists to the west across Gamble Road. The proposed use should not have an adverse effect on the surrounding properties. 3. On -Site Drives and Parking: Access to this site will be gained by utilizing an existing paved driveway across the 0-3 zoned property to the west. The proposed use requires 26 parking spaces. There are nine spaces on this site in front of the building. The Board of Adjustment recently approved the adjacent 0-3 zoned property to the west for parking spaces for Bale Chevrolet -Honda employees. Therefore, the number of parking spaces complies with ordinance requirements. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3276-E 4. Screenina and Buffers: No comments 5. Public works Comments: Applicant has shown intention to widen Gamble Road to collector streets standards, improve storm drainage, construct concrete driveway apron and provide a sidewalk on the frontage. Stormwater detention will apply. Turn radius at the rear of the building is limited, it should be redesigned for minimum turn radii for vehicles. Driveway grades should meet ordinance, provide for a level transition for sidewalk surface across the driveway apron; to conform with current ADA standards. 6. Utility and Fire Department Comments: Fire Department - The driveway around the building must be a minimum of 20 feet wide. Fire hydrants must be placed according to code requirements. AP&L - A 15 foot utility easement is requested along the west property line of the 0-3 zoned property. 7. Staff Analysis: The applicant, Bale Chevrolet, is requesting a conditional use permit for the operation of an auto detail shop within the existing building at 125 Gamble Road, zoned C-3. On October 31, 1995, the Planning Commission approved a conditional use permit to allow Bale Chevrolet to operate an auto detail shop on this C-3 zoned site. The conditional use permit was approved for one year as the applicant only had a one year lease at that time. Bale Chevrolet is now back before the Commission requesting a conditional use permit to continue the auto detail shop indefinitely. On October 28, 1996, the Board of Adjustment approved the permanent use of the 0-3 zoned property immediately west of this site (for parking and access) with the following conditions: 1. The lot is to be used only for Bale Chevrolet -Honda employee parking. No new vehicles are to be delivered to this site. E November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO • Z-3276-E 2. The parking lot is to be developed in full compliance with all applicable City Codes. 3. There is to be no parking on the unimproved portions of the site. 4. There is to be no lighting of the site. 5. The parking lot is to be developed in phases. Bale Chevrolet proposes to utilize the existing building as an auto detail shop, keeping all activities within the enclosed structure. The detail shop is to used for Bale Chevrolet -Honda vehicles only. The applicant proposes to bring vehicles to the facility, detail them and return them to the Bale Chevrolet -Honda dealership property. The general public will not use the facility. The applicant proposes the hours of operation to be from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday. As noted earlier, the proposed auto detail shop requires 26 parking spaces. There are nine spaces on this C-3 zoned lot in front of the building. The parking lot on the 0-3 zoned property immediately west will have parking spaces for employee parking only. There is also room for several vehicles within the building. Therefore, parking on this site should be no problem and with the new parking lot to the west, the number of parking spaces will comply with ordinance requirements. Due to the fact that the C-3 zoned property has no street frontage, no signage will be permitted for this site, according to the Zoning Ordinance. This should not prove to be a problem to the applicant since the facility is not open to the public. The applicant will also construct all required paving, landscaping, screening and street improvements and no variance from these standards is requested. with compliance with a number of conditions as noted in the 'Staff Recommendation-, this proposed use should not have an adverse effect on the surrounding properties. 8. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit with the following conditions: 3 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: z-3276-E 1. Compliance with the Public Works Comments 2. Compliance with the Utility and Fire Department Comments 3. All activities must be kept within the enclosed structure. No washing/detailing of vehicles outside the structure. 4. Screening fence required along north, south and east property lines. S. No parking/storage of sale vehicles on adjacent 0-3 zoned property to the west. This lot is for employee parking only. 6. The detail shop is to be utilized for Bale Chevrolet vehicles only. The detail shop is not to be open to the public at any time. 7. If Bale Chevrolet -Honda vacates the site, no other auto detail shop can occupy this site without additional Planning Commission Review. 8. No signage will be permitted for this site due to the fact that the C-3 zoned property has no street frontage and the auto detail shop is not open to the public. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Tim Daters was present, representing the application. Staff gave a brief description of the proposal. There was a brief discussion which included the proposed use and the Public Works Comments. Mr. Daters stated that the hours of operation would be from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday. After further discussion, the Committee accepted the presentation and forwarded the issue to the full Commission for final action. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) The staff presented a positive recommendation on this application, as there were no further issues for resolution. There were no objectors to this matter. 4 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 19 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3276-E The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff. A motion to that effect was made. The motion was passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 6i November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 20 FILE NO.: Z-3812-B NAME• LOCATION: Alta Mere - Conditional Use Permit 101500 W. Markham Street OWNER/APPLICANT: Financial Centre Corporation/ Darryl J. Stearle of Alta Mere Window Tinting and Auto Alarms PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the operation of an auto window tinting and auto alarm installation business within the existing commercial building at 10,500 W. Markham Street. The property is zoned C-3. ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS: 1. Site Location: The property is located at the northeast corner of W. Markham Street and Markham Center Drive. 2. Compatibility with Neighborhood: The general area contains a mixture of office and commercial uses, including general/professional offices to the east and south along West Markham Street and a motel and vacant restaurant to the west. Office uses are also located to the north along Markham Center Drive and Natural Resources Drive. Single family residences are located slightly further to the northeast. The proposed use should not have an adverse effect on the surrounding properties. 3. On -Site Drives and Parking: Access to the commercial center can be gained by utilizing a single drive from W. Markham Street or one of two drives from Markham Center Drive. This commercial complex requires 67 parking spaces. There are 97 parking spaces provided on the site plan. Therefore, no additional parking is required. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO • Z-3812-B 4. Screening and Buffers: No comments 5. Public Works Comments: Traffic Engineer recommends rejection of this proposed plan due to the proposed access to the street, curb cut on the street. There does not exist adequate frontage for this property to have three driveways. Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps brought up to the current ADA standards with any planned construction. Staff does not object to the use, but we object to the proposed location of the overhead garage doors and the new access drive. 6. Utility Comments: No Comments 7. Staff Analysis: The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow for the operation of an auto window tinting and auto alarm installation business within the existing commercial building at 10,500 W. Markham Street. The property is zoned C-3. The applicant proposes to occupy approximately 1,800 square feet of this commercial strip center for the auto window tinting and auto alarm installation business. As part of this proposed use, the applicant proposes to install two garage doors on the west side of the building. The applicant also proposes to make new curb cuts to allow vehicles to access the building directly from Markham Center Drive. Staff cannot support the installation of overhead garage doors on the west side of this building, with vehicles backing out onto a public street (Markham Center Dr.). Also, as noted in the Public Works Comments, there does not exist adequate frontage for this property to have three driveways on Markham Center Drive (two existing). However, staff could support the use if the applicant can install the overhead doors on the east side of the building and show that vehicles could enter the building from this side and maintain a safe vehicle/pedestrian relationship. If the overhead doors are placed on the east side of the building, they must remain closed during E November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 20 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-3812-B vehicle service. This proposed use should not have an adverse effect on the surrounding properties. 8. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit with the following conditions: 1. The overhead doors must be installed on the east side of the building and vehicles entering the building must maintain a safe vehicle/pedestrian relationship. 2. The overhead doors must remain closed during vehicle service. 3. Compliance with the Public Works Comments SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Darryl Stearle was present, representing the application. Staff gave a brief description of the proposal. The discussion primarily focused on the proposed overhead doors on the west side of the building and the Planning Staff and Public Works concerns relating to the placement of these doors and the proposed curb cuts. The applicant informed the Committee that he would explore the possibility of locating the overhead doors on the east side of the building. The Committee accepted the presentation and forwarded the issue to the full Commission for final action. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) The staff presented the item, informing the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter requesting that the item be withdrawn. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for withdrawal. A motion to that effect was made. The motion was passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 3 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 21 FILE NO.: Z-5300-A NAME• LOCATION• Carriage Creek - Revised Conditional Use Permit 13207 Ridgehaven Road OWNER/APPLICANT: Kim Moore/Pat McGetrick PROPOSAL: A revised conditional use permit is requested to convert the existing clubhouse building within the Carriage Creek recreational area to a single-family dwelling. The property is zoned R-2. The applicant proposes to replat the residential structure into a separate single-family lot. ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS: 1. Site Location: The site is located on the south side of Ridgehaven Road, approximately six tenths of a mile west of Napa valley Road. 2. Compatibility with Neighborhood: The area surrounding the park property is exclusively single-family residential is nature. 3. On -Site Drives and Parking: Access to the park property is gained by utilizing a driveway from Ridgehaven Road. There is a small existing parking lot on the site which the applicant proposes to plat into the new residential lot. 4. Screening and Buffers: No comments 5. Public Works Comments: Public Works has concerns about this Revised Conditional Use Permit, they are as follows: November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 21 (Cont.) FILE NO.• Z-5300-A 1. The existing concrete walk that is provided for the neighborhood that would be solely in a residential lot without a pedestrian access easement. 2. The lot encumbering a portion of the lake and the dam, this lake and spillway structure will provide for stormwater detention control for the development. Now a portion of this dam and lake would be within private ownership. 3. Staff also have concerns about the existence of the drive and parking for the tennis courts being on the private property for the house. These areas of concerns could be addressed through revised plans and easements and written agreements between the private property owner and the Neighborhood Association. 6. Utility Comments: L.R. Wastewater - Wooden deck constructed over existing sewer main located within existing sewer easement. Little Rock Wastewater will not be responsible for repair of deck should removal be required for maintenance of sewer main in the future. 7. Staff Analysis: The applicant is requesting a revised conditional use permit to convert the existing clubhouse building within the Carriage Creek Recreational area to a single-family dwelling. The property is zoned R-2. The applicant proposes to replat the residential structure into a separate single-family lot. The clubhouse is part of the existing conditional use permit for the Carriage Creek Recreational area. This item is before the Planning Commission as a result of a recent zoning enforcement action. On July 7, 1996, the Zoning enforcement staff made an inspection of the clubhouse structure. The inspection revealed that the structure was being used as a single-family residence. The property had been illegally subdivided and sold to Kim and Phyllis Moore. The Moores were renting out the property. On August 12, 1996, after attempts to contact the property owner, a courtesy notice was issued to cease the use of the clubhouse structure or apply for a revision to the conditional use permit. The enforcement action has 2 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 21 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5300-A been suspended pending the Planning Commission's review of the revised conditional use permit. On March 13, 1990, the Little Rock Planning Commission approved a conditional use permit for the Carriage Creek Recreational area. The conditional use permit included a 2,554+/- square foot clubhouse, a pond, swimming pool, two tennis courts, a basketball court and parking area (with two access points on Ridgehaven Road). To date, the clubhouse, tennis courts, pond and part of the parking lot have been constructed. The applicant proposes to replat the area around the clubhouse into a separate lot and convert the clubhouse to a single-family dwelling. The replat would also include the one existing access drive to the site, the parking area, a portion of the sidewalks along the north side of the pond, as well as a small portion of the pond. There are several questions which the applicant has not yet answered regarding this proposal. For example, does the applicant propose that the remainder of the site continue to be used as a park? If the remainder of the property continues to be used as a park, how will the future park users access the site and where will they park? How will the applicant treat the sidewalks which traverse the proposed residential lot (easement?)? Is the applicant proposing to construct the swimming pool, basketball court, remainder of the parking lot and the second access drive from Ridgehaven Road as approved with the original conditional use permit? These and possibly other questions need to be answered by the applicant before Staff can analyze the technical issues pertaining to this item and make a staff recommendation. 8. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends deferral of this item to the January 9, 1997 Subdivision Agenda. This will allow the applicant time to provide more information pertaining to this item and it will also allow the Subdivision Committee an opportunity to address the technical issues associated with the proposal. 3 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 21 (Cont.) FILE NO • Z-5300-A SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) -Pat McGetrick was present, representing the application. Staff gave a brief description of the proposal. Staff noted that there were several unanswered questions pertaining to this proposal. Mr. McGetrick stated that there are possible legal issues associated with this proposal regarding the Bill of Assurance, park and neighborhood. Mr. McGetrick stated that he would like to talk to the property owner's attorney and the City Attorney's Office to try to resolve any possible legal issues relating to the property and the present proposal. Mr. McGetrick stated that he would need to do this before he could answer the questions posed by staff. The Subdivision Committee accepted Mr. McGetrick's proposal to meet with the attorneys before discussing the technical issues associated with this proposal. STAFF UPDATE: On November 7, 1996, Staff received a letter from Pat McGetrick requesting that this item be deferred to the January 9, 1997 Planning Commission agenda. Mr. McGetrick states that he is trying to resolve legal questions regarding this issue prior to proceeding with the revised conditional use permit. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) Staff presented the item, informing the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter requesting that the item be deferred until the Subdivision Agenda of January 9, 1997. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral. A motion to that effect was made. The motion was passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays, and 2 absent. 4 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 22 FILE NO.: Z-6205 NAME: Massery - Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: 5709 Stonewall Road OWNER/APPLICANT: R. David Massery PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the construction of an accessory dwelling at 5709 Stonewall Road. The property is zoned R-2. ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS: 1. Site Location: The site is located on the south side of Stonewall Road, approximately 3 blocks east of University Avenue. 2. Compatibility with Neighborhood: The properties to the north and west are zoned R-2 and contain single-family residences. There is also a single-family residence immediately east with a mixture of commercial uses further east along the north side of Kavanaugh Blvd. There are also mixed commercial uses to the south across Kavanaugh Blvd. The proposed accessory dwelling should not have an advance effect on the surrounding properties. 3. On -Site Drives and Parkina: The property is accessed by utilizing a single -car drive from Stonewall Road. Adequate parking exists on the site to accommodate the two dwellings. 4. Screening and Buffers: No comments 5. Public Works Comments: Stonewall Street is a 27 foot asphalt curb and gutter street with no walk, staff does not object to the proposed accessory dwelling. Kavanaugh Boulevard is a November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 22 (Cont.) FILE NO • Z-6205 6. 7. collector on the Master Street Plan and right-of-way is 30 feet from centerline, it does not appear that this accessory dwelling would be within Master Street Plan right-of-way for Kavanaugh Boulevard. Utility Comments: L.R. Water Works - No separate utilities allowed. Staff Analysis: The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow for the construction of an accessory dwelling at 5709 Stonewall Road. The property is zoned R-2. Several months ago, the applicant was issued a building Permit to demolish an existing garage/storage building on this site and replace it with an accessory storage building. The new accessory building has been built. However, the new accessory building was built to include a bathroom facility, a fireplace, and a kitchenette/wet bar area. The applicant states that he has no plans of either renting out this accessory building or using it for an office. He states that it will be used for storage, a retreat for reading and other hobbies. It is staffs opinion that, because of the separate bathroom, the kitchenette/wet bar area, and the fireplace, this accessory building could definitely be used as a separate functional dwelling unit without any further alterations. Therefore, staff has required that the applicant file for a conditional use permit for an accessory dwelling. The applicant is also requesting to construct a deck across the rear of the house which will connect to the accessory dwelling. The required setback along the east and west side yards is six feet. The new construction, even though it maintains essentially the same setback as the principle structure, must meet these required side yard setbacks. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow a reduced side yard setback for the deck along the east property line and the deck and accessory dwelling along the west property line. The deck will maintain a 5.3 foot setback along the east property line and the deck/accessory dwelling will maintain a 3.3 feet setback from the west property line. The front and rear setbacks meet and exceed the ordinance requirements. E November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 22 (Cont.) FILE NO • Z-6205 Both the principle and accessory dwellings will be accessed from Stonewall Road and adequate parking exists to serve both dwellings. The proposed accessory dwelling should not have an adverse effect on the surrounding properties. 8. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit and of the requested side yard setback variances. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: The applicant was not present. description of the proposal. (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Staff gave a brief Staff explained to the Committee that even though the applicant states that the accessory building will not be used as a dwelling, the facilities (bathroom, fireplace, and wet bar/kitchenette) are present and the building could be used as a dwelling without any further alternations. Therefore, the staff required that the applicant obtain a conditional use permit for the property. After a brief discussion, the Committee accepted the presentation and forwarded the issue to the full Commission for final action. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) The Staff presented a positive recommendation on this application, as there were no further issues for resolution. There were no objectors to this matter. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff. A motion to that effect was made. The motion was passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 3 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 23 FILE NO.: Z-6216 NAME: LOCATION• Holy Cross Day Care - Conditional Use Permit 1306 Abigail Street OWNER/APPLICANT: Rev. William S. Easter/ Holy Cross Missionary Baptist Church PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the temporary operation of a day care within the existing residential structure at 1306 Abigail Street. The property is zoned R-3. ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS: 1. Site Location: The site is located on the west side of Abigail Street, approximately 1 1/2 blocks south of West 12th Street. 2. Compatibility with Neighborhood: This general area is predominately single-family in nature with a mixture of office and commercial uses 1 1/2 blocks north along West 12th Street. The proposed use should not have an adverse effect on the surrounding properties. 3. On -Site Drives and Parking: Access to the site is gained by utilizing a single driveway from Abigail Street. Three parking spaces (one per employee) and two drop- off spaces (one per 10 children) are required by ordinance. The applicant proposes to have the employees park at the Holy Cross Missionary Baptist Church (approximately 5 blocks away) and be shuttled to the day care. The applicant also states that four vehicles can be parked along the north side of the structure if necessary. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 23 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6216 The applicant proposes to utilize the single -car driveway and the alley (as recommended by Public works) as area to drop-off children. 4. Screenina and Buffers: The proposed playground area should be screened with a six foot high opaque wood fence with its face directed outward from the residential properties to the north, south and west. 5. Public Works Comments: Abigail Street is a 25 foot pavement, dedication of right-of-way to 25 feet from centerline for this commercial use will be required. There are some concerns about drop-off plan of the permitted 30 students. Applicant should investigate the use of the alley and discuss it with the neighbors that take access from the alley for its use for drop off for the students. This is a temporary use of this residential structure and thus no objection. 6. Utility Comments: No comments 7. Staff Analysis: The applicant, Holy Cross Missionary Baptist Church, is requesting a conditional use permit to allow for the temporary operation of a day care within the existing residential structure at 1306 Abigail Street, zoned R-3. The church wishes to establish the day care at this site and move it to the existing church site when an education building is constructed. The Holy Cross Missionary Baptist Church will begin construction of an education building at 4800 West 12th Street in January 1997. when the education building is complete (10-12 months) the day care will be moved into it from 1306 Abigail Street. At that time the structure at 1306 Abigail Street will revert back to a single- family dwelling. Therefore, the conditional use permit is proposed on a temporary basis until January 1, 1998 (approximately 13 1/2 months). The hours of operation for the day care will be from 6:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday. 2 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 23 (Cont.) _ FILE NO.: Z-6216 The applicant proposes to place one wall sign on the front of the structure which will identify the day care. The sign will conform to ordinance requirements. As noted earlier, the proposed day care is licensed for a maximum of 30 children which will require three employees. The applicant has informed staff that an enrollment of approximately 20 children will be maintained at the 1306 Abigail Street site. Therefore, three parking spaces (one per employee) and two drop-off spaces (one per 10 children) are required by ordinance. The applicant proposes to have the employees park at the Holy Cross Missionary Baptist Church site (approximately 5 blocks away) and have them shuttled to the day care at 1306 Abigail Street. The applicant also states that up to four vehicles can be parked along the north side of the structure if necessary. The applicant proposes to utilize the single -car driveway and the alley (as recommended by Public works) as areas to drop-off children. As noted in the Screening and Buffers Comments, the proposed playground area should be screened, with a six- foot high opaque wood fence with its face side directed outward, from the residential properties to the north, south and west. Due to the temporary nature of this conditional use permit, the applicant is requesting a variance from this screening requirement. The property is bounded by an alley to the south, a vacant lot to the west and a single-family residence to the north. Based on the fact that the conditional use permit is proposed as a temporary use, as a location for the church to get a start on their day care program, it should not have an adverse effect on the surrounding properties. 8. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit with the following conditions: 1. The conditional use permit is to be temporary, until January 1, 1998 only. 2. Compliance with the Public works Comments 3. Due to the unusual parking and drop-off arrangement associated with this site, staff 3 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 23 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6216 recommends that the enrollment be limited to twenty (20) children. 4. Staff also recommends approval of the requested variance to eliminate the screening requirement on the south and west sides of the playground area only, since the property abuts an alley to the south and a vacant lot to the west. 5. Staff recommends that the screening fence be constructed along the north property line to screen the existing residences. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Rev. William Easter, of the Holy Cross Missionary Baptist Church, was present, representing the application. Staff gave a brief description of the proposal. There was a brief discussion regarding the use of the alley to drop-off children. Rev. Easter stated that only one residence (immediately south of 1306 Abigail Street) takes access from the alley. He stated that he would check with that neighbor and verify that they have no problem with the day care using the alley. Bob Brown, Site Plan Review Specialist, reviewed his comment with the Committee regarding the screening of the playground area. After a brief discussion, the presentation and forwarded the for final action. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Committee accepted the issue to the full Commission (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) The staff presented a positive recommendation on this application, as there were no further issues for resolution. There were no objectors to this matter. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff. A motion to that effect was made. The motion was passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 4 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 24 FILE NO.: G-23-255 Name: Alley Right -of -Way Abandonment Location: Block 9, Pfeifer Addition to the City of Little Rock Applicant: Dinah M. Cross of Barnes, Quinn, Flake and Anderson, Inc. Request: To abandon the west 249 feet of the alley right-of-way within Block 9, Pfeifer Addition to the City of Little Rock (W. Markham Street at Tyler Street). STAFF REVIEW• 1. Public Need for This Right -of -Way There is no public need for this alley right-of-way. 2. Master Street Plan The Master Street Plan reflects no need for this alley right-of-way. 3. Need for Right -of -Way on Adiacent Streets There is no need for right-of-way on adjacent streets. 4. Characteristics of Right -of -Way Terrain The west 249 feet of the alley right-of-way within Block 9, Pfeifer Addition is currently paved and being used as an access drive for the office building at west Markham Street and Tyler Street (5326 West Markham Street). The alley right-of-way was never constructed any further east because of an open drainage ditch. Because of this, none of the properties to the east within this block will be effected by the abandonment. 5. Development Potential Once abandoned, the area of this abandonment will remain open and continue to be used as an access drive for the office building parking lot. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 24 (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-23-255 6. Neighborhood Land Use and Effect The general area contains office and commercial uses along the north side of West Markham Street, with single-family residences located further to the north. The War Memorial golf course is located to the south, across West Markham Street. 7. Neighborhood Position No neighborhood position has been voiced. The remaining property owners within this block as well as the Hillcrest Residents' Association have been notified of the public hearing. 8. Effect on Public Services or Utilities Fire Department - Must continue to have access to rear of building. AP&L: No objection to abandonment. Area must be retained as a utility, egress and ingress easement. ARKLA: No objection to abandonment. Area must be retained as utility, egress and ingress easement. Southwestern Bell: No objection to abandonment. Retain as a utility easement. L.R. Water Works: No objection to abandonment. No easements required. L.R. Wastewater: No objections to abandonment. No easements required. 9. Reversionary Rights All reversionary rights will extend to James F. Kyser, Ind., Byron Eiseman, Jr. and William Kinneman, Trustees. 10. Public Welfare and Safety Issues Abandoning this alley right-of-way will not have an effect on the public welfare and safety. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the alley right-of-way abandonment subject to the following conditions: 2 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 24 (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-23-255 1. The area of the proposed abandonment will be retained as a utility4drainage easement. 2. The Little Rock Fire Department or other emergency vehicles must continue to have access to the rear of the office building at 5326 west Markham Street. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) Dinah Cross was present, representing the application. Staff gave a brief description of the right-of-way abandonment. After a brief discussion, the Committee accepted the presentation and forwarded the issue to the full Commission for final action. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) Dickson Flake and Dinah Cross were present, representing the application. There were several persons present in opposition to this item. Staff represented the item with a recommendation of approval. Leon Holmes spoke in opposition to the application. Mr. Holmes stated that the alley is used as a forum for free speech under the first amendment to the United States. Mr. Holmes stated that there is an abortion clinic in the office building. Mr. Holmes stated that the women who come to the abortion clinic park in the parking lot and have to walk across the alley to access the building. He stated that the people he represents stand in the alley and talk to and present literature to the women who are going into the abortion clinic. Chairman Putnam stated that the issue at hand is a land use issue and that it is beyond the Commission to make a ruling on a first amendment right. He asked the City Attorney to speak on this issue. Cindy Dawson, of the City Attorney's Office, stated that the reason for an alley is to gain access to private property, not for free speech. Ms. Dawson stated that it is a land use question. Commissioner Earnest asked if all abutting property owners were notified of the request. Monte Moore, of the Planning Staff, stated that the applicant is the only abutting property owner. He stated 3 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 24 (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-23-255 that all the remaining owners within this block received notices of the public hearing. Dickson Flake addressed the Commission in support of the application. Mr. Flake stated that the intent of the application has nothing to do with religious or social issues; it is a question of land use. Mr. Flake stated the reasons for abandonment. He stated that the alley would be abandoned for uses as a private drive, for security purposes, and to comply with ADA standards with the construction of ramps into the alley area. Maria Maldinado, president of St. Joseph's Helpers, addressed the Commission in opposition to the application. She stated that her group uses the alley to promote their abortion ministry. Kathy Bland spoke in opposition to the application. She stated that she needed the alley to be left public so she and her friends could hand out literature and talk to women going into the abortion clinic. There was a brief discussion concerning the public use of the alley and other aspects of the abandonment proposal. Commissioner McCarthy stated concerns relating to the Fire Department's request for continued access to the rear of the building. There was a brief discussions relating to this issue. Jim Lawson, Planning Director, stated that the Fire Department only had to have access to the rear of the building. He stated that the property owner could not gate or barricade the alley after abandonment. Staff informed the Commission that the City did not maintain alleys. After a brief discussions, a motion alley right-of-way abandonment. The of 7 ayes, 2 nays and 2 absent. was made to approve the motion passed by a vote 4 November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 25 FILE NO.: G-23-256 Name: Alley Right -of -Way Abandonment Location: Block 21, Bellevue Addition to the City of Little Rock Applicant: Frederick S. Wetzel, III Recruest: To abandon the alley right- of-way within Block 21, Bellevue Addition to the City of Little Rock (near the intersection of Cantrell Road and Foxcroft Road. STAFF REVIEW• 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Public Need for This Right-of-Wav There is no public need for this alley right-of-way. Master Street Plan The Master Street Plan reflects no need for this alley right-of-way. Need for Right -of -Way on Adjacent Streets There is no need for right-of-way on adjacent streets. Characteristics of Right -of -Way Terrain The 20 foot alley right-of-way is currently an undeveloped strip of land running east off of Cantrell Road, between the Goodyear/Fashion Park Cleaners Store and Cantrell Gardens Nursery. Development Potential Once abandoned, the area of this abandonment will be incorporated into the adjacent commercial lots. There are no plans to develop the area at this time. 6. Neighborhood Land Use and Effect The general area contains a mixture of office and commercial uses along Cantrell Road to the north, south, and west. Single-family residences are located to the east. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 25 (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-23-256 7. Neighborhood Position No neighborhood position has been voiced. All abutting property owners have been notified of the public hearing. 8. Effect on Public Services or Utilities AP&L: No objection to abandonment. Retain the north 15 feet of the alley as a utility and ingress/egress easement. ARKLA: No objection to abandonment. No easements required. Southwestern Bell: No objection to abandonment. Retain as utility and ingress/egress easement. L.R. Water Works: No objection to abandonment. No easements required. L.R. Wastewater: No objection to abandonment. Retain area as utility easement. 9. Reversionary Rights All reversionary rights will extend to CJC-KWR Partners, Baird, Inc., and the Fason Family Revocable Trust. 10. Public Welfare and Safetv Issues Abandoning this alley right-of-way will not have an effect on the public welfare and safety. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the alley right-of-way abandonment subject to the entire area being retained as a utility and drainage easement. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) The applicant was not present. Staff gave a brief description of the alley right-of-way abandonment request. Staff noted that the area of abandonment would be retained as a utility and drainage easement. After a brief discussion, the Committee accepted the presentation and forwarded the issue to the full Commission for final action. 2 November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 25 (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-23-256 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) The staff presented a positive recommendation on this application, as there were no further issues for resolution. There were -no objectors to this matter. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff. A motion to that effect was made. The motion was passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. KI November 21, 1996 ITEM NO.: 26 1 FILE NO.: G-23-257 Name• Location• Owner/Applicant: Request• STAFF REVIEW• North State Street Right -of - Way Abandonment North of North Street Sandy McMath To abandon the North State Street right-of-way north from the intersection of North Street and North State Street to the present dead-end of North State Street. 1. Public Need for This Right-of-Wav There is no public need for this alley right-of-way. Public Works Staff supports the proposed abandonment with the following two conditions: 1. Staff met with applicant and advised when development occurs that a public turn -a -round would be required and this portion of the street would need to be removed. 2. That staff would accept closure to the north of North Street with an appropriate curb radius to create this 90 degree street intersection with a private drive leaving this curb. 2. Master Street Plan The Master Street Plan reflects no need for this right- of-way. 3. Need for Right -of -Way on Adjacent Streets There is no need for right-of-way on adjacent streets. 4. Characteristics of Right -of -Way Terrain The proposed area of abandonment is currently paved and used as a right-of-way to access the adjacent properties. November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 26 (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-23-257 5. Development Potential Once abandoned, the area of abandonment will be incorporated into the adjacent properties for the future construction of an office building and parking area. 6. Neighborhood Land Use and Effect The property immediately north, east and west is undeveloped. The Davidson Law Firm is located to the southeast and a bank is being constructed to the south, across North Street. 7. Neighborhood Position No neighborhood position has been voiced. All abutting property owners as well as the Downtown Neighborhood Association have been notified of the public hearing. 8. Effect on Public Services or Utilities AP&L: No objection to abandonment. No easements required. ARKLA: No objection to abandonment. No easements required. Southwestern Bell: No objection to abandonment. No easements required. L.R. Water Works: No objection to abandonment. A 2-inch water main in this right-of-way will have to be abandoned. L.R. Wastewater: No objection to abandonment. Retain the area of abandonment as a utility easement. 9. Reversionary Rights All reversionary rights will extend to Sandy S. McMath, the Sidney and Anne McMath Revocable Trust and the Davidson Law Firm. 10. Public Welfare and Safety Issues Abandoning this right-of-way will not effect the public welfare and safety. E November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 26 (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-23-257 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the right-of-way abandonment subject to the area of proposed abandonment being retained as a utility easement. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 31, 1996) The applicant was not present. Staff gave a brief description of the requested right-of-way abandonment. There was a brief discussion of the proposal including the Public Works Comments. The Committee accepted the presentation and forwarded the issue to the full Commission for final action. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) The staff presented a positive recommendation on this application, as there were no further issues for resolution. There were no objectors to this matter. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff. A motion to that effect was made. The motion was passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 3 0 cr U W Ir W I-- O z 0 as U C'3 z z z J a ti ............ MEMME.....,... comom000mmom CENENNNNNNNN oM vMMNNNNIINN ©00►�OOQOOL�©� eoo�io�oea��vv ©o�ri�e�oea��oo ever�evooe��vv ©eei�ev�e©��ee oov��ov000�ioo .. oor��oo�or�ov eve��ovoevi�ve l�00�,�100©O�Di� B00 ��oD0�0I 0� oeoi��0000ii�o �Dv1��0��01�00 Bul�lll �0v00�i00 ©0vi�©0000��00 ©v0\10oi�1,011��7 so�n8omrimiom 111�11�I1�� ODI��1� YIIIIIY�1 DIN 0 2 z w CO a m w z November 21, 1996 SUBDIVISION MINUTES There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m. Date r. hai a