Z-5600 Staff AnalysisLE NO.: z-5600
NAME: CHENAL MINI -STORAGE PCD LONG -FORM (REVOCATION)
LOCATION: NE corner Hwy. 10 at Chenal Parkway
CURRENT PROPERTY OWNERS: ORIGINAL APPLICANT:
E. M. Pfeifer, III E. M. Pfeifer, III
P. O. Box 99 P. O. Box 99
No. Little Rock, AR 72115 No. Little Rock, AR 72115
AREA: 4.29 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
CURRENT ZONING: PCD ORIGINAL ZONING: 0-3 and C-3
PLANNING DISTRICT: #19
CENSUS TRACT: 42.05
BACKGROUND
This PCD received preliminary approval form the Planning
Commission on September 22, 1992. The Board of Directors
approved PCD by Ordinance No. 16,289 on October 29, 1992. There
were no objectors.
The owner did not file time extension requests and none were
granted. Therefore, one year after expiration staff began
revocation of the ordinance.
STAFF UPDATE•
On October 1, 1996, Staff mailed a certified notice to Mr.
Pfeifer advising him of the revocation action. The receipt has
been returned and placed in the case file. At this writing no
contact has been made Mr. Pfeifer.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
That the PCD titled "Chenal Mini -Storage PCD Long -Form" be
revoked and that the zoning of 0-3 and C-3 be stored as existed
prior to the PUD.
FILE NO.: Z-5600 Cont.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 5, 1996)
Richard wood, of the Staff, offered a brief update of the request
stating Mr. Pfeifer, the current property owner, has indicated by
letter in the file that he agrees with the revocation action.
Mr. Pfeifer stated in his letter that the development proposed
has failed and the restoration of the 0-3 and C-3 classifications
would be appropriate.
After a brief discussion, a motion was made to recommend to the
City Board of Directors that this PCD be revoked and restored to
its previous classification. The motion passed by a vote of
11 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent.
2
1. Meeting Date: October 20, 1992
2. Case No.: Z-5600
3. Request: To approve a Short -form PCD titled Chenal
Mini -Storage.
4. Location: NE corner of Chenal Parkway at State
Highway No. 10
5. Owner/Applicant: Eugene Pfeifer by Joe White
6. Existing Status: Vacant wooded property
7. Proposed Use: The construction of several buildings for a
mini -warehouse complex.
8. Staff Recommendation: Approval with conditions
9. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval with
conditions
10. Conditions or Issues Remaining to be Resolved: The
dedication of Chenal Parkway north of Highway 10 as a public
street.
il. Right -of -Way Issues: Arterial right-of-way standard for
dedication on Chenal Parkway.
12. Recommendation Forwarded With: A vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and
2 absent.
13. Objectors: None
14. Neighborhood Plan: Chenal (19)
ILE NO.: Z-560
NAME: Chenal Mini -Storage - Short -Form - Planned Commercial
Development
LOCATION: North of Highway 10 and East of Chenal Blvd.
DEVELOPER•
ENGINEER•
E. M. PFEIFER, III WHITE-DATERS AND ASSOCIATES
401 Victory
Little Rock, AR 72201
374-1666
AREA: 4.2949 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
PLANNING DISTRICT: Chenal 19
CENSUS TRACT: 42.05
VARIANCES RE VESTED: None
STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL:
It is the developer's desire to create mini -storage warehouses
on the site.
A. PROPOSAL RE VEST:
This proposal involves construction of six buildings on the
four plus acres.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
This site is currently vacant with a large amount of mature
natural foliage. This section of Chenal Parkway dead -ends
to the west about 1/4 mile.
C. ENGINEERING UTILITY COMMENTS:
1. Master Street Plan improvements on Chenal Parkway are
required or in -lieu contribution provided.
2. Dedicate entire right-of-way of Chenal Parkway to
establish legal access.
3. Build acceleration and deceleration lanes per the
Master Street Plan requirement.
4. The Stormwater Detention and Excavation Ordinances apply.
1
FILE NO.: Z-5600 Cont.
Little Rock Waste Water Utility
1. Sewer main extension required with easements.
2. Hinson Interceptor fee must be paid on the property prior
to sewer main extension construction.
3. Possible reimbursement fee required to Ranch Properties
for construction of existing outfall.
4. Contact Little Rock Waste Water Utility for details.
Little Rock Municipal Water Works
1. Annexation to the City
2. A water main extension and on site fire protection is
required.
D. ISSUESILEGAL/TECHNICALLDESIGN:
1. Submittal of a revised plan to indicate a future second
exit.
2. Structural description should be provided.
3. A lighting scheme for the building and driveway areas be
provided.
4. Describe ways to protect trees as landscaping buffer area
during construction and provide a plan.
5. Use nonreflecting materials for roofing.
E. ANALYSIS:
The Planning staff's view of this proposal is that the design
is adequate for the use and the size of property indicated.
There will be a total of six buildings with a total of
300 units, approximately 4,000 square feet in size. The roofs
will be shingled. There is an existing chain link fence to
the east. The applicant has requested that it remain until
the entire site is developed, at which time a good neighbor
fence will be constructed.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the Planned Office Development
subject to (a) the Engineering and Utility comments being
resolved as well as those indicated under Section D of this
write-up.
2
FILE NO.: Z-5600 Cont.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:
(SEPTEMBER 3, 1992)
Joe White and E. M. Pfeifer represented the applicant. There was a
brief discussion on the Engineering, Utilities and Staff comments.
This item was forward to the full Commission for action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
(SEPTEMBER 22, 1992)
Mr. Joe White was present and represented this application. There
were no objectors in attendance. Staff reported that the several
issues discussed, in the agenda material, have been resolved.
After a brief discussion, the Commission determined to place this
item on the Consent Agenda for approval. A motion to that effect
was made. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and
2 absent.
3
September 22, 1992
ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: Z-5600
NAME: Chenal Mini -Storage - Short -Form - Planned Commercial
Development
LOCATION: North of Highway 10 and East of Chenal Blvd -
DEVELOPER:
ENGINEER:
E. M. PFEIFER, III WHITE-DATERS AND ASSOCIATES
401 Victory
Little Rock, AR 72201
374-1666
AREA: 4.2949 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
PLANNING DISTRICT: Chenal 19
CENSUS TRACT: 42.05
VARIANCE5 REQUESTED: None
STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL:
It is the developer's desire to create mini -storage warehouses
on the site.
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
This proposal involves construction of six buildings on the
four plus acres.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
This site is currently vacant with a large amount of mature
natural foliage. This section of Chenal Parkway dead -ends
to the west about 1/4 mile.
C. ENGINEERING/UTILITY COMMENTS:
1. Master Street Plan improvements on Chenal Parkway are
required or in -lieu contribution provided.
2. Dedicate entire right-of-way of Chenal Parkway to
establish legal access.
3. Build acceleration and deceleration lanes per the
Master Street Plan requirement.
4. The Stormwater Detention and Excavation Ordinances apply.
1
September 22, 1992
ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO— Z-5600
NAME: Chenal Mini -Storage - Short -Form - PlannedDffice ,C.-mAMEXC1ul
Development
LOCATION: North of Highway 10 and East of Chenal Blvd.
DEVELOPER' ENGINEER'
E. M. PFEIFER, III WHITE-DATERS AND ASSOCIATES
401 Victory
Little Rock, AR 72201
374-1666
AREA: 4.2949 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
PLANNING DISTRICT: Chenal 19
CENSUS TRACT: 42.05
VARIANCES REQUESTED: None
STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL:
It is the developer's desire to create mini -storage warehouses
on the site.
A. PROPOSAL RE VEST:
This proposal involves construction of six buildings on the
four plus acres.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
This site is currently vacant with a large amount of mature
natural foliage. This section of Chenal Parkway dead -ends
to the west about 1/4 mile.
C. ENGINEERING UTILITY COMMENTS:
1. Master Street Plan improvements on Chenal Parkway are
required or in -lieu contribution provided.
2. Dedicate entire right-of-way of Chenal Parkway to
establish legal access.
3. Build acceleration and deceleration lanes per the
Master Street Plan requirement.
4. The Stormwater Detention and Excavation Ordinances apply.
1
September 22, 1992
ITEMNO.• 4 Cont. FILE NO.• Z-5500
Little Rock Waste Water Utilit
1. Sewer main extension required with easements.
2. Hinson Interceptor fee must be paid on the property prior
to sewer main extension construction.
3. Possible reimbursement fee required to Ranch Properties
for construction of existing outfall.
4. Contact Little Rock Waste Water Utility for details.
Little Rock Munici al Water Works
1. Annexation to the City
2. A water main extension and on site fire protection is
required.
D. ISSUES/LEGAL/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
1. Submittal of a revised plan to indicate a future second
exit.
2. Structural description should be provided.
3. A lighting scheme for the building and driveway areas be
provided.
4. Describe ways to protect trees as landscaping buffer area
during construction and provide a plan.
5. Use nonreflecting materials for roofing.
E. ANALYSIS•
The Planning staff's view of this proposal is that the design
is adequate for the use and the size of property indicated.
There will be a total of six buildings with a total of
300 units, approximately 4,000 square feet in size. The roofs
will be shingled. There is an existing chain link fence to
the east. The applicant has requested that it remain until
the entire site is developed, at which time a good neighbor
fence will be constructed.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the Planned Office Development
subject to (a) the Engineering and Utility comments being
resolved as well as those indicated under Section D of this
write-up.
2
September 22, 1992
ITEM NO.• 4 Cont. FILE NO.- 7-5500
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:
(SEPTEMBER 3, 1992)
Joe White and E. M. Pfeifer represented the applicant. There was a
brief discussion on the Engineering, Utilities and Staff comments.
This item was forward to the full Commission for action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
(SEPTEMBER 22, 1992)
Mr. Joe White was present and represented this application. There
were no objectors in attendance. Staff reported that the several
issues discussed, in the agenda material, have been resolved.
After a brief discussion, the Commission determined to place this
item on the Consent Agenda for approval. A motion to that effect
was made. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and
2 absent.
3