Z-5682-B Staff AnalysisApril 22, 2010
ITEM] NO.: 8 FILE NO.: Z -5682-B
NAME: Country Club of Little Rock Parking Lot —
Conditional Use Permit
LOCATION: 4200 Country Club Blvd.
OWNER/APPLICANT: Country Club of Little Rock/White Daters
PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the
addition of a 33 -space parking lot on this existing,
238 -acre, R-2 zoned Country Club site.
SITE LOCATION:
The property is located at the eastern end of the Heights. The parking lot
is located south of the existing tennis courts.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The proposed small parking lot addition is located south of the Country
Club's tennis courts. The tennis court facilities separate the parking lot
from the residences across Country Club Lane to the west. A 100 -foot
buffer separates the parking lot from the nearest residential property to the
south. The south side of the parking lot will be screened by the existing
wooded buffer and the addition of new plantings. The addition of the 33 -
space parking lot should not affect the Club's compatibility with the
neighborhood.
All owners of properties within 200 feet of the boundaries of the Club
property near the location of the parking lot, all residents within 300 feet of
that area and the Heights Neighborhood Association were notified of this
request.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
Access to the parking lot is through an existing parking lot and off of an
internal driveway. The parking lot will contain 33 spaces.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is
required.
2. Interior landscaping no less than 8% of the vehicular use area is
required. Interior landscape islands must be no less than one hundred
April 22, 2010
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.
FILE NO.: Z -5682-B
fifty (150) square feet in area and seven and one-half (7.5) feet in
width.
3. Landscaping is suggested at the base of the retaining walls.
4. Screening is required along the south perimeter of the parking lot site.
Screening shrubs should be installed along the south perimeter of the
parking lot itself.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No Comments.
6. UTILITY FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS
Wastewater: Sewer available to this project.
Entergy: No comments received.
Centerpoint Energy: No comments received.
AT&T (SBC): No comments received.
Water: No objection. Possible conflict with existing 6 -inch private fire
service.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
County Planning: No Comments.
CATA: The site is not located on a CATA bus route.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 1, 2010)
Tim Daters was present representing the applicant. Staff presented the item and
noted little additional information was required. Staff asked Mr. Daters to provide
the signed authorization affidavit, a current survey and a lighting plan.
Landscape Comments were discussed. Due to the terrain of the, staff suggested
screening be planted along the south perimeter of the parking lot and at the base
of the retaining walls.
Staff noted that the overall property exceeded 238 acres and the small parking
lot was located near the southwest corner of the property. Staff asked if the
Committee felt it was appropriate to do notification of property owners based on
2
April 22, 2010
ITEM NO.: 8 Cont. FILE NO.: Z -5682-B
the boundary of the overall site or on the boundary in closer proximity to the
proposed parking lot. The Committee agreed that notification based on the
property lines in proximately to the parking lot was appropriate.
The applicant was advised to respond to staff issues by Wednesday, April 7,
2010. The Committee determined there were no other outstanding issues.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The Country Club of Little Rock occupies the 230± acre, R-2 zoned tract located
at the east end of the Heights. The club contains a golf course, tennis and
swimming facilities and a clubhouse. The tennis facilities are located near the
southwest corner of the overall site. A small parking lot is located south of the
tennis facilities. The club is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to
allow for construction of a new, 33 space parking lot adjacent to that small
parking lot. Access to the new parking lot will be through the existing parking lot
and off of an existing internal driveway. Due to the slope of the terrain, a pair of
terraced retaining walls will be constructed south of the parking lot.
A 100 -foot wide, wooded buffer exists between the parking lot and the residential
property adjacent to the south. The applicant is proposing to place landscape
screening shrubs along the south perimeter of the parking lot and new driveway.
Staff believes trees should be planted at the base of the retaining walls to provide
additional screening. Any lighting will be low level and directional, aimed
downward and into the site.
To staff's knowledge, there are no outstanding issues. There is no bill of
assurance for this acreage tract.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested CUP subject to compliance with the
following conditions:
1. Compliance with the comments and conditions in Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the
agenda staff report.
2. Trees are to be planted along the base of the retaining walls to provide
additional screening.
3
April 22, 2010
ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -5682-B
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 22, 2010)
The applicant was present. There were three persons present in interest, only
one of whom turned in a card to speak. Commissioner Rector recused on the
item. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval subject to
compliance with the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4, 5 and 6
of the agenda staff report.
2. Trees are to be planted along the base of the retaining walls to provide
additional screening.
3. Ivy is to be planted to grow on the walls to provide additional screening of the
retaining walls.
4. The shrubs, trees and ivy are to be evergreen.
Tim Daters gave a brief outline of the project and stated he would reserve the
remainder of his time to address concerns raised by the neighbors.
Jane Batton spoke on behalf of her mother, Lois Park, who lives at # 4 Cantrell
Rd. She read a letter from her mother in which Ms. Park asked for planting of ivy
on the walls and the use of dark sky lighting. She also voiced concern that the
CCLR had not followed through on promises made to provide screening of the
Club's maintenance building. She presented a letter from CCLR, dated February
2001, in which the Club's president stated the maintenance building would be
screened by new landscaping. Ms. Batton asked that final plans for the new
parking lot be provided to the neighbors prior to construction.
Mr. Daters responded that the Club would comply with the conditions proposed
by Staff, including the landscaping. He stated the lighting would be low level,
shielded downward and into the site. He stated he would provide copies of the
plan to the neighbors prior to construction.
Blaine Burgess, manager of the Club, stated he had only been on the job about
18 months and he was not familiar with the prior agreement related to the
maintenance building. He said he would meet with the neighbors and if there
were outstanding obligations, they would be addressed. Mr. Burgess stated the
new parking would actually improve the appearance of the site for the neighbors
and would help to keep overflow cars off of the neighborhood streets during
special events at the Club.
M
April 22, 2010
TEM NO.:
FILE NO.: Z -5682-B
Chairman Yates asked if the Commission could make completion of the items in
the 2001 letter a condition of approval of this CUP. Director of Planning Tony
Bozynski stated the City was not a party to the 2001 agreement and it would not
be appropriate to tie the agreement between the Club and the neighbors to this
issue.
Commissioner Nunnley commented that the Club had agreed to comply with all
staff conditions for the new parking lot, including the ivy and shielding lighting
requested by the neighbors.
A motion was made to approve the application, subject to compliance with all
staff recommendations and conditions. The motion was approved by a vote of
9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 recusing (Rector).
61