Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpc_11 05 2015 LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING – REZONING – CONDITIONAL USE HEARING MINUTE RECORD NOVEMBER 5, 2015 4:00 P.M. I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present being eleven (11) in number. II. Members Present: Jennifer Martinez Belt Craig Berry Tom Brock Alan Bubbus Buelah Bynum Keith Cox Janet Dillon Rebecca Finney Scott Hamilton Paul Latture Bill May Members Absent: None City Attorney: Shawn Overton III. Approval of the Minutes of the September 24, 2015 Meeting of the Little Rock Planning Commission. The Minutes were approved as presented. LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING – REZONING – CONDITIONAL USE HEARING NOVEMBER 5, 2015 4:00 P.M. I. OLD BUSINESS: Item Number: File Number: Title: A. Z-1465-E NuLife Christian Fellowship Church – Conditional Use Permit 4601 S. University Avenue B. G-23-458 “R” Street -- Right-of-Way Abandonment Between Normandy Drive and N. University Avenue C. Z-9073 eStem Public Charter School High School – Conditional Use Permit North side of the 5500 and 5600 Blocks of West 28th Street D. LA-0066 Yarberry Lane Timber Harvest Variance 7326 Yarberry Lane E. Z-5304-A Nuage Residential Contracts Short-form PD-R, located at 5817 Big Oak Lane. F. Z-6532-G Lot 2 Chenal Heights Addition Long-form PD-R, located East of Chenal Valley Drive and South of Chenal Heights Circle. II. NEW BUSINESS: Item Number: File Number: Title: 1. LU15-19-02 A Land Use Plan Amendment in the Chenal Planning District located West of Northwest corner of Chenal Parkway and Rahling Road from Residential Low Density and Park/Open Space to Office and Park/Open Space. Agenda, Page Two I. NEW BUSINESS: (Continued) Item Number: File Number: Title: 1.1 Z-5936-N Rezoning from R-2 and OS to O-2 and OS West of the Northwest corner of Chenal Parkway and Rahling Road 2. Z-9088 Hope Rises Group Home – Special Use Permit 1201 East 9th Street 3. Z-9089 Phoenix Recovery Parolee/Probation Housing Facility – Special Use Permit 104 N. Battery Street 4. Z-1840-C Little Rock Racquet Club Parking – Conditional Use Permit #1 Huntington Road 5. Z-9086 Phillips Duplexes – Conditional Use Permit 1100 and 1106 Appianway Street 6. Z-9087 #1 Orlé Circle Accessory Dwelling – Conditional Use Permit #1 Orlé Circle 7. Adoption of the 2016 Planning Commission Calendar 8. MSP15-02 Master Street Plan Amendment to modify the Design Standard for Kanis Road Walnut Grove Road to Chenal Downs Blvd. 9. LU15-01 Land Plan Amendments North of I-630 from I-430 to State Capitol Building 10. Proposed Amendments to Various Provisions of Chapter 36 of the Code of Ordinances (the Zoning Ordinance) 11. LA-0067 Landmark Apartments Advanced Grading Variance Capitol Hill Blvd. and Rushmore Avenue November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: Z-1465-E NAME: NuLife Christian Fellowship Church – Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: 4601 S. University Avenue OWNER/APPLICANT: Rick Middleton/Windsor Williams, NuLife Church PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow a church to occupy up to 6,000 sq. ft. of the existing building on this C-4 zoned property. 1. SITE LOCATION: The site was developed and previously occupied by an automobile dealership. The property is located on the east side of S. University Avenue, a little less than ½ mile south of Asher Avenue. 2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: The property is located along the University Avenue Commercial corridor. Shopping centers are located to the north at the major intersection. An automobile dealership and other commercial uses are located across University to the west. Areas of floodway bound the property on the north, south and east. Since this large building was vacated by the dealership, it has been used for a mixture of smaller uses. Allowing the church to occupy a portion of the building appears to be compatible with uses in the area and a reasonable reuse of a portion of the building. Notice of the public hearing was sent to all owners of properties within 200 feet of the site and the SWLR United for Progress Neighborhood Association. 3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: Access to the property is via a single driveway off of S. University Avenue. The northern portion of the site is occupied by a single use; a used vehicle sales business. The southern portion is occupied by two buildings containing a total of 39,500 square feet of area. The entirety of the smaller building and a portion of the larger building contain automobile service uses. The church is to occupy 6,000 sq. ft. of the larger building. The maximum stated seating capacity of the church’s main worship area is 195 persons; requiring 48 parking spaces. There are 119 parking spaces on the site which is sufficient to accommodate the uses. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1465-E 2 4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS: Site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. If building rehabilitation exceeds fifty percent (50%) of the replacement cost then the landscaping and buffer must also come into compliancy accordingly. 5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1. Show the floodplain and/or floodway delineations on the survey. 2. It appears a substantial area of the site lies within the regulated floodway and/or floodplain of Fourche Creek and Rock Creek. No future construction of any structures, improvements to the interior of the structures over 50% of the market value of the structure, parking areas, or placement of fill materials are allowed in the floodway. Additions or improvements to the interior of structures in the floodplain of 50% or more of the market value of a structure must comply with the CLR floodplain regulations. 6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS: Wastewater: Sewer available to this project. Entergy: Entergy does not object to the conditional use permit whereby the applicant is requesting to use 6,000 +- square feet of the existing building. The building is already supplied with electric service. The customer should contact Entergy in advance if changes in the electrical service requirements to the building are required. Centerpoint Energy: No comment received. AT&T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1465-E 3 The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the Developer's expense. Please submit plans for water facilities and/or fire protection system to Central Arkansas Water for review. Plan revisions may be required after additional review. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of water facilities and/or fire service. Approval of plans by the Arkansas Department of Health Engineering Division and Little Rock Fire Department is required. If there are facilities that need to be adjusted and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. That work would be done at the expense of the developer. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding the size and location of the water meter. The facilities on-site will be private. When meters are planned off private lines, private facilities shall be installed to Central Arkansas Water's material and construction specifications and installation will be inspected by an engineer, licensed to practice in the State of Arkansas. Execution of Customer Owned Line Agreement is required. Fire sprinkler systems which do not contain additives such as antifreeze shall be isolated with a double detector check valve assembly. If additives are used, a reduced pressure zone backflow preventer shall be required. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Fire Department: Maintain fire apparatus access roads at fire hydrant locations as per Appendix D of the 2012 Arkansas Fire Prevention Code Vol. 1 Section D103.1 Access road width with a hydrant. Where a fire hydrant is located on a fire apparatus access road, the minimum road width shall be 26 feet, exclusive of shoulders. Building Codes: Project is a change in occupancy and is therefore subject to current building code requirements. Review and approval is required by Building Codes Division before occupancy takes place. For information on submittal requirements and the review process, contact a commercial plans examiner: November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1465-E 4 Curtis Richey at 501.371.4724; crichey@littlerock.org or Mark Alderfer at 501.371.4875; malderfer@littlerock.org. County Planning: No comments. CATA: The site is located on a CATA bus route. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JUNE 10, 2015) The applicant, Windsor Williams, was present. Staff presented the item and noted some additional information was needed. Staff requested a signage plan and asked if there would be any outdoor activities. Staff noted that the application stated the church currently had 50 members. Staff asked what the maximum seating capacity of the main worship area would be. Staff noted that the CUP was for only this 6,000 square foot area and any future expansion would have to be brought back to the Commission. Public Works Comments were discussed. Staff requested that floodplain and/or floodway delineations be indicated on the survey. Staff noted the restrictions on construction and remodeling on properties in the floodplain/floodway. Other Agency Comments were noted. The applicant was advised to provide responses by June 17, 2015. The Committee determined there were no other issues and forwarded the item to the full Commission. STAFF ANALYSIS: The C-4 zoned, 8.5± acre tract located at 4601 S. University Avenue was previously occupied by various automobile and truck sales and service businesses. Since the last of the new car sales businesses left the site several years ago, it has been occupied by a mixed variety of uses; including used vehicle sales and service companies. A relatively recent effort was made to reuse the site and buildings for a mixed use retail development. That proposal did not succeed. A used vehicle sales business is located on the northern portion of the site. The southern portion of the site contains two buildings; 32,285 square feet and 7,280 square feet. The smaller building is occupied by a couple of automobile service type businesses. The southern portion of the larger building is also occupied by a similar use. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1465-E 5 The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow a church to occupy up to 6,000 square feet in the northern portion of the larger building. NuLife Fellowship Christian Church will be conducting Sunday worship services, Monday Leadership meeting and Wednesday Bible Study. There will be other events from time-to-time as are typical for a church. NuLife currently has 50 members. The maximum seating capacity in the proposed new worship area is 195 persons. No outside activities are planned. Signage will consist of wall signage on the building façade facing S. University and a possible ground sign. Signage will comply with that allowed in commercial districts. Only cosmetic type work to the building is proposed to accommodate the new use. To staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues. The proposal to allow use of a portion of this existing building for a small church appears to be a reasonable request. There is no bill of assurance for this acreage tract. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested CUP, subject to compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 2, 2015) The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the commission that the applicant had failed to send the required notices and the item needed to be deferred. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and deferred to the August 13, 2015 meeting by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 13, 2015) Staff informed the Commission that on July 22, 2015 the applicant had requested deferral of the item to the September 24, 2015 meeting. Staff recommended approval of the deferral request. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved for deferral with a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 24, 2015) The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the commission that the applicant had requested deferral of the item on September 18, 2015. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1465-E 6 the consent agenda and approved for deferral to the Nov. 5, 2015 meeting by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 5, 2015) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the “staff recommendation” above. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved as recommended by staff, including all staff comments and conditions. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: B FILE NO.: G-23-458 Name: “R” Street -- Right-of-Way Abandonment Location: Between Normandy Drive and N. University Avenue Owner/Applicant: Gary Clayton and Estate of Cleda G. Pack (Blake Cossey)/Gary Clayton Request: The request is to abandon the west 97 feet of the 50 foot wide “R” Street right-of-way located between N. University Avenue and Normandy Drive. Purpose: After abandonment, the area of right-of-way will transfer to the ownerships to the north and south, and be incorporated into these single family properties. STAFF UPDATE: On September 9, 2015 the applicant requested this application be deferred to the November 5, 2015 Agenda. Staff supports the deferral request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 24, 2015) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant requested this application be deferred to the November 5, 2015 agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the November 5, 2015 agenda. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted a letter to staff on October 21, 2015 requesting this application be withdrawn, without prejudice. The property on the north side of the proposed abandonment has a new owner who does not wish to sign the petition of abandonment. Staff supports the withdrawal request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 5, 2015) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant requested this application be withdrawn without prejudice. Staff supported the withdrawal request. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: B (Cont.) FILE NO.: G-23-458 8 The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and withdrawn without prejudice. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: C FILE NO.: Z-9073 NAME: eStem Public School High School – Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: North side of the 5500 and 5600 Blocks of West 28th Street OWNER/APPLICANT: Board of Trustees of the University of Arkansas/eStem PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the construction of a public charter school high school on this R-3 zoned site. 1. SITE LOCATION: The site is located at the side of the 5500 and 5600 Blocks of West 28th Street, between Fair Park Blvd. and S. University Avenue. 2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: The proposed school is located at the north edge of the UALR campus and will, for all intents and purposes, function as an extension of the college campus. Campus facilities and parking are located to the west and south. A single family neighborhood extends to the north and east. The eStem campus consists of the education building, a small amount of on-site parking and limited outside use area. Staff believes the proposed use could be compatible with uses in the area. Notice of the public hearing was sent to all owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site, the Curran Conway, Oak Forest Initiative and Fair Park Residents Neighborhood Association and the University District. 3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: The parking typically required for a high school is 6 spaces per classroom plus one space for every teacher, employee and administrator. This school is proposed to have 30 classrooms and 50 staff members resulting in a parking requirement of 230 parking spaces. Six (6) on-site spaces are proposed. The difficulty of applying the Ordinance Standards to a charter school is that charter schools do not utilize school buses resulting in many more vehicles dropping off and pick up students. This school proposes to utilize a UALR parking lot located across Fillmore Street to the west for drop-off and pickup of students. It had previously been mentioned to staff that school employees will park in a UALR lot across West 28th Street to the south. Public Works Traffic Engineering staff is November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-9073 2 analyzing the traffic plan submitted by the applicant to determine its feasibility. 4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS: Site plan must comply with the City’s minimal landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. Screening requirements will need to be met for the vehicular use areas adjacent to street right-of-ways. Provide screening shrubs with an average linear spacing of not less at three (3) feet within the required landscape area. Provide trees with an average linear spacing of not less than thirty (30) feet. A perimeter planting strip is required along any side of a vehicular use area that abuts adjoining property or the right-of-way of any street. This strip shall be at least nine (9) feet wide. One (1) tree and three (3) shrubs or vines shall be planted for every thirty (30) linear feet of perimeter planting strip. The property is located in the City’s designated mature area. A 25% reduction of the perimeter requirements is acceptable. Landscape areas shall be provided between the vehicular use area used for public parking and the general vicinity of the admin / rehab building, excluding truck loading or service areas not open to public parking. These areas shall be equal to an equivalent planter strip three (3) feet wide along the vehicular use area. An irrigation system shall be required for developments of one (1) acre or larger. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. 5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1. W 28th St is classified on the Master Street Plan as a collector street. A dedication of right-of-way 30 feet from centerline or a sufficient width to provide needed street improvements will be required. 2. S. Fillmore St is classified on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. A dedication of right-of-way 30 feet from centerline or a sufficient width to provide needed street improvements will be required. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-9073 3 3. W. 27th St. is classified on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. A dedication of right-of-way 30 feet from centerline or a sufficient width to provide needed street improvements will be required. 4. A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of W. 28th St and S. Fillmore St. 5. With site development, provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to W. 28th St including 5-foot sidewalks with planned development. The new back of curb should be located to provide adequate street width to address the proposed traffic impact. Based on the findings of the traffic study, an EB left turn lane or WB right turn lane may be required to be provided on W. 28th St into the vehicle stack area west of S. Fillmore St. Consideration should be made to the driveway locations on the south side of W. 28th St. 6. With site development, provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to S. Fillmore St and W. 27th St. including 5-foot sidewalks with planned development. The new back of curb 7. Submit a Traffic Impact Study for the proposed project. Study should address trip generation, trip distribution, and vehicle stack for the development and also should take into account existing and projected traffic growth. Turn movement counts at the signalized intersections should be included in the study. 8. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 9. Striped pedestrian crossings should be provided at planned crossing locations. 10. A grading permit in accordance with section 29-186 (c) & (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other than residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 11. Provide a Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec. 29-186 (e). 12. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan. 13. If disturbed area is 1 or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 14. Street Improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Public Works must approve completed plans prior to construction. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-9073 4 15. Drainage easements should be maintained in the right-of-way to convey storm water from adjacent property. 16. Damage to public and private property due to hauling operations or operation of construction related equipment from a nearby construction site shall be repaired by the responsible party prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 17. Prior to construction of retaining walls, an engineer's certification of design and plans must be submitted to Public Works for approval. After construction, an as-built certification is required for construction of the retaining wall. 6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS: Little Rock Wastewater: Sewer easements must be retained until sewer relocations are complete and new easements are dedicated. Entergy: Entergy does not object to this conditional use. Overhead facilities are in place along the south side of West 28th Street. Contact Entergy in advance regarding future service requirements to the development and future facilities locations as this project proceeds. Centerpoint Energy: No comments received. AT&T: No comments received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the Developer's expense. Please submit plans for water facilities and/or fire protection system to Central Arkansas Water for review. Plan revisions may be required after additional review. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of water facilities and/or fire service. Approval of plans by the Arkansas Department of Health Engineering Division and Little Rock Fire Department is required. If there are facilities that need to be adjusted and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. That work would be done at the expense of the developer. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-9073 5 Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding the size and location of the water meter. Due to the nature of this facility, installation of an approved reduced pressure zone backflow preventer assembly (RPZ) is required on the domestic water service. This assembly must be installed prior to the first point of use. Central Arkansas Water (CAW) requires that upon installation of the RPZA, successful tests of the assembly must be completed by a Certified Assembly Tester licensed by the State of Arkansas and approved by CAW. The test results must be sent to CAW's Cross Connection Section within ten days of installation and annually thereafter. Contact the Cross Connection Section at 377-1226 if you would like to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this project. Fire sprinkler systems which do not contain additives such as antifreeze shall be isolated with a double detector check valve assembly. If additives are used, a reduced pressure zone backflow preventer shall be required. Fire Department: Maintain Access: Fire Hydrants. Maintain fire apparatus access roads at fire hydrant locations as per Appendix D of the 2012 Arkansas Fire Prevention Code Vol. 1 Section D103.1 Access road width with a hydrant. Where a fire hydrant is located on a fire apparatus access road, the minimum road width shall be 26 feet, exclusive of shoulders. Commercial and Industrial Developments – 2 means of access. - Maintain fire apparatus access roads as per Appendix D of the 2012 Arkansas Fire Prevention Code Vol. 1 Section D104.1 Buildings exceeding three stories or 30 feet in height. Building or facilities exceeding 30 feet or three stories in height shall have at least two means of fire apparatus access for each structure. Section D104.2 Building exceeding 62,000 square feet in area. Buildings or facilities having a gross building area of more than 62,000 square feet shall be provide with two separate and approved fire apparatus access roads. Exception: Projects having a gross building area of up to 124,000 square feet that have a single approved fire apparatus access road when all building are equipped throughout with approved automatic sprinkler systems. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-9073 6 D104.3 Remoteness. Where two fire apparatus access roads are required, they shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than one half of the length of the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the lot or area to be served, measured in a straight line between accesses. 30’ Tall Buildings - Maintain aerial fire apparatus access roads as per Appendix D of the 2012 Arkansas Fire Prevention Code Vol. 1 Section D105.1 – D105.4 D105.1 Where Required. Where the vertical distance between the grade plane and the highest roof surface exceed 30’, approved aerial fire apparatus access roads shall be provided. For the purposes of this section the highest roof surfaces shall be determined by measurement to the eave of a pitched roof, the intersection of a roof to the exterior wall, or the top of the parapet walls, whichever is greater. D105.2 Width. Aerial fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed with of 26’, exclusive of shoulders, in the immediate vicinity of the building or portion thereof. D105.3 Proximity to building. At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. The side of the building on which the aerial fire apparatus access road is positioned shall be approved by the fire code official. D105.4 Obstructions. Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located over the aerial fire apparatus access road or between the aerial fire apparatus road and the building. Other obstructions shall be permitted to be places with the approval of the fire code official. Gates Maintain fire apparatus access road gates as per Appendix D of the 2012 Arkansas Fire Prevention Code Vol. 1 Section D103.5 Fire apparatus access road gates. Gates securing the fire apparatus access roads shall comply with all of the following criteria: 1. Minimum gate width shall be 20 feet. 2. Gates shall be of swinging or sliding type. 3. Construction of gates shall be of material that allows manual operation by one person. 4. Gate components shall be maintained in an operable condition at all times and replaces or repaired when defective. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-9073 7 5. Electric gates shall be equipped with a means of opening the gate by fire department personnel for emergency access. Emergency opening devices shall be approved by the fire code official. 6. Manual opening gates shall not be locked with a padlock or chain and padlock unless they are capable of being opened by means of forcible entry tools or when a key box containing the keys to the lock is installed at the gate location. 7. Locking device specifications shall be submitted for approval \by the fire code official 8. Electric gate operators, where provided, shall be listed in accordance with UL 325. 9. Gates, intended for automatic operation shall be designed, constructed and installed to comply with requirements of ASTM F 2200. Fire Hydrants Locate Fire Hydrants as per Appendix C of the 2012 Arkansas Fire Prevention Code. Section C101 – C105, in conjunction with Central Arkansas Water (Daniel Tull 501-377-1245) and the Little Rock Fire Marshal’s Office (Capt. Tony Rhodes 501-918-3757 or Capt. John Hogue 501-918-3754). Number and Distribution of Fire Hydrants as per Table C105.1. Building Codes: Project is subject to full commercial plan review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. For information on submittal requirements and the review process, contact a commercial plans examiner: Curtis Richey at 501.371.4724; crichey@littlerock.org or Mark Alderfer at 501.371.4875; malderfer@littlerock.org. County Planning: No comment. Rock Region METRO: The area is currently served by METRO at Fair Park Boulevard and 28th Street adjacent to the location indicated. We have no objections to the location of a school in this area. One concern with the plan presented is that the sidewalks do not provide a contiguous pedestrian way around the newly created block. We wish to encourage students to walk and take transit to school. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-9073 8 E-Stem students are currently served by METRO at their location in downtown Little Rock. We already partner with E-Stem to provide rides to school for students and would continue to do so. Bus service at this location provides a bridge for students between the two campuses via UALR – Route 16. Sidewalks are an important component with in the streetscape serving transit and multi-modal transportation. METRO has plans to continue to serve the campus and plan to provide service enhancements. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (SEPTEMBER 2, 2015) The applicants, including representatives of eStem and UALR, were present. Staff presented the item and noted much additional information was needed. Staff presented the following list of comments: 1. Provide a copy of the Bill of Assurance for Cherry and Cox Addition. 2. Provide in writing the total number of classrooms by grade, the number of students and the number of employees. 3. Provide information on the proposed building; height, materials, roof… 4. Locate mechanical equipment and screening. 5. Provide details of dumpsters screening to comply with Code, dumpster pick- up should be limited to normal business hours (6:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m.). 6. Locate and describe all proposed fencing. 7. Provide signage plan. 8. Label building setbacks from property lines. 9. Describe use of outdoor recreation area. 10. Provide lighting plan; should low-level and directional, aimed downward and into the site. 11. Provide parking, drop-off/pick-up plan. 12. Will the building contain a gymnasium or cafeteria? 13. Will there be activities at the site after normal school hours? It was noted that parking and building setback variances were needed. Public Works Comments were presented and discussed at length. Staff emphasized the need for a traffic study and the applicants responded that one was being done. The applicants commented that they had previously met with staff and the comments were as expected and previously discussed. Landscaping, Fire Department and Other Agency Comments were noted. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-9073 9 The applicants were advised to submit responses to those issues raised by Planning Staff by September 9, 2015. They were advised to work with Public Works and Traffic Engineering on their comments, including completion and submittal of the traffic study. The Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission. STAFF ANALYSIS: eStem Public Charter Schools, Inc. proposes to construct an open enrollment public charter high school on the property located on the north side of West 28th Street, between Fair Park and Fillmore. The property is currently owned by UALR and the high school will function somewhat as an extension of the college campus. This proposed new building is to accommodate students in 9th and 10th grades. Students in grades 11 and 12 will attend classes in refurbished buildings located elsewhere on the UALR campus. This proposed building is to house 750 students in 15 classrooms per grade (30 total) with 50 employees. The building will be 3 stories in height and will have an exterior finish of brick, glass and metal panels. Once right-of-way is dedicated, the building will have a setback of 13’6” from the property line on West 28th Street and 0’ from the property line on West 27th Street. New fencing will consist of screening fencing along the property lines adjacent to the single family residential properties located at the northwest and northeast corners of the site. A small outdoor recreation area is located on the east side of the building. The area will be a mix of hardscape plaza and grass lawn. A basketball goal will be provided. The building will have a large multipurpose room that will provide convocation, recreation and dining opportunities. There will be no kitchen built as part of the project; all food will be catered. As with a typical high school, there will be some afterhours events for parents, student organizations, etc. The frequency of such will vary throughout the year. The mechanical equipment and dumpster are proposed to be located in a screened area at the rear of the building. Dumpster pick-up will be limited to 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Signage will comply with that allowed in office and institutional zones as is typical for a school. All site lighting will be low-level and directional, aimed downward and into the site. The 1907 plat/bill of assurance for Cherry and Cox Addition does not address use issues. The proposed plan results in the need for setback and street buffer variances on the West 28th and West 27th Street frontages. Additionally, a variance is needed to allow virtually all required parking to be off-site. Only 6 of the required 230 spaces are located on the school site. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-9073 10 The issue of greatest potential concern appears to be that of traffic, specifically providing for the drop-off and pick-up of up to 750 students when no school bus service is provided. The applicant proposes to utilize a UALR parking lot located across Fillmore Street to the west for vehicle stacking and drop-off/pick-up of students. Staff is reviewing the plan submitted by the applicant and staff continues to work with the applicant to address the issues. The matter is under consideration and additional information will be presented to the Commission at the public hearing. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff’s recommendation is forthcoming. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 24, 2015) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff recommended deferral of the item to the November 5, 2015 agenda to allow additional time to review traffic issues. Staff informed the commission that the applicant had agreed to the deferral. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved for deferral to the November 5, 2015 agenda by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 5, 2015) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the commission that the applicant had recently submitted a traffic study but staff had not had sufficient time to study it and prepare an adequate response. Staff recommended deferring the item to the Dec. 17, 2015 agenda. The applicant had agreed to the deferral. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved for deferral by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: D FILE NO.: LA-0066 NAME: Yarberry Lane Timber Harvest Variance Request LOCATION: 7326 Yarberry Lane APPLICANT: Cynthia D. Woods AREA: Approximately 11.5 acres CURRENT ZONING: R2 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from the Land Alteration Regulations to harvest timber on approximately 11.5 acres. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Applicant is requesting a variance from the Land Alteration Regulations to harvest timber on approximately 11.5 acres located at 7926 Yarberry Lane. The variance would allow staff to issue a grading permit for the timber harvesting activities without imminent construction. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The 11.5 acre property is tree covered. West of the subject property are several properties zoned R2 and Chicot Road. South of the subject property is developed properties zoned R2 and Yarberry Lane. North and east of the subject property are several single family developed lots zoned R2. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of the time of writing, staff has not been provided proof of notifications being mailed by the applicant to all adjacent property owners including those across streets and alleys. As of the time of writing, staff has not received any telephone calls or emails with questions or desiring additional information. Staff has received 4 emails desiring the required undisturbed buffer to not be maintained. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: 1. Harvest activities must comply with state and federal forestry harvest techniques and code. 2. Tree tops and debris generated from the harvest activity must be removed at the conclusion of harvest to reduce the potential fire hazard. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for conditions and additional requirements. 3. Vegetation must be established on disturbed area within 21 days of completion of harvest activities. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0066 2 4. A grading permit in accordance with section 29-186 (c) & (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. 5. The harvest activities shall be expediently completed in a time frame not to exceed one (1) year in duration from the time work commences to installation of all final erosion control measures and vegetation. 6. All required federal, state, and local permits and approvals shall be obtained prior to commencement of land alteration activities. 7. Public works staff must be contacted for inspection for final approval of site stabilization prior to acceptance and relinquishment of maintenance bond. 8. Per Sec. 29-179(5), undisturbed areas designated for temporary buffers shall be kept undisturbed except for reasonable access to the site. The width of the temporary buffer strip shall be 6% of the lot width and depth. The minimum width shall be 25 ft. and the maximum required width shall not exceed 40 ft. In no event shall these temporary strips be less than the width of the permanent buffers required for the development. Label and delineate undisturbed buffer areas on the harvest plan. 9. Damage to public and private property due to hauling operations or operation of construction related equipment from a nearby construction site shall be repaired by the responsible party prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. E. PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS: No comments F. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE: The applicant was present. Staff presented an overview of the variance application. Staff relayed to the applicant that only 4 properties sent requests asking that the undisturbed buffer not be maintained. Since only a small number of neighbors provided emails compared to the number of surrounding lots, staff cannot recommend removal of the undisturbed buffers. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. G. ANALYSIS: The applicant is proposing to harvest timber on approximately 11.5 acres. The timber harvest plan identifies a mixture of pine and hardwood trees ranging from 6 inches in diameter to 22+ inches in diameter. The majority of trees show to be 6 inches in diameter. The principal species of trees identified were loblolly and shortleaf pines and southern red oak, cherry bark oak, white oak, gum, and hickory. The plan states generally stands with a range of size and age classes that are overstocked will benefit from a selective harvest to market mature and defective trees and others, as needed, to relieve overcrowded conditions. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0066 3 The timber harvest plan identifies approximately 122 trees per acre consisting specifically of approximately 48 pine and 74 hardwood trees per acre. The applicant proposes to conduct a selective harvest removing the mature and defective trees and leaving a sufficiently stocked stand for future growth while removing no more than 50% of the growing stock. The applicant has revised the timber harvest plan and agrees to maintain 25 ft. undisturbed buffers along all property boundaries. Access to the property is proposed to be taken from Yarberry Lane. The applicant has agreed to remove all tree tops and debris generated from the project by either burning or hauling off. The applicant has also agreed to obtain a grading permit prior to beginning work. The applicant has agreed that the project will be completed in less than 1 year. H. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the timber harvest variance request subject to the compliance with staff’s comments found in paragraph D along with the following comments and conditions: 1. The undisturbed buffers at least 25 ft. in width should be marked on site with paint and/flagging; 2. A grading permit should be obtained prior to the start of harvest; 3. Mud and debris tracked on Yarberry Lane should be removed immediately. 4. Any damages that occur to Yarberry Lane attributed to the timber harvest will be repaired immediately. I. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 24, 2015) The applicant was not present. The applicant did not provide notice to the adjacent property owners within 10 days prior to the item being heard by the Planning Commission. Therefore, staff recommended the item be deferred to the November 5, 2015 Planning Commission agenda. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the November 5, 2015 agenda. The item was deferred by the Planning Commission by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 5, 2015) The applicant was not present. The applicant did not provide notice to the adjacent property owners within 10 days prior to the item being heard by the Planning Commission. Therefore, staff recommended the item be deferred to the December 17, 2015 Planning Commission agenda. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to the December 17, 2015 agenda. The item was deferred by the Planning Commission by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: E FILE NO.: Z-5304-A NAME: Nuage Residential Contracts Short-form PD-R LOCATION: Located at 5817 Big Oak Lane DEVELOPER: Nuage Residential Contractors P.O. Box 250 Sweet Home, AR 72164 SURVEYOR: Brooks Surveying 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.25 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District ALLOWED USES: Retail PROPOSED ZONING: PD-R PROPOSED USE: Single-family VARIANCE/WAIVERS: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT’S STATEMENT: The property was rezoned from R-2, Single-family to C-3, General Commercial District on May 15, 1990, by the adoption of Ordinance No. 15,868 by the Little Rock Board of Directors. The applicant is now proposing to rezone the site from C-3, General Commercial District to Planned Development Residential to allow the construction of a single-family home. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5304-A 2 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a grass lot and is located with single-family homes on each side. The site is located across from an office warehouse building which has frontage on Geyer Springs Road. The area southeast of Big Oak Lane is primarily single-family. The area to the north and southwest is primarily non-residential with the businesses fronting on Geyer Springs Road and/or West 65th Street. Big Oak Lane on the north side is constructed with curb and gutter, no sidewalk. The frontage on the south side has no curb, gutter or sidewalk. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area property owners. All property owners located within 200 feet of the site along with the Wakefield Neighborhood Association and Southwest Little Rock United for Progress were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: No comment. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available to this site. Entergy: Entergy does not object to this proposal. A single phase power line exists along the front of the property which should not interfere with the construction of the new residence. Contact Entergy in advance regarding future service requirements to the structure and future facilities locations as this project proceeds. CenterPoint Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: 1. All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5304-A 3 2. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all connections including metered connections off the private fire system. Fire Department: No comment. Parks and Recreation: No comment received. County Planning: No comment. Rock Region Metro: The area is currently served by METRO on Route 22 at Geyer Springs Rd. The area is part of our future plans for local service and service enhancements. We have no comments on this development. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Building Code: No comment. Planning Division: This request is located in the 65th Street East Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Commercial (C) for this property. The commercial category includes a broad range of retail and wholesale sales of products, personal and professional services, and general business activities. Commercial activities vary in type and scale, depending on the trade area that they serve. The applicant has applied for a rezoning from C-3, General Commercial District to PDR (Planned Development Residential District) to allow for the construction of a single-family house on this site. Master Street Plan: Big Oak Lane is a Local Street on the Master Street Plan. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Local Streets that are abutted by non-residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes are considered as “Commercial Streets”. A Collector design standard is used for Commercial Streets. This street may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes shown in the immediate vicinity. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (September 16, 2015) The applicant was not present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant was requesting to rezone the site to PD-R to allow the construction of a new single-family home on the property. Staff stated the property was currently November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5304-A 4 zoned C-3, General Commercial District which did not allow single-family. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: There were no items raised at the September 16, 2015, Subdivision Committee meeting in need of addressing via a revised site plan. The applicant is requesting to rezone the property from C-3, General Commercial District to Planned Development Residential to allow the construction of a new single-family home on this currently vacant lot. The home is proposed with a setback of 27-feet for the front yard, 14-feet for the eastern side yard and 30-feet for the western side yard. The rear yard setback is indicated at 30-feet. The setbacks are more than adequate to meet the typical minimum standards for residentially zoned property. The site plan as presented does not include the placement of fencing or accessory structures. The applicant is requesting the future homeowner be allowed fencing and accessory structures as typically allowed per the R-2, Single-family Zoning District. The applicant is also requesting the allowance of home occupations as allowed in the residential zoning districts. Staff is supportive of the request. The applicant is seeking to rezone the site to allow for construction of a new single-family home on this vacant lot. Although there are non-residential uses located in the area this area also has a large number of single-family homes located to the south and southeast of this site. There have been very few new homes constructed in this area in the past several years but there are very few vacant lots in this area to build on. Staff does not feel the rezoning to PD-R to allow for construction of a new home will have any adverse impact on this area. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 8, 2015) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had failed to notify property owners as required by the Commission’s by-laws. Staff presented a recommendation of deferral of the item to the November 5, 2015, public hearing. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5304-A 5 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 5, 2015) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the variance request to allow advanced grading of the entire site with the requests for a grading permit for the first phase. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: F FILE NO.: Z-6532-G NAME: Lot 2 Chenal Heights Addition Long-form PD-R LOCATION: Located East of Chenal Valley Drive, South of Chenal Heights Circle DEVELOPER: Larry Crain Crain Family Holdings, LLC 17300 Chenal Parkway, Suite 330 Little Rock, AR 72211 ARCHITECT: EV Studio design@evstudio.com Denver, CO 303.670.7242 SURVEYOR: White-Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 38.23 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF CURRENT ZONING: PD-R ALLOWED USES: Age Restricted - Elderly Housing PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD-R PROPOSED USE: Age Restricted - Elderly Housing VARIANCE/WAIVERS: A variance from the City’s Land Alteration Ordinance to allow grading of future phases with the development of the first phase. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-G 2 BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 18,163 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on December 20, 1999, rezoned the site from R-2 and MF-18 to PD-R to allow the establishment of a Planned Residential Development titled Arkansas Teachers Retirement Village – Long-form PD-R. The proposal included the rezoning of 71.9 acres from R-2 and MF-18 to PD-R to allow for the development of the Arkansas Teachers Retirement Village, a stepped-care retirement facility. The development would house retired persons with facilities including independent living, assisted living, skilled nursing facilities and Alzheimer facilities. A single access point from Chenal Valley Drive was proposed, with a fire lane access at the southwest corner of the property. The proposed site plan indicated a large amount of green space, which was to be undisturbed, along with a proposed lake, walking trails and a lakeside pavilion. In March of 2002, the Arkansas Teachers Retirement System decided to reevaluate the project and did not develop the site as proposed. ATRS decided to proceed with excavating to the finished grade indicated and approved on the site grading plan, extending sewer lines to the site, drainage construction, seeding and erosion control, power and telephone utility crossing the site were installed underground and no additional trees were to be removed from the site except those necessary to install utilities. A restoration plan was submitted to the City for approval. The applicant adhered to City’s requirements in the restoration of the site and the developer’s obligations were met. A proposal was reviewed and recommended for approval by the Little Rock Planning Commission at their August 26, 2004, Public Hearing to allow two of the indicated lots to develop with the retirement village concept. The applicant proposed the development of the site with eight individual lots through a preliminary plat in conjunction with the request to revise the PD-R zoning. The applicant indicated Lot 2 would be developed as an assisted living facility. Proposed Lot 8 was indicated for garden style patio homes. The applicant also indicated all uses would remain similar to the multi-unit residential retirement facility as approved on the original PD-R. The request was approved by the Little Rock Board of Directors on October 5, 2004, by the adoption of Ordinance No. 19,195. Lot 8 has not developed. Ordinance No. 19,220 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on November 1, 2004, revised the previously approved PD-R to allow a nursing and rehabilitation center to locate on Lot 6. Chenal Nursing and Rehabilitation Center proposed a 114-bed skilled nursing facility. The development included 90 staff positions which included Arkansas Hospice Staff. October 17, 2006, Ordinance No. 19,611 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on October 17, 2006, approved a revision to the PD-R for Lot 6 to increase the number of beds allowed in the nursing home facility from 114 to 140. The site plan included the November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-G 3 placement of 93 parking spaces to serve the facility. There were no other changes to the previously approved PD-R proposed. An item to allow the development of this site (Lot 8) with single-family development of attached and detached homes was withdrawn at the Commission’s January 14, 2010, public hearing. The proposal did not comply with the covenants issued on this site and could not receive approval of the persons having oversight of the covenants. Ordinance No. 20,299 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on August 2, 2010, allowed the development of 18.47 acres located at the northwest corner of Chenal Valley Drive and Chenal Heights Drive as a gated residential neighborhood with 109-units of multi-family elderly housing. The development was proposed to be enclosed by a six foot tall wall/fence with eight foot columns. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT’S STATEMENT: The applicant is requesting approval of a site plan to allow the development of 241-units of age restricted housing. The site plan includes the placement of 78-buildings each with two (2) to three (3) units. The buildings are proposed with front and rear loaded garages. The development is proposed in three phases. Access to the site is proposed as gated entry from Chenal Valley Dries as well as Chenal Heights Drive. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is a vacant site and most of the interior trees were cleared as a part of the original approval. The applicant did replant several interior trees and reseed the site as a part of the restoration plan. A regional detention facility is located near Chenal Valley Drive. The nursing home and the assisted living facility are complete and occupied. Northwest of the site is a City of Little Rock Fire Station. South of the site is the Village at Rahling Road Shopping Center. West of the site are two multi-family developments fronting Chenal Valley Drive. Chenal Valley Drive has been constructed to Master Street Plan standard with curb and gutter. There is not a sidewalk in place along the property frontage. Chenal Heights Drive and Chenal Heights Circle have been constructed with curb and gutter. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area residents. All owners of property located within 200-feet of the site along with the Villages of Wellington Property Owners Association were notified of the public hearing. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-G 4 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. A turnaround should be provided at the end of Chenal Heights Circle to be at least 80 feet in length and the same width as the street. 2. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps should be installed from the existing sidewalk on Chenal Valley Drive to the proposed sidewalk adjacent to the private street in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code. 3. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 4. The private street should have a concrete apron at Chenal Valley Drive per City Ordinance. 5. Due to the number of units, the private street should be named and the units addressed off that street name. 6. The street designation in Chenal Heights Circle should be changed to "Cove" or "Lane". 7. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other than residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. A variance is being requested to grade the entire development with construction of Phase 1. 8. Stormwater Detention Ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan. Does the existing detention pond provide detention for the existing developed properties adjacent to Chenal Heights Drive? 9. Provide a Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Section 29-186 (e). 10. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES stormwater permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 11. Streetlights are required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock code. Provide plans for approval to Traffic Engineering. Streetlights must be installed prior to platting/certificate of occupancy. Contact Traffic Engineering 501.379.1813, Greg Simmons, for more information. 12. Provide width and location of proposed access easements. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-G 5 13. Hauling of fill material on or off site over municipal streets and roads requires approval prior to a grading permit being issued. Contact Public Works Traffic Engineering at 621 S. Broadway, 501.379.1805, Travis Herbner, for more information. 14. The final plat should show the streets and drainage improvements to be private. 15. The waste collection is proposed to be private. Due to the proposed design of the streets and alleys, City of Little Rock collection trucks cannot maneuver within the development and service cannot be provided in the future if desired. 16. Turn around must be provided for a SU-30 vehicle attempting to enter development. A stacking distance of 30-feet from pavement must also be provided. 17. Provide a letter prepared by a registered engineer certifying the sight distance at the intersection(s) comply with 2004 AASHTO Green Book standards. 18. Damage to public and private property due to hauling operations or operation of construction related equipment from a nearby construction site shall be repaired by the responsible party prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 19. The owner and/or manager of each multi-family residence of 100 or more dwelling units shall provide recycling and encourage participation by the tenants, renters, or owners of each unit. Contact Melinda Glasgow at 501.371.4646 for more information. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if sewer service is required for this project. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for additional information. Entergy: Entergy GIS Maps indicate a 3-phase underground line running along the eastern side of Chenal Heights Circle then extending west to a 3-phase pad transformer serving Emerius Corp. Entergy will require a 10-foot easement across the property of the PRD for any existing lines where one does not exist. Care should be used when digging. Please notify Entergy in advance for service requirements for the development. Center-Point Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-G 6 Central Arkansas Water: 1. All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. 2. Please submit plans for water facilities and/or fire protection system to Central Arkansas Water for review. Plan revisions may be required after additional review. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of water facilities and/or fire service. Approval of plans by the Arkansas Department of Health Engineering Division and the Little Rock Fire Department is required. 3. This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. 4. If there are facilities that need to be adjusted and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. That work would be done at the expense of the developer. 5. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). 6. A capital investment charge based on the size of meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. Fire Department: Fire hydrants per code, maintain access, 26-foot drive lanes, 2-ways to enter and exit the development. By Phase II you need to have 2-ways to enter and exit. County Planning: No comment. CATA: CATA has reviewed the plans submitted by your office on the above referenced area. The area is currently served by CATA at Cantrell and Taylor Loop Roads approximately one and a half miles away. The development consists of a gated community with multiple units. CATA has no current plans at this time for this area. CATA requests consideration for long range use plans along Rahling Road to consider pullouts and sidewalks there. Parks and Recreation: No comment received. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-G 7 F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Building Code: Project is subject to full commercial plan review approval prior to issuance of a building permit. For information on submittal requirements and the review process, contact a commercial plans examiner: Curtis Richey at 501.371.4724; crichey@littlerock.org or Mark Alderfer at 501.371.4875; malderfer@littlerock.org. Planning Division: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Residential High Density (RH) and Residential Low Density (RL) for this property. The Residential High Density category provides for residential development of more than twelve (12) dwelling units per acre. Residential Low Density allows for single family homes at densities not to exceed 6-dwelling units per acre. Such residential development is typically characterized by conventional single family homes, but may also include patio or garden homes and cluster homes, provided that the density remain less than 6-units per acre. The applicant has applied for a rezoning from PDR (Planned Development Residential) to PDR (Planned Development Residential) to allow for the construction of attached residential units (3 or 4 units per building) for elder population on this site. Master Street Plan: Chenal Heights Circle is a Local Street on the Master Street Plan. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Local Streets that are abutted by non-residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes are considered as “Commercial Streets”. A Collector design standard is used for Commercial Streets. This street may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. Bicycle Plan: There are no bike routes shown in the immediate vicinity. Landscape: No comment. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 27, 2014) Mr. Larry Crain and Mr. Tim Daters of White-Daters and Associates were present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the development stating there were a number of outstanding technical issues associated with the request. Staff requested Mr. Crain and Mr. Daters provide the proposed construction materials of the units, the maximum building height, the proposed building elevations and any proposed fencing material. Staff questioned if a development sign would be located on Chenal Valley Drive and the proposed height and area of any signage to be placed identifying the site. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-G 8 Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated a turnaround was to be provided at the end of Chenal Heights Circle. Staff stated any curb, gutter or sidewalk should be repaired prior to occupancy. Staff stated the private street should be constructed with a concrete apron on Chenal Valley Drive. Staff questioned the limits proposed for advanced grading. Staff stated the final plat for the lot should include the streets and drainage as private. Staff noted the comments from the various other agencies. There were no more issues for discussion. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan addressing a number of issues raised at the August 27, 2014, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has provided the proposed construction materials, the building heights, the fencing materials and the proposed building elevations. The development is proposed in three (3) phases. 76-units are proposed in the first phase, 78-units in the second phase and 87-units in the final phase for a total of 241-units. The units are proposed as age restricted duplex and triplex buildings. The age limit will be in compliance with Federal Regulations which require eighty percent (80%) of the residences be occupied by at least one (1) person who is fifty-five (55) years of age or older. The site plan notes 37-front loaded triplexes, 1-front loaded duplex, 42-rear loaded triplexes and 2-rear loaded duplexes. The construction materials include brick, stone, hardi-board siding and architectural shingled roofs. The buildings are proposed with a maximum building height of 30-feet. Most of the buildings are intended to be single level structures but according to the applicant some of the units may include a second level. The clubhouse maximum height is 35-feet and will include two (2) levels. All of the units are proposed with an attached garage. A portion of the garages will load from the private street with the remaining loading from a rear alley. The building envelopes are proposed 65-feet by 96-feet and 55-feet by 100-feet. The units average roughly 1,600 square feet of heated and cooled space. 31.4-percent of the site is proposed with open space. Internal streets are proposed 26-feet in width. Garbage collection cannot be provided within the development by the City of Little Rock solid waste department due to the proposed street design and configuration. The City collection vehicles cannot maneuver with the current street design and alley dead-ends. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-G 9 A single development sign is proposed on Chenal Valley Drive. The sign is proposed five (5) feet in height and eight (8) feet long for a total sign area of 40-square feet. The zoning ordinance typically allows signs six (6) feet in height and twenty-four (24) square feet in area for multi-family developments. Staff is general supportive of the request but the applicant has not addressed all staff’s concerns related to a number of the technical issues. The applicant has not addressed staff’s concerns related to Chenal Heights Circle. Since the street is a public street, a turnaround for SU-30 vehicles must be provided at the end of Chenal Heights Circle prior to entering the gate. In addition the gated entrance on Chenal Valley Drive must be designed for a SU-30 vehicle to turn around. The fencing on the streets must be removed out of the right-of-way and not located within the 50-foot sight triangle. Sidewalk must be constructed from Chenal Valley Drive into the proposed development. The applicant must provide grading plan to show area to be disturbed. The applicant must also provide a letter to certify the sight distance of the proposed driveway location complies with AASHTO standards. Contact Nat Banihatti at 501.379.1818 for sight distance requirements. Based on unresolved issues staff cannot support the request. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on the current site plan staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 18, 2014) The applicant was present. There was one registered objector present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request dated September 17, 2014, requesting deferral of the item to the October 30, 2014, public hearing. Staff stated the applicant had indicated additional time is needed to work with staff and the neighborhoods concerning the proposed development. Staff stated the deferral request would require a by-law waiver with regard to the late deferral request. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the by-law waiver with regard to the late deferral request. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The item was previously deferred to allow the applicant and the Chenal Design Review Committee (DRC) to review the plan and allow the DRC to offer some form of November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-G 10 agreement with the overall development concept. The applicant has stated they have not reached a formal agreement with the Chenal Design Review Committee but is requesting the item be moved forward since the items related to the DRC are not items the Commission is reviewing or approving. According to the applicant the site plan with regard to access and circulation will not vary from the plan approved by this Commission. The applicant has indicated minor modifications may be required to satisfy the DRC but the substance of the development will not change. The previous staff recommendation was that of denial. After publication of the agenda the applicant and staff worked through staff’s concerns related to the technical issues associated with the site development. The applicant has addressed staff’s concerns related to the access for all vehicle types from Chenal Heights Circle and has agreed to relocate fencing as requested by staff in the staff analysis. Sidewalks will be provided and a sketch grading plan was submitted to staff for review and approval. Based on the applicant addressing staff’s concerns related to the site development staff now supports the application request. Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Staff recommends approval of the advanced grading variance subject to all disturbed area being seeded and vegetation established prior to approval of the certificate of occupancy on the first building structure. Erosion controls must be maintained in the advanced graded area until that area is permanently stabilized. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 30, 2014) Mr. Larry Crain was present representing the request. There was one registered objector present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Staff also presented a recommendation of approval of the advanced grading variance subject to all disturbed area being seeded and vegetation established prior to approval of the certificate of occupancy on the first building structure. Erosion controls must be maintained in the advanced graded area until that area is permanently stabilized. Mr. Larry Crain addressed the Commission on the merits of his request. He stated the development was for a three phased age restricted housing development. He stated each phase would contain 75 units. He stated the development would comply with all requirements imposed by the Chenal Design Review Committee. He stated his desire was to receive zoning approval prior to expending funds to develop the formal site plan, building elevations and layout. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-G 11 Mr. Cliff McKinney stated the development would go before a full review of the Chenal Design Review committee prior to the request for any building permits from the City. He stated the developer was well aware of the restrictive covenants for the property and would fully comply with these covenants. He stated the developer desired to move forward and not wait for the details of structure design and layout which were items this Commission did not review or approve. Mr. Bill Spivey addressed the Commission on behalf of Deltic Timber Corporation. He stated Deltic was the original grantors of the property to Arkansas Teachers Retirement. He stated Deltic was not opposed to development of the property. He stated their concern was if the development would comply with the design criteria. He stated he could not say in complying with the design criteria there would be no changes required of the site plan. He stated he could not tell the Commission this was the final site plan. He stated the details of the plan had not been submitted for review by Deltic therefore they could not comment. He stated the Commission typically reviewed items effectively and efficiently and he did not want the Commission to be forced to review a second site plan due to changes which may be required based on the review by the Design Review Committee. He stated staff had little flexibility when making changes to site plans. He stated the Villas at Chenal went through a similar process for approval. He stated at the time the Villas was approved the Design Review Committee had all the information needed to provide a formal recommendation of support. He stated this was not the case for Mr. Crain’s application. He requested the Commission defer the item to allow the Design Review Committee time to work with Mr. Crain and develop a plan which would most likely be the final development plan for the site. Mr. McKinney stated the developer was willing to work out the details with the Design Review Committee at the time that was appropriate. He stated the items the Design Review Committee would approve were not items the Commission was reviewing or approving. He stated the Commission’s approval was one step in a much larger process. Commissioner Berry stated the Commission typically did not get involved in the enforcement of private restrictions or covenants. He stated the Commission had its role which was to serve the public and not enforce private restrictions. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for approval of the item, as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 10 ayes 0 noes and 1 absent. STAFF UPDATE: This item is being returned to the Commission for review and approval by the Little Rock Board of Directors. At the Little Rock Board of Directors meeting on June 16, 2015, the Board of Directors referred this item back to the Planning Commission on the November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-G 12 recommendation of staff. The applicant had submitted a revised site plan to be reviewed by the Board of Directors that differed from the site plan approved by the Planning Commission. Section 36-454 of the Little Rock Code of Ordinances states the Board shall not consider an application that has been modified by the applicant to a design other than that reviewed by the Commission. The applicant is seeking review and approval by the Planning Commission on the proposed revised site plan. The plan has eliminated the three (3) unit buildings and reduced to total number of units. The revised site plan includes 104 buildings containing 208 units of two (2) and three (3) bedroom age restricted apartments. The applicant has indicated the buildings will be single story buildings. The development is proposed in three (3) phase. A secondary access to Chenal Heights Circle will be completed in the second phase. The site plan indicates 37 buildings will be constructed in the first phase along with the clubhouse, 31 buildings in the second phase and 36 buildings in the final phase. (each building contains 2 units) Each of the buildings will have a minimum driveway length of 20-feet. A note on the site plan states there is a minimum building setback of 30-feet. The minimum side to side building distance is stated at 15-feet. The typical side to side building distance is stated at 20-feet. The minimum rear to rear building distance is stated at 30-feet. The internal street is proposed as a private street with a minimum pavement width of 24-feet. The cul de sac radii is indicated at 80-feet. The driveway entering the proposed subdivision is indicated as a divided entrance with a key pad. The plan notes the turnaround will accommodate a SU 30 vehicle. A sidewalk will be extended from Chenal Valley Drive to the entrance of the proposed development. The applicant has indicated the exterior building materials will be brick, stone and precast. The roof is proposed with architectural asphalt shingles. Each unit is proposed with 1,698 square feet of heated and cooled space, 451 square feet of garage space and a 157 square foot covered porch. The plan includes both wood fencing and decorative iron fencing. The minimum fence height is six (6) feet. A single development sign is proposed on Chenal Valley Drive. The sign is proposed five (5) feet in height and eight (8) feet long for a total sign area of 40-square feet. The zoning ordinance typically allows signs six (6) feet in height and twenty-four (24) square feet in area for multi-family developments. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage plan. The plan includes advanced grading of the site with the construction of the first phase. The plan includes grading to the property lines to maintain a 3:1 slope. Portions of the area to the south are zoned for commercial and office use. The remaining area and to the west is zoned R-2, Single-family. Once the grading activities are complete the applicant will reestablish vegetation in the areas adjacent to the residentially zoned properties. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-G 13 Staff continues to support the request. Staff is also in support of the advanced grading request. This item was approved by the Commission On October 30, 2014. The item was then forwarded to the Board of Directors for final action at their December 2, 2014, public hearing. The item was deferred a number of times by the Board of Directors awaiting approval by the Chenal Design Review Committee (DRC). As of date this approval has not been received by the applicant. Based on the previous Board of Directors action staff feels the applicant should have approval of the Chenal DRC prior to the Commission hearing and approving the revised site plan. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 16, 2015) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item requesting a deferral of the item to the August 27, 2015, public hearing to allow staff additional time to review information submitted by the applicant. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant has submitted a revised site plan and sketch grading plan to staff. The revised plans somewhat address staff’s concerns previously raised related to the sketch grading and drainage plan. Staff is continuing to review the item submitted and will provide a recommendation at the Commission’s August 27, 2015, public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 27, 2015) The applicant was present. There was one registered objector present. Staff presented the item stating they felt the item should be deferred to allow the applicant additional time to seek approval of the Chenal Design Review Committee. Staff stated the item was approved by the Commission in October of 2014 and was forwarded to the Board of Directors for final action. Staff stated the Board of Directors would not hear the request due to the applicant not having approval by the Design Review Committee. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a revised site plan to staff which the Board of Directors could not hear due to the Board not be able to consider a request that differed from the request and approval by the Planning Commission. Staff stated they felt there would be additional modifications to the site plan which would then require the Commission to act on different site plan. Staff requested the Commission defer the request until the applicant had an approved site plan from the Design Review Committee. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-G 14 Mr. Cliff McKinney requested the Commission hear the request. He stated he and his client felt it was time to move the item forward for final resolution. He stated he and his client had worked with the review committee and felt they were making progress. He stated the plan presently before the Commission could be constructed with little to no modifications. Commissioner Berry stated he was the Commissioner who had stated with the original submission that the item should move forward. He stated he did not feel the Commission’s role was to enforce private restrictions. He stated his fear was if the plan was approved and there were modifications the Commission would be back reviewing and approving a different site plan. A motion was made to defer the request to the October 8, 2015, public hearing. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff in an attempt to address comments raised by the Chenal Architectural Control Committee. The revised plan indicates the development of 90 buildings each containing two (2) units. The units are proposed as one and two (2) story buildings. The plan includes a clubhouse/administrative office to serve the development. The development is proposed in three (3) phases. The first phase includes the construction of 38 buildings for a total of 76 units. The second phase allows the construction of 25 buildings and 50 units and the final phase includes the construction of 27 buildings for a total of 54 units. The units are one and two (2) story buildings. The two (2) story buildings will have walk-out basements. From the view of the street the units will appear as a single level building but in the rear the buildings will have the second level. Building setbacks are indicated at 25-feet from the back of curb. There is a 20-foot building separation between buildings, side yard separation and a 15-foot rear yard building setback. The site plan indicates several retaining walls scattered around the site. The site plan notes all walls will be less than 15-feet in height. A decorative fence is proposed along Chenal Valley Drive. The fence will be a maximum of six (6) feet in height. Along the remaining perimeters fencing will be installed as a six (6) foot solid screening fence or decorative fencing also limited to six (6) feet in height. The site plan indicates the placement of a detention facility with access near the clubhouse/administrative office. The detention will be sized to accommodate the stormwater detention needs of the development. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6532-G 15 Staff continues to support the development plan as presented by the applicant. The applicant is working with the Architectural Control Committee to resolve their concerns. As previously recommended staff feels the ACC should provide a recommendation on the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 8, 2015) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the developer had not received approval from the Chenal Architectural Review Committee. Staff presented a request for deferral of the item to the November 5, 2015, public hearing. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 5, 2015) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: LU15-19-02 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment – Chenal Planning District Location: West of northwest corner of Chenal Parkway and Rahling Road Request: Residential Low Density to Office Source: Tim Daters, White Daters The applicant has requested via letter on October 23, 2015 that the item be deferred to the December 17, 2015 agenda. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 5, 2015) The item was placed on the consent agenda for deferral to December 17, 2015. By unanimous vote - 11 for, 0 against the consent agenda was approved. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 1.1 FILE NO.: Z-5936-N Owner: Deltic Timber Corporation Applicant: Tim Daters, White-Daters and Associates Location: West of the northwest corner of Chenal Parkway and Rahling Road Area: 16.73 Acres Request: Rezone from R-2 and OS to O-2 and OS Purpose: Future office development and open space Existing Use: Undeveloped SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North – Golf course and single family residences; zoned R-2 and MF-6 South – Floodway, single family residences and undeveloped property; zoned OS, R-2 and POD East – Undeveloped property, multifamily, office and commercial uses; zoned PD-R, C-3, C-2 and O-3 West – Single family residences and golf course; zoned MF-18 and R-2 A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1. Proposed changes to the intersection of Founders Drive and Chenal Parkway are not reviewed nor approved with approval of this application. B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT: The site is not located on a Rock Region Metro bus route. C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION: All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site were notified of the public hearing. There was no established neighborhood association to notify. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 1.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5936-N 2 D. LAND USE ELEMENT: This request is located in the Chenal Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Residential Low Density (RL) for this property. Residential Low Density is for single-family homes at densities no greater than six dwelling units per acre. The applicant has applied for a rezoning from R-2 (Single-Family Residential) to O-2 (Office and Institutional District) to allow for future office development of this site. There is an accompanying item to amend the Land Use Plan to Office (O) – Office allows services provided directly to consumers as well as general offices, which support more basic economic activities. Master Street Plan: Chenal Parkway and Rahling Road are shown as a Principal Arterials on the Master Street Plan. A Principal Arterial is to serve thorough traffic and to connect major traffic generators or activity centers within the urbanized area. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Chenal Parkway and Rahling Road since they are Arterials. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. BICYCLE PLAN: A Class I Bike Path is shown both Chenal Parkway and Rahling Road. A Bike Path is to be a paved path physically separate for the use of bicycles. Additional right-of-way or an easement is recommended. Nine-foot paths are recommended to allow for pedestrian use as well (replacing the sidewalk). E. STAFF ANALYSIS: Deltic Timber Corporation, owner of the 16.73 acre property located west of the northwest corner of Chenal Parkway and Rahling Road, is requesting to rezone the property from “R-2’ Single Family District and “OS” Open Space District to “O-2” Office and Institutional District and “OS” Open Space District. The rezoning is proposed to allow for future office development and open space. The areas of rezoning are as follows: Area 1 – R-2 to OS ( 1.92 acres) Area 2 – R-2 to O-2 (13.35 acres) Area 3 – OS to O-2 ( 1.04 acres) Area 4 – OS to O-2 ( 0.42 acres) November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 1.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5936-N 3 The property is currently undeveloped and mostly tree-covered. A golf course and single family residences (zoned R-2 and MF-6) are located to the north. Floodway, single family residences and undeveloped property (zoned OS, R-2 and POD) are located to the south. Undeveloped property, a bank and multifamily development are located to the east (zoned C-3, O-3 and PD-R), with a large commercial development (zoned C-2) across Rahling Road further east. Single family residences and a golf course (zoned MF-18 and R-2) are located to the west. The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as Residential Low Density (RL) and Park/Open Space (PK/OS). A proposed Land Use Plan Amendment to Office (O) and Park/Open Space (PK/OS) is a separate item on this agenda. Staff is supportive of the requested O-2 and OS rezoning. Staff views the request as reasonable. Staff feels that the proposed rezoning represents an appropriate land use pattern for this area. The request basically shifts the existing OS strip to the north and west, adjacent to the existing Bretagne Circle single family development and golf course. The OS strip will be widened to 100 feet adjacent to the single family lots, and will be 50 feet in width adjacent to the golf course. The proposed O-2 zoning provides for an adequate transition from the C-3 zoned property along Rahling Road to the single family development and zoning to the north and west. Staff believes rezoning this property to O-2 and OS will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested O-2 and OS rezoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 5, 2015) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant requested this application be deferred to the December 17, 2015 agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the December 17, 2015 agenda. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: Z-9088 Name: Hope Rises Group Home – Special Use Permit Location: 1201 East 9th Street Owner: Rainwater Property, LLC Applicant: Kim Roxburgh, Executive Director Hope Rises Proposal: A Special Use Permit is requested to allow a group home to be operated in the single family residence located on the R-4 zoned property at 1201 East 9th Street. A. Public Notification: All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and the Hanger Hill and East Little Rock Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. B. Public Works Issues: No Comments. C. Fire Department Issues: 1. Need smoke detectors and CO detectors in each bedroom upstairs. 2. Need two (2) smoke detectors and one (1) CO detector in upstairs common area. 3. Need vent-a-hood with fire suppression system. 4. Need one (1) fire extinguisher upstairs, one (1) downstairs and one (1) K-type extinguisher for kitchen. 5. Need smoke detection downstairs and one (1) CO detector downstairs. D. Staff Analysis: The R-4 zoned property at 1201 East 9th Street is occupied by a two-story frame single family residential structure. The property is located at the southeast corner of East 9th and College Streets. There is a two-car wide unpaved drive from College Street at the southwest corner of the property. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-9088 2 A two-car carport is located within the rear yard area. There is parking for four (4) vehicles. An alley is located along the rear (south) property line. A large scrap metal business (zoned PD-I and I-3) is located to the north, across East 9th Street, with single family residences to the northwest. A single family residence and undeveloped lots are located to the south. Single family residences and mixed industrial uses are located to the east. A liquor store (zoned C-3) is located across College Street to the west, with single family residences to the southwest. The applicant, Hope Rises, is requesting a Special Use Permit to allow operation of a group home within the residential structure on the R-4 zoned property at 1201 East 9th Street. The applicant proposes the group home for up to eight (8) female residents who are disabled and recovering from alcohol/substance abuse or have a mental health disability. There will be one (1) live-in house manager. The applicant notes that some program activities will be provided to the residents. Program activities at the location will be as follows: risk/needs assessment; case-management; support groups (i.e., trauma healing, substance abuse); classes (i.e. self- esteem, health and wellness, job readiness, and parenting); drug-screens; organized physical activities (i.e., yoga and cycling); and, employment assistance. Following is the definition of a group home as found in Section 36-3 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance: “Group home means a facility that does not fall within another defined facility category within this section and which provides housing in a family-like environment to more than four (4) handicapped individuals. This use is permitted only as a special use as designated in this chapter.” The applicant notes that the total area of the residential structure is 2,375 square feet. The applicant proposes to house the residents in four (4) bedrooms as follows: Bedroom 1 – 181 square feet – 3 occupants – upstairs Bedroom 2 – 152 square feet – 2 occupants – upstairs Bedroom 3 – 232 square feet – 3 occupants – upstairs Bedroom 4 – 130 square feet – 1 occupant (live-in house manager) - downstairs November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-9088 3 Section 8-406(a) of the City’s Buildings and Building Regulations Ordinance (minimum area per dwelling unit) requires 150 square feet for the first occupant and 100 square feet for each additional occupant. Therefore, the minimum area for a residence occupied by nine (9) persons (8 residents plus 1 manager) is 950 square feet. As noted earlier the residential structure contains 2,375 square feet. Section 8-406(b) (minimum area per bedroom) requires 70 square feet for the first occupant and 50 square feet for each additional occupant. The occupancy for the bedrooms as proposed conforms to this ordinance requirement. Section 36-54(e)(4) of the City’s Zoning Ordinance provides the following provisions, as adopted by the Board of Directors on September 6, 2005: 1. family care facility, group care facility, group home, parolee or probationer housing facility, rooming, lodging and boarding facility. (a) Separation, spacing and procedural requirements for family care facilities, group care facilities, group homes, parolee or probationer housing facilities and rooming, lodging and boarding facilities will be determined by the Planning Commission so as not to adversely impact the surrounding properties and neighborhood. Unless the commission determines that a different area is more appropriate, a neighborhood shall be defined as an area incorporating all properties lying within one thousand five hundred (1,500) feet of the site for which the permit is requested. (b) There shall be a presumption that a special use permit for a group home of 5, 6, 7, or 8 handicapped persons will be granted if all ordinance requirements are met, except that individuals whose tenancy would constitute a direct threat to the health or safety of other individuals of whose tenancy would result in substantial physical damage to the property of others shall not be allowed in such a home. (c) Issues that the planning commission will consider during its review of a family care facility, group care facility, group home, parolee or probationer housing November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-9088 4 facility, or rooming, lodging and boarding facility include, but are not limited to: 1. Spacing of existing similar facilities. 2. Existing zoning and land use patterns. 3. The maximum number of individuals proposed to be served, the number of employees proposed and the type of services being proposed. 4. The need and provision for readily accessible public or quasi-public transportation. 5. Access to needed support services such as social services agencies, employment agencies and medical service providers. 6. Availability of adequate on-site parking. (d) The Fire Marshal must approve the use of any structure proposed as a family care facility, group care facility, group home, parolee or probation housing facility or rooming, lodging and boarding facility. (e) Family care facilities, group care facilities, group homes and parole or probation housing facilities shall be operated within any and all applicable licensing and procedural requirements established by the State of Arkansas. The site is not located on a Rock Region METRO bus route. Route #20 (College Station route) runs along College Street two (2) blocks to the south and along East 9th Street one (1) block to the west. Route #12 (East 6th Street Route) run along 6th Street to the north. The Bill of Assurance for this area was recorded in 1870 and is not legible. It likely contains no use restrictions. An area survey conducted by staff revealed no existing similar facilities within 1,500 feet of the subject property. Special Use Permits are not transferable in any manner. Permits cannot be transferred from owner to owner, location to location or use to use. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-9088 5 Staff is supportive of the application for a group home, as proposed by the applicant. Staff views the request as reasonable. The property is zoned R-4 and could contain a duplex structure with up to eight (8) unrelated persons (four (4) per unit) by right. Additionally, as noted in Section 36-54(e)(4) of the code (page 3. of the staff report), there shall be a presumption that a special use permit for a group home of 5 to 8 handicapped persons will be granted if all ordinance requirements are met. Staff believes that is the case with the subject property. Utilizing the parking area in the rear yard area should be sufficient to serve the proposed group home use. The applicant notes that typically none of the residents will have their own vehicle. The manager will utilize one (1) parking space, leaving three (3) for visitors. Staff believes the proposed group home is an appropriate use for this property. E. Subdivision Committee Comment: (October 14, 2015) Kim Roxburgh was present, representing the application. Staff briefly described the proposed group home use. In responses to questions raised by staff, Ms. Roxburgh noted that there would be one (1) live-in house manager and that typically none of the residents would have vehicles. The parking on the site was briefly discussed. Ms. Roxburgh briefly described program activities that would take place at the residence. The minimum area requirements were briefly discussed. Staff noted that an inspection by the Fire Marshall needed to be made prior to the Planning Commission meeting. After the discussion, the Committee forwarded the application to the full Commission for final action. F. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Special Use Permit to allow a group home at 1201 East 9th Street, subject to the following conditions: 1. A maximum of eight (8) handicapped residents will be allowed, with one (1) live-in house manager. 2. Compliance with the Fire Department requirements as noted in paragraph C. of the staff report, prior to occupancy. 3. Compliance with all other requirements as found in Section 36-54(e)(4) of the Code. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-9088 6 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 5, 2015) Kim Roxburgh was present, representing the application. There was one objector present. Staff presented the application with a recommendation of approval. David Garner addressed the Commission in opposition to the application. He stated that he represented the 9th Street Business Group. He explained problems which exist in the neighborhood (homeless, break-ins, etc.). He noted that some new residences have been constructed in the area. He explained that he owns property in the area along East 9th Street. He talked about the current condition of the subject property. Staff noted that Hope Rises does not currently occupy the property. Staff also noted that the applicant notified all property owners within 1,000 feet of the site, more than the 200 foot notification as required. Kim Roxburgh addressed the Commission in support of the application. She explained that the proposed use of the property would be part of the revitalization of Hanger Hill, and noted plans to rehabilitate the residential structure. She explained that the Hope Rises Board of Directors located the residence to be within the Hanger Hill neighborhood, as many of the Board members lived very near or within the neighborhood. She briefly discussed the six-month program associated with the proposed group home. Vice-Chairman Berry asked about the Fair Housing Act and Americans with Disabilities Act with respect to this application. Shawn Overton noted that they do apply based on the fact that the group home is proposed for handicapped individuals. He noted that some of the statements made by Mr. Garner should not be considered by the Commission. There was a motion to approve the application, as recommended by staff. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent. The application was approved. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 3 FILE NO.: Z-9089 Name: Phoenix Recovery Parolee/Probationer Housing Facility – Special Use Permit Location: 104 N. Battery Street Owner: Capitol Development Co., LLC Applicant: Matt Bell Proposal: A Special Use Permit is requested to allow a parolee/probationer housing facility to be operated within the existing multifamily development located on the R-5 zoned property at 104 N. Battery Street. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted a letter to staff on October 21, 2015 requesting this application be deferred to the December 17, 2015 agenda. The applicant notes that he will not be available to attend the November 5, 2015 meeting. Staff supports the deferral request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 5, 2015) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant requested this application be deferred to the December 17, 2015 agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the December 17, 2015 agenda. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: Z-1840-C NAME: Little Rock Racquet Club Parking – Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: #1 Huntington Road OWNER/APPLICANT: Little Rock Athletic Center, LLC./ James Summerlin PROPOSAL: A revision to the previously approved conditional use permit is requested to allow for the addition of more parking on this R-4 zoned site. 1. SITE LOCATION: The Racquet Club is located off of Huntington Road, in Foxcroft. 2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: The Club has been here since the late 1960’s and the neighborhood built around the site beginning at about the same time. Parking has been an issue and the applicant is attempting to address that by adding the new parking. With attention given to properly screening the parking, installation of low-level, directional lighting and addressing drainage issues, the proposed parking expansion should be of benefit to the neighborhood with minimal impact. Notice of the public hearing was sent to all owners of properties within 200 feet of the site. There is no neighborhood association in the area that is registered with the City. However, the Club has met with the Foxcroft Property Owners Association membership. 3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: Access to the Racquet Club site is via a single driveway off of Huntington Road. The site currently has 138 parking spaces. By reconfiguring some of the existing parking and adding the proposed new parking, the site will have 182 parking spaces. 4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS: Site plan must comply with the City’s landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1840-C 2 Screening requirements will need to be met for the vehicular use areas adjacent to street right-of-ways. Provide screening shrubs with an average linear spacing of not less at three (3) feet within the required landscape area. Provide trees with an average linear spacing of not less than thirty (30) feet. A perimeter planting strip is required along any side of a vehicular use area that abuts adjoining property or the right-of-way of any street. This strip shall be at least nine (9) feet wide. One (1) tree and three (3) shrubs or vines shall be planted for every thirty (30) linear feet of perimeter planting strip. Note on the plan that the new 6’ high wood privacy fence will be constructed with its face side directed outward. Eight percent (8%) of the vehicular use area must be designated for green space; this green space needs to be evenly distributed throughout the parking area(s). The minimum size of an interior landscape area shall be one hundred fifty (150) square feet for developments with one hundred fifty (150) or fewer parking spaces. Interior islands must be a minimum of seven and one half (7 1/2) feet in width. Trees shall be included in the interior landscape areas at the rate of one (1) tree for every twelve (12) parking spaces. Any existing landscape or irrigation disturbed by construction shall be repaired or replaced before completion and final acceptance of the project. Note on plan any existing trees or groups of trees that are to remain. Trees selected for preservation shall have the area within the dripline fenced with protective fencing and protected from development activities. Graphically indicate the area to be protected on the plan and provide detail of the protective fencing. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. 5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1. A grading permit in accordance with section 29-186 (c) & (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other than residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1840-C 3 2. A handicap ramp is required to be installed on Huntington Road at in accordance with Sec. 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. 3. Provide a Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan for the additional parking areas per Sec. 29-186 €. 4. On site striping and signage plans must be designed per MUTCD standards. 5. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 6. Damage to public and private property due to hauling operations or operation of construction related equipment from a nearby construction site shall be repaired by the responsible party prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 7. Prior to construction of retaining walls, an engineer's certification of design and plans must be submitted to Public Works for approval. After construction, an as-built certification is required for construction of the retaining wall. 6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS: Little Rock Wastewater: No objection. Entergy: Entergy does not object to this proposal. A three phase power line exists on the west side of the property on the west side of the driveway. A single phase line exists on the east side of the property serving the houses to the east. Neither power line appears to be in conflict with the proposed parking lot expansion plans. Contact Entergy in advance should future service requirements change or facilities locations need adjusting as this project proceeds. Centerpoint Energy: No comment received. AT&T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. If there are facilities that need to be adjusted and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. That work would be done at the expense of the developer. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1840-C 4 Fire Department: Maintain access. Building Codes: No comment. County Planning: No comments. Rock Region METRO: Location is not currently served by Rock Region METRO. No comments. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 14, 2015) The applicant was present. Staff presented the item and noted little additional information was needed. In response to a question from staff, the applicant stated all site lighting would be low-level and directional, aimed away from adjacent residences. The applicant stated the new parking lot would be for employees so there would be less in and out usage. He stated access to the new lot would be through the existing parking lot and the entire site was gated after hours. Public Works Comments were discussed. Staff stated a sketch grading and drainage plan was needed for the additional parking area and a grading permit would be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities on the site. Landscape Comments were presented. Staff noted the importance of properly screening the new parking lot since it was at a higher elevation than the adjacent residence. It was suggested that screening would be better served if placed at the upper level, where the actual parking was proposed rather than at the property line on the lower level. Other Agency Comments were noted. The applicant was advised to submit responses to staff issues by October 21, 2015. The Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission. STAFF ANALYSIS: The Little Rock Racquet Club occupies the 10± acre R-4 zoned property located at #1 Huntington Road. The Club’s ownership consists of a large acreage tract and Lot 118, Foxcroft Addition. The large acreage tract contains the Racquet Clubs facilities consisting of buildings, tennis courts (both open and enclosed), swimming pools and parking lots. The Racquet Club has occupied the property November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1840-C 5 since the late 1960’s and previous CUP’s have allowed for modifications of the facilities on the site over the ensuing years. Lot 118, fronting onto Huntington Road, has remained wooded and undeveloped. The Club is requesting an additional revision to their CUP to allow for the rehabilitation and expansion of the existing parking lots and for the construction of additional parking. Most of the proposed renovation and expansion will occur within the developed, large acreage tract that has historically been used for the Racquet Club. A new 17 space parking lot is now being proposed for development on Lot 118. A single driveway off of Huntington provides access to the Racquet Club property. No new driveway access is being proposed. Access to the new, Lot 118 parking lot will be through the existing Racquet Club parking lot. Two small parking lots containing a total of 14 new spaces are proposed to be constructed near the rear of the Club property, within the perimeter driveway. The main parking lot in front of the Club’s main building is to be reconfigured to create an additional 13 parking spaces. A new driveway off of the main parking lot will provide access to the new 17 space parking lot proposed for Lot 118. Retaining walls will be constructed to accommodate the new Lot 118 parking as well as the reconfigured main parking lot. A 6 foot tall wood privacy fence will be placed on top of the retaining walls to provide screening of the vehicular use areas from the adjacent residences. The buffer area between the parking lots and the street and adjacent residences will be left undisturbed but also planted with vegetation that will screen the retaining walls and fences. An electrical engineer will be retained for lighting design that will be low-level and directed inward, away from adjacent properties. A meeting was held October 21, 2015 at the Club by the Foxcroft Property Owners Association and the proposed plan was discussed with the neighborhood. The Club addressed concerns related to lighting and drainage. The 1968 bill of assurance for Lot 118, Foxcroft Addition contains two provisions that are pertinent to the issue at hand. 1. Use of Land. Lot 118, Foxcroft Addition shall be held, owned and used only as a private parking lot for automobiles for, and in conjunction with, private club facilities. 2. Green Buffer Strip. Trees, grass and shrubbery shall not be removed from that portion of Lot 118 which lies within 35 feet Huntington Road, except for normal cutting and shearing of tall grass and underbrush, and said strip of Lot 118, 35 feet in November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-1840-C 6 width, shall be maintained as an attractive green buffer strip between Huntington Road and the balance of Lot 118. Staff is supportive of the proposed CUP to create additional parking. The applicant has done a good job of addressing screening and lighting concerns to be sensitive to the neighborhood. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested CUP, 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. A lighting design plan is to be prepared by an electrical engineer and all new site lighting is to be low-level and directional, aimed downward and away from adjacent residential properties. 3. All screening fences are to be constructed with the finished side facing outward. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 5, 2015) The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the commission that the applicant had requested withdrawal of the item on October 30, 2015. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved for withdrawal by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: Z-9086 NAME: Phillips Duplexes – Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: 1100 and 1106 Appianway Street OWNER/APPLICANT: Quentin Rhodes/Stanley Phillips PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the construction of a duplex residential structure on each of these R-3 zoned lots. 1. SITE LOCATION: The properties are located on the southwest corner of West 11th Street and Appianway Street. 2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: The property is located in an area of mixed zoning and uses. A charter bus company is located to the north. Vacant lots are located to the west and east. A sheet metal company is located one block to the east, adjacent to the railroad. The properties across Appianway are zoned I-2 Industrial. The C-3 zoned properties south of the site along West 12th Street contain a variety of nonresidential uses; including a liquor store, a church and an auto service business. There is R-4 duplex zoning in the block and new duplexes have been built on the west side of Woodrow, to the west. The immediate neighborhood also contains single family homes and boarded, vacant residential structures. The proposed, in fill two-family residential appears to be compatible with the neighborhood. Notice of the public hearing was sent to all owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site and the Central High, Capitol Hill, Pine to Woodrow and Stephens Area Faith Neighborhood Associations. 3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: Each unit of each duplex is required to have 1.5 parking spaces. The four (4) units require a total of 6 parking spaces. The applicant is proposing to construct 8 parking spaces at the rear of the lots, taking access off of the alley. The applicant will have to widen the alley to a width of 20 feet. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-9086 2 4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS: No Comments. 5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1. A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the intersection of W. 11th St and Appianway Street. 2. The ROW on the site plan does not agree with the lot survey. 3. With parking proposed off the alley, the alley should be paved to a width of 20 ft. from the driveway apron to the south property line. 6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS: Little Rock Wastewater: Sewer available. Separate service required for each lot. Entergy: Entergy does not object to this proposal. Single phase, overhead power lines exist on the north side of the property along 11th Street, and on the west side of the alley on the west side of the property. Neither line appears to be in conflict with the project. Contact Entergy in advance regarding future service requirements to the development and future facilities locations as this project proceeds. Centerpoint Energy: No comment received. AT&T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the Developer's expense. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding the size and location of the water meter. Fire Department: No comment. Building Codes: No comment. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-9086 3 County Planning: No comments. Rock Region METRO: The location is currently served by Route 3 – Rosedale at 12th & Woodrow. It is one of the top 3 ridership routes in Little Rock. This location is also located along our future Bus Rapid Transit line. The current plan does not indicate sidewalks. Sidewalks provide access to the transit route for pedestrians and those with disabilities. We request that sidewalks be provided at this location. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 14, 2015) The applicant was present. Staff stated a cover letter detailing the proposal had not been submitted and additional details were needed on the buildings and dwelling units. Public Works noted the site plan indicated the dedication of right-of-way for West 11th and Appianway which was not required. Staff did note that a 20 foot radial dedication was needed at the corner. Staff stated the alley would need to be paved to a width of 20 feet, from 11th Street to the South property line. Other Agency Comments were noted. The applicant was advised to submit responses to staff issues by October 21, 2015. The Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission. STAFF ANALYSIS: The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow for construction of a duplex residential structure on each of the two (2) R-3 zoned lots located at 1100 and 1106 Appianway Street. The buildings will be one-story in height and will have vinyl clad exteriors with 6:12 pitch hip roof profile with architectural shingles. Each unit within the duplexes will have 1,150 square feet containing three (3) bedrooms each. The buildings will have a 25 foot front setback off of Appianway, a 49 foot rear setbacks and side setbacks of 5 feet and 10 feet. The setbacks meet or exceed the Ordinance requirements. A total 6 parking spaces are required; 1.5 per unit. The applicant is proposing to place 8 spaces at the rear of the site, with access off of the alley. The alley will have to be widened to 20 feet in width from 11th Street to the south property line of the southern duplex. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-9086 4 To staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues. The proposed duplexes appear to be compatible with uses and zoning in the area. This infill residential development is a positive development for the neighborhood. The 1890 plat/bill of assurance for Roots and Coy Addition does not address use issues. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Conditional Use Permit subject to compliance with the comments in Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 5, 2015) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the “staff recommendation” above. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved as recommended by staff, including all staff comments and conditions. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: Z-9087 NAME: #1 Orlé Circle – Accessory Dwelling Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: #1 Orlé Circle OWNER/APPLICANT: Gene Schoonmaker/Byron Holmes PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow an accessory dwelling on this R-2 zoned lot. 1. SITE LOCATION: The lot is located at the corner of Orlé Circle and Mornay Lane, in Chenal Valley. 2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: The Orlé Neighborhood is a gated neighborhood of large, single family residences on private streets. Other homes in the neighborhood are similar in that they utilize a port-cochere with an enclosed courtyard parking area and garage access. In so much as the accessory dwelling will only be used for family members and guests and not rented as a separate dwelling, the proposed use should be compatible with the neighborhood. A letter of approval from the Chenal Valley Architectural Control Committee has been provided by the applicant. Notice of the public hearing was sent to all owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site and the representative for Chenal Valley Properties. 3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: The principle dwelling and accessory dwelling each require one (1) parking space. The proposed garage and driveway provide more than required parking. 4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS: No comments. 5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: No comments. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-9087 2 6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS: Little Rock Wastewater: Sewer available to this site. Entergy: Entergy does not object to this proposal. This area is currently served via an underground power line on the front of the lots. Entergy’s records indicate that this lot is served by underground secondary cable on the southeast corner of the lot. There do not appear to be any conflicts with existing Entergy facilities. Contact Entergy in advance regarding service connections as the project proceeds. Centerpoint Energy: No comment received. AT&T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. A Capital Investment Charge based on the size of meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all connections including metered connections off the private fire system. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding the size and location of the water meter Fire Department: No comment. Building Codes: No comment. County Planning: No comments received. Rock Region METRO: Location is not currently served by Rock Region METRO. No comments. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 14, 2015) The applicant was present. Staff presented the item and noted little additional information was needed. Staff requested a copy of the bill of assurance. The applicant presented a letter of approval from the Chenal Valley Architectural Control Committee. Other Agency Comments were noted. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-9087 3 The Committee determined there were no other issues and forwarded the item to the full Commission. STAFF ANALYSIS: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for construction of an accessory dwelling to be built in connection with a new single family residence to be located on the R-2 zoned lot at #1 Orlé Circle. Orlé is a gated community of large single- family residences located in Chenal. The proposed accessory dwelling is to be located in an accessory structure that is connected to the principal dwelling by a port-cochere. The accessory structure will contain a garage, storage and the accessory dwelling. The accessory dwelling will be used by family members and guests of the homeowners. The structure will be constructed of the same materials as the principal dwelling and will give the appearance of only one structure, with a porte- cochere providing access to a parking courtyard behind the residence. Staff is not aware of any issues. The proposed construction is out of character with other homes in this neighborhood. The Chenal Valley Architectural Control Committee has approved the plans subject to some conditions. Those conditions are particular to the ACC’s approval for this home and are not to be enforced by the City. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested CUP subject to compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in Section 6 of the agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 5, 2015) The applicant’s representative was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff informed the commission that, on November 4, 2015, the applicant had requested deferral of the item to the December 17, 2015 meeting to allow for time to address concerns that had been raised by neighbors. There was no further discussion. A motion was made to waive the commission’s by-laws to accept the late deferral request. That motion passed with a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. The item was then placed on the consent agenda and approved for deferral to the December 17, 2015 meeting by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. Adopted DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION CALENDAR - 2016 SUBDIVISION – SITE PLAN – PLANNED ZONING DEVELOPMENT HEARINGS: Subdivision Filing Date Legal Ad Committee (2) Hearing Date (1) (3) 11-23-15 12-04-15 12-09-15 01-07-16 01-11-16 01-22-16 02-03-16 02-25-16 02-29-16 03-11-16 03-16-16 04-07-16 04-11-16 04-22-16 04-27-16 05-19-16 05-23-16 06-03-16 06-08-16 06-30-16 07-05-16 07-15-16 07-20-16 08-11-16 08-15-16 08-26-16 08-31-16 09-22-16 09-26-16 10-07-16 10-12-16 11-03-16 11-07-16 11-18-16 11-22-16 (Tues) 12-15-16 12-19-16 12-30-16 01-11-17 02-02-17 PLANNING – REZONING – CONDITIONAL USE HEARINGS: Subdivision Filing Date Legal Ad Committee (2) Plans Committee(5) Hearing Date (1) (3) 11-09-15 11-20-15 11-24-15 (Tues.) 11-24-15 (Tues) 12-17-15 12-21-15 12-31-15 01-06-16 01-06-16 01-28-16 02-01-16 02-12-16 02-17-16 02-17-16 03-10-16 03-14-16 03-25-16 03-30-16 03-30-16 04-21-16 04-25-16 05-06-16 05-11-16 05-11-16 06-02-16 06-06-16 06-17-16 06-22-16 06-22-16 07-14-16 07-18-16 07-29-16 08-03-16 08-03-16 08-25-16 08-29-16 09-09-16 09-14-16 09-14-16 10-06-16 10-10-16 11-21-16 01-09-17 10-21-16 12-02-16 01-20-17 10-26-16 12-07-16 01-25-16 10-26-16 12-07-16 01-25-16 11-17-16 01-05-17 02-16-17 AVAILABLE INFORMAL MEETING DATE (to be scheduled as required) Meeting Date (4) 12-03-15 02-11-16 03-24-16 05-05-16 06-16-16 07-28-16 09-08-16 10-20-16 12-01-16 NOTE: (1) All public Hearings shall be held at 4:00 P.M. unless otherwise changed by the Commission. (City Hall, Board Rm) (2) All meetings shall be held at 12:00 P.M. unless changed by the Subdivision Committee. (City Hall, Board Rm) (3) An agenda meeting will be held prior to each public hearing date and will begin at 3:30 P.M. in the Sister Cities Conference Room. (4) All informal meetings shall be held at 3:30 P.M. unless otherwise changed by the Commission. (5) All meetings shall be held at 12:00 NOON unless otherwise changed by the Plans Committee. (723 W . Markham) NOTICE: AN INTERPRETER WILL BE PROVIDED FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED UPON REQUEST. REQUEST SHOULD BE MADE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AT LEAST TWO WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO THE SCHEDULED MEETING DATE. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: MSP15-02 Name: Master Street Plan Amendment Location: Kanis Road, Chenal Downs Blvd. to Walnut Grove Road Request: Modify the design standard to two 10.5 foot lanes with no shoulders Source: Michael Mitchell PROPOSAL / REQUEST: To amend the Master Street Plan design standards for the Arterial section of Kanis Road from Chenal Downs Boulevard to Walnut Grove Road to two travel lanes of 10.5 feet each and no shoulders from two 11-foot lanes with two 4-foot gravel shoulders. ANALYSIS: Ordinance 18510 approved June 19, 2001 reduced the design standard for Kanis Road west of Stuart Road to two 11-feet lands with two 4-foot gravel shoulders. Kanis Road was and is classified as a Minor Arterial. This was not changed in 2001 and is not proposed for a change currently. The amendment 14 years ago was an attempt to maintain the rural character of the road as it develops. This amendment’s intend is to further protect the tree canopy along Kanis Road through ‘Fletcher Hollow’. The stretch of Kanis Road, between Walnut Grove Road and Chenal Downs Boulevard, has ridges along either side of the road making development difficult. The zoning pattern and future Land Use Plan designations both call for single family development along this corridor. The traffic volumes along this stretch of Kanis Road have been from 1900 to 2300 trips a day for several years. MetroPlan projects the traffic will increase to between 4000 and 6000 trips per day by 2040. Due to the development pattern, current and projected, in the area and location beyond the City, the range of possible volumes is greater than typical for this segment. Kanis Road has always been a route for traffic coming to Little Rock from areas to the west. The applicant and Staff agree that this will continue in the future and that the functional classification of Arterial is appropriate. The area south of Kanis Road through this corridor is now developed or proposed to be developed as large lot residential with no direct access to Kanis Road from the residential tracts, only three street access points along this two plus mile corridor would exist. A typical minor arterial street is 59-feet wide with 5-lanes in a 90-feet of right-of-way similar to Markham St. between Shackleford Rd and Bowman Rd. Approximately 2000 vehicles per day travel on this portion of Kanis Rd today. It is expected the November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: MSP15-02 2 number will increase as more land is developed west of Little Rock. Staff is concerned that the current reduced standard for Kanis Road will be insufficient in the future. The current City of Little Rock ‘Minor Residential Street’ design consisting of 2 – 11 foot lanes is the narrowest street section at 24 feet total width. The service volume on a Minor Residential Street is 400 vehicle trips per day. With the proposed Master Street Plan amendment, Kanis Road with its current traffic volume is proposed with a street section that is narrower than a Minor Residential Street. This section of Kanis Road will operate at a level of service E (LOS-E) at the best. Street section designs found in the Master Street Plan are for a LOS C or better based on the expected traffic volume. Streets with 10-foot lanes and no shoulders are less safe than wider streets with shoulders. The typical lane width of a street is 11 feet. The minimum allowed street width per the latest version of the International Fire Code is 20 feet. Shoulders are constructed for drivers to safely find refuge during times of crisis and not obstruct the travel lanes. Kanis Road is on the Master Bike Plan as a Class 2 Bike Path. A Bike Path along a shoulder road is typically the paved shoulder. Pulaski County Planning has informed the City that they have classified this road - the Kanis Road Scenic Corridor. The standard they would recommend is two (20) 10 foot lands with two five foot shoulders (which could be used as bike lanes) within a 60-foot right-of-way with no sidewalks. They do not recommend any further design reductions for the corridor. Both the City and County regulations require a 30-foot wide road consisting of two-travel lanes and two shoulders. Both staffs recommend no further reduction to the design standard. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: The applicant notified 16 adjacent property owners. Staff has received 17 emails and 1 phone in support and one against the amendment as of this writing. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is not appropriate and recommends denial. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 5, 2015) Walter Malone, Planning Staff presented the item to the Planning Commission. Mr. Malone reminded the Commission that the City in 2001 approved a standard of 2 11-foot lanes with 4-foot shoulders for Kanis Road from Burlingame Road to Stuart Road. The proposed amendment would change that to two lanes (10.5 foot lanes) with November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: MSP15-02 3 no shoulders. Staff believes that shoulders should not be removed from the standard for this over 2-mile stretch of road from safety reasons – assure there is a place to get out of traffic (pull over). The standard proposed is about the same for a Minor Residential Street in the Master Street Plan which is a loop or cul-de-sac street not a through street like Kanis Road. Staff cannot support the proposed amendment. Mr. Michael Mitchell, applicant, addressed the Commission. He indicated that he has been involved with issues related to this road for 38 years and Fletcher Hollow for at least 15 years. The request is for 2-miles, to preserve the natural beauty and history of the Hollow. This is a case for a ‘rare exception’. Mr. Mitchell reviewed some of the history related to Thomas Fletcher (Pulaski County and State). The Hollow and stream are both named for him. There are steep ridges on both sides of Kanis Road, with no utility lines or houses in this stretch (a couple of driveways and pull off stops only). There is a natural beauty with the woods for each season which Mr. Mitchell reviewed. There are seven places where one could pull over currently (in each direction). Mr. Mitchell stated in the years he has traveled the corridor he has never seen a traffic problem. Adding a four foot shoulder would have a greater impact than just four feet on the trees due to topography. (There would have to be large cuts or fills that would affect the trees in order to construct a four foot shoulder.) Please delay the possibility of any changes to the canopy by making this change. If necessary, in the future, a change in standard could always be made due to changed conditions. Mr. Allan Finne, resident since the 1970s, spoke to the Commission. The topography for the area does not allow for expansion of the road. We should not be trying to look at this as a one size fits all. Mr. Drew Kelso, Resident of Chenal Downs, asked for a show of hands of those for the amendment, most of the audience raised their hands. He indicated he was part of the Citizens of West Pulaski County with over 250 members. They wish to preserve the character of the hollow. The group would be willing to talk about things that make sense for the area. They have chosen to live in the area for the rural character – larger lots, wooded areas, wild life. This area should be designated a scenic corridor as the county has done with a lesser or reduced standard. If the canopy could not be destroyed, some widening or shoulders might be appropriate. The addition of some paved areas for pull offs might be appropriate. He called for the City to designate this a scenic corridor and to protect the tree canopy in the hollow. Cathy Morrison spoke to the Commission. Ms. Morrison indicated this was a beautiful area. It is unique with its curves and hills and wooded surroundings. There are places to pull off the road and in all the years she has traveled it she has seen only one accident which was due to high speed. Even with shoulders access speed will be a problem. There is not a safety need for the shoulders and it would be a shame to lose the canopy. The best answer is to approve the amendment. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: MSP15-02 4 Lolly Honea, after saying she did not have anything further to add, asked the Commissioners if they had not driven the corridor to please drive it prior to acting. Judy Hampton stated that for 61 years she has driven through this area. There has only been one accident and that has 50 years ago. Speaking for her family (Miles’/Hampton’s/Lester’s) the amendment should be approved. Gerry Shire, spoke to the Commission, She has lived on 12th and Kanis Street all her life (she noted several different locations along the corridor). Ms. Shire noted the problem of representation for those outside the City – no voice. She supports the desire to preserve the history and natural beauty of the corridor. She noted how family members had used the corridor to travel from points west to Little Rock via covered wagon in the past. Teri Drennan spoke to the Commission of her families’ history in Ferndale and Fletcher Hollow. She noted the damage caused by a tornado. But this would be man-made destruction of trees that could not be replaced and asked that the amendment be approved. Wayne Richie, addressed the Commission. He is and has been a property owner in the area for many years. Safety is important but keeping the tree canopy is also important. He does not support the shoulder but did suggest paving some for the flat areas along the road for pull-outs. There are six flat areas in the right-of-way on each side. They are large enough for an SUV and could be paved. He offered to do this as part of his development rather than construct the shoulders as proposed in the Master Street Plan. Commissioner Bubbus asked about the idea of having pull overs rather than a shoulder and impacts of widening. Mr. Bozynski, Planning Department, indicated that the County had suggested use of the shoulders for other modes of transportation which could not be done without a shoulder. Mr. Mike Hood, Public Works, did indicate that there would have to be some cut and fill and that the stream would have to be moved in some places, this would cause the loss of some trees in the corridor. The exact impacts are unknown at this time. It was noted by Staff that the design is an ultimate design and that at the time of development variances could be requested (such as the pull outs). Any changes to Kanis Road would be done as part of a development along the road, there are no moneys for any public projects at this time. Commissioner May noted there will be subdivisions and changes in the area in the future. Mr. May noted that tracts will be subdivided by heirs, so everyone is going to have to be ready for some give and take. For now, he will vote to amend the Master Street Plan. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: MSP15-02 5 Commissioner Berry stated that the biggest benefit toward preserving the area was done in 2001, when the City amended the standard from 4-lanes to 2 lanes with shoulders. He does not believe that the change requested tonight would be of a benefit to justify the change. A motion was made to approve the amendment as filed. By a vote of 7 for, and 4 against the motion was approved. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 9 FILE NO.: LU15-01 Name: North Central Area Land Use Plan Amendment Location: West of Union Pacific Rail line to Interstate 430, South of Arkansas River to Interstate 630 Request: Various Source: Staff PROPOSAL / REQUEST: As part of the City’s efforts to keep the Future Land Use Plan current, Staff reviewed the Plan in the area west of Union Pacific Rail line to Interstate 430, South of Arkansas River to Interstate 630. The package has nine areas with changes; each area has from one to three changes: Area 1 is south of Markham from Park to Alley east of Schiller. The change is from Residential High Density to Residential Low Density. Residential Low Density provides for single family homes at densities not to exceed 6 units per acre. Such residential development is typically characterized by conventional single family homes, but may include patio or garden homes and cluster homes, provided that the density remain less than 6 units per acre. Area 2 is at the east end of Ozark Point. The change is from Public Institutional to Park Open Space. Park/Open Space includes all public parks, recreation facilities, greenbelts, flood plains, and other designated open space and recreational land. Area 3 is generally between Cantrell Road and Brookwood Drive, south of Riverdale Road. There are three changes in this area. Change 03A is from Commercial to Office (either side of Cedar Hill Road, northeast of Cantrell Road). The Office category represents services provided directly to consumers (e.g., legal, financial, medical) as well as general offices which support more basic economic activities. Change 03B is from Office to Commercial (south east of the Cedar Hill/Old Cantrell Road intersection). The Commercial category includes a broad range of retail and wholesale sales of products, personal and professional services, and general business activities. Commercial activities vary in type and scale, depending on the trade area that they serve. Change 03C is from Commercial to Residential High Density northwest of the Cedar Hill Road-Brookwood Drive intersection). Residential High Density accommodates residential development of more than twelve (12) dwelling units per acre. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU15-01 2 Area 4 is southeast of the I Street/Monroe Street intersection. The change is from Residential High Density to Residential Low Density. Residential Low Density provides for single family homes at densities not to exceed 6 units per acre. Such residential development is typically characterized by conventional single family homes, but may include patio or garden homes and cluster homes, provided that the density remain less than 6 units per acre. Area 5 is either side of Tyler Street between G and H Streets. There are two changes in this area. Change 05A is from Residential Low Density to Public Institutional (west of Tyler between G and H Streets). Public Institutional includes public and quasi-public facilities that provide a variety of services to the community such as schools, libraries, fire stations, churches, utility substations, and hospitals. Change 05B is from Public Institutional to Residential Low Density (east of Tyler between G and H Streets). Residential Low Density provides for single family homes at densities not to exceed 6 units per acre. Such residential development is typically characterized by conventional single family homes, but may include patio or garden homes and cluster homes, provided that the density remain less than 6 units per acre. Area 6 is generally between Jackson and Harrison, Markham and B Streets. There are two changes in this area. Change 06A is from Residential Low Density to Suburban Office (northeast of Harrison and A Streets). Suburban Office provides for low intensity development of office or office parks in close proximity to lower density residential areas to assure compatibility. A Planned Zoning District is required. Change 06B is from Residential Low Density and Commercial to Office (west of Jackson between A and Markham Streets). The Office category represents services provided directly to consumers (e.g., legal, financial, medical) as well as general offices which support more basic economic activities. Area 7 is south of H Street, between Buchanan and Pierce Streets. The change is from Residential Low Density to Public Institutional. Public Institutional includes public and quasi-public facilities that provide a variety of services to the community such as schools, libraries, fire stations, churches, utility substations, and hospitals. Area 8 is north of Markham, between Wingate Drive and Markwood Drive. The change is from Residential High Density to Residential Medium Density. Residential Medium Density accommodates a broad range of housing types including single family attached, single family detached, duplex, town homes, multi-family and patio or garden homes. Any combination of these and possibly other housing types may fall in this category provided that the density is between six (6) and twelve (12) dwelling units per acre. Area 9 is generally south of Markham, either side of Oak Lane. There are two changes in this area. Change 9A is from Residential Low Density to Suburban Office (southwest of Markham and Oak Lane). Suburban Office provides for low intensity development of office or office parks in close proximity to lower density residential areas to assure November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU15-01 3 compatibility. A Planned Zoning District is required. Change 9B is from Residential Low Density to Mixed Use (Roosevelt Road to 24th Street, Commerce to Sherman Streets). Mixed Use provides for a mixture of residential, office and commercial uses to occur. A Planned Zoning District is required if the use is entirely office or commercial or if the use is a mixture of the three. ANALYSIS: The Planning and Development staff began reviewing this area in March 2015. The existing development pattern, as well as existing zoning and recent re-classification actions were reviewed. After field visits and staff discussions, letters were sent to all neighborhood associations in the area asking for suggested changes in the area. No recommendations were forthcoming to Staff. Staff then developed a package of changes and identified affected property owners. All the affected property owners were contacted about the possibility of changing the Land Use Plan designation of their property in July 2015. Staff received numerous phone calls and email responses to that letter notifying them of the proposed changes. Most contacts were informational only. There were several written requests not to make the suggested change for the properties (South of Markham/3rd Street to the Railroad, east of Barton - proposed change from Residential Low Density, Residential High Density and Park/Open Space to Residential Medium Density; and Southwest of the Riverdale Road – Brookwood Drive intersection – proposed change from Commercial to Service Trades District.) Staff modified the package removing both of these areas from the package. The final package of changes was developed and property owners together with neighborhood associations were contacted in October 2015 about the public hearing to consider the changes. Staff believes this package of changes is a ‘clean-up’ to more accurately reflect the current and likely future development pattern in the area of the changes. This resulting ‘package’ of changes should create a more accurate Future Land Use Plan that all can use, whether public or private. Area 1 is south of Markham from Park to Alley east of Schiller. The change is from Residential High Density to Residential Low Density. To the north and east is zoned R-3 (Single Family District) with some R-4 (Two-Family District) zoning. There are primarily single-family houses on this land. To the south is zoned C-3 (General Commercial District), O-3 (General Office District), and R-5 (Urban Residential District). The land is partially undeveloped and the remainder is a multi-story office building. To the west is, C-3 (General Commercial) with pet grooming business and an apartment building. The area of change is zoned R-3 (Single Family District) and R-5 (Urban Residential District), with single-family owner occupied homes. The use of the land is not likely to change in the short of mid-term making Residential Low Density a more appropriate designation. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU15-01 4 Area 2 is at the east end of Ozark Point. The change is from Public Institutional to Park Open Space. In all directions the land is zoned either R-2 (Single Family District) or R-3 (Single Family District). The areas to the north, south and immediate east are all undeveloped and owned by Central Arkansas Water. To the East is a water treatment facility owned by Central Arkansas Water. The change area is zoned PR (Park District) and is developed as a City Park under agreement with Central Arkansas Water. The use of the land is not likely to change in the short of mid-term making Park/Open Space a more appropriate designation. Area 3 is generally between Cantrell Road and Brookwood Drive, south of Riverdale Road. To the north is C-3 (General Commercial District) and I-2 (Light Industrial District) with some PCD (Planned Commercial Districts). The area is a commercial/office area with a mix of restaurants. To the East is O-3 (General Office District) and C-3 (General Commercial District) zoning, with offices and undeveloped tracts. To the south east is C-3 (General Commercial District) and O-2 (General Office District) zoning with businesses and parking. Change 03A is from Commercial to Office (either side of Cedar Hill Road, northeast of Cantrell Road). The area is zoned C-3 (General Commercial District) with two office buildings and a bank. A change to Office is more appropriate with the existing and likely future uses to continue as office uses. Change 03B is from Office to Commercial (south east of the Cedar Hill/Old Cantrell Road intersection). The change area is zoned I-2 (Light Industrial District), C-3 (General Commercial District), and O-2 (General Office District). There are restaurant uses, a health club and a contractor’s facility in this area which is not likely to change in the near or mid-term. Change 03C is from Commercial to Residential High Density northwest of the Cedar Hill Road- Brookwood Drive intersection). The change area is C-3 (General Commercial District) with a new apartment complex on the site, which is not likely to change in the short or mid-term. Area 4 is southeast of the I Street/Monroe Street intersection. The change is from Residential High Density to Residential Low Density. To the north and west is mostly R-2 (Single Family District), with single family detached homes. To the south is zoned C-3 (General Commercial District) with a parking lot. To the east is R-5 (Urban Residential District) zoned land with single-family homes and small apartments. The change area is zoned R-2 (Single Family District) with single-family homes. This is not likely to change in the future making a Residential Low Density designation more appropriate to the use. Area 5 is either side of Tyler Street between G and H Streets. The surrounding areas are R-2 (Single Family District) and zoned R-3 (Single Family District). There are single-family homes to the south, east and west. To the north is a school and church. Change 05A is from Residential Low Density to Public Institutional (west of Tyler between G and H Streets). The area is zoned R-3 (Single Family District) with part of the school located in the area. This is not likely to change in the future making a Public Institutional designation more appropriate to the use. Change 05B is from Public November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU15-01 5 Institutional to Residential Low Density (east of Tyler between G and H Streets). The area is zoned R-3 (Single Family District) with a single-family home located on the lot. This is not likely to change in the future making a Residential Low Density designation more appropriate to the use. Area 6 is generally between Jackson and Harrison, Markham and B Streets. To the north is zoned R-3 (Single Family District) with some R-4 (Two-Family District). There are single-family detached homes on these lots. To the south is Zoned PR (Park) and developed with a football stadium, golf course and other recreational uses. To the east and west is a mix of PCD (Planned Commercial District), POD (Planned Office District), O-3 (General Office District) and C-3 (General Commercial District) zoning. There are restaurants, commercial uses, hotel, and office uses in these areas. Change 06A is from Residential Low Density to Suburban Office (northeast of Harrison and A Streets). The area is zoned PDO (Planned District Office) with the parking area for a medical clinic on the site. This is likely to continue for the near and mid-term making a change to Suburban Office more appropriate. Change 06B is from Residential Low Density and Commercial to Office (west of Jackson between A and Markham Streets). The area is zoned POD (Planned Office District), with a branch bank building on the site. With this development pattern Office would be a more appropriate designation. Area 7 is south of H Street, between Buchanan and Pierce Streets. The change is from Residential Low Density to Public Institutional. To the north is R-2 (Single Family District) zoned land with a school located on it. To the east and south is R-3 (Single Family District) zoned land with homes. To the west is POD (Planned Office District), R-4 (Two-Family District) and O-3 (General Office District) zoned land with offices and apartments. The change area is zoned R-3 (Single Family District) and O-3 (General Office District) with a branch library on the land. The use is likely to remain a library making Public Institutional the most appropriate designation. Area 8 is north of Markham, between Wingate Drive and Markwood Drive. The change is from Residential High Density to Residential Medium Density. To the north, east and south is zoned R-2 (Single Family District), with single-family homes to the north and east. To the south is a school. To the west is R-5 (Urban Residential District) zoned land with an apartment complex. To the southwest is R-4 (Two-Family District) zoned land with school playground. The change area is zoned R-2 (Single Family District) and is undeveloped. Due to the configuration and access issues requests for multifamily development have been rejected. With its proximity to both an apartment complex and a single family neighborhood a residential development with a density between the two would seem most appropriate thus the recommendation for Residential Medium Density for this property. Area 9 is generally south of Markham, either side of Oak Lane. To the north, south and east is generally R-2 (Single Family District) zoned land, with single-family homes. There is a church to the east along Markham. To the west is O-3 (General Office District) zoned land with office buildings. Change 9A is from Residential Low Density November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU15-01 6 to Suburban Office (southwest of Markham and Oak Lane). The change area is zoned O-3 (General Office District) and R-2 (Single Family District) with two offices and a single-family home on the land. This office pattern is likely to continue in the near and mid-term making Suburban office a more appropriate designation. Change 9B is from Residential Low Density to Mixed Use (Roosevelt Road to 24th Street, Commerce to Sherman Streets). The change area is C-3 (General Commercial District) and PCD (Planned Commercial District) with a retail center and two smaller commercial/office uses and a single family house. Due to the location and use pattern Mixed Use would be more appropriate. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Breckenridge NA, Briarwood NA, Capitol View Stiff Station NA, Cedar Hill Terrace, Colony West Home POA, Country Club Heights NA, Eagle Crest NA, Echo Valley POA, Evergreen NA, Foreman Lake Preservation Society, Forest Park NA, Hall High NA, Heights NA, Hillcrest Residents Association, Kingwood NA, Leawood Garden Club, Merriwether NA, Normandy Shannon POA, Overlook POA, Pennbrook/Clover Hill NA, Prospect Terrace Association Inc, River Ridge POA, Riverside NA, Robinwood POA, Sherrill Heights NA, South Normandy POA, Sunnymeade NA, Treasure Hill POA, Wingate POA. Letters were sent to approximately 69 property owners in the area. Staff received several informational calls from area residents as a result of the initial mailing in July. There were requests to not proceed in two areas, which staff is honoring. The second mailing on October 1, 2015 was sent to approximately 39 property owners and the same neighborhood associations to notify them of the public hearing. Staff received a couple of contacts from the second mailing, with one expressing support. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: This package of amendments is designed to make the Future Land Use Plan more representative of current and likely mid-term future uses for this area. Staff recommends the approval of the amended package of changes. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 5, 2015) Walter Malone, Planning Staff reviewed the areas of changes. Staff believes these changes would make the Land Use Plan more reflective of the likely future development patterns in the areas. There was one area of opposition – Area 1. This area is zoned R-3 for the western two-thirds and R-5 for the eastern one-third all but about three of the properties are single-family home owner lots. The one in opposition is a vacant R-3 parcel. Ms. Tonya Hollifield for Ms. Olivia Hollifield spoke to the Commission. Ms. Hollifield gave some history of the site and indicated it had once been a site suggested for November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU15-01 7 parking for a complex across the street. She wanted to assure that if they wanted to proceed with this option they could, so they would rather the Plan not be changed to Residential Low Density in the area. There was discussion about the positives and negative of changing from Residential High Density and the other factors that might be considered if and when this parcel requested a rezoning to allow a use other than single-family. Mr. Ben Allen indicated he received a letter with the area discussed as area 3A previously and he did not understand what was being proposed or why it was proposed and how it would affect his property. Mr. Malone gave a brief explanation of the change in that area and how it might affect a property owner and what it did not do. After discussion Mr. Allen indicated he did not want the change made for his property. Staff indicated they were alright with removing area 3A from the package. Commissioner Berry moved for the approval of the package of changes with area 3A removed. The Commission voted unanimously 10 for 0 against and one absent to approve the package as amended. Staff noted that the first speaker would want area 1 to be removed from the package as well. After a discussion the Commission voted 10 for 0 against to expunge their vote. A new motion was made to approve the package with areas 1 and 3A removed. By a vote of 10 for 0 against and 1 absent the motion was approved. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 10 ITEM: Fall 2015 Ordinance Amendment Package SUBJECT: Planning Commission approval of the Fall 2015 Ordinance Amendment Package STAFF REPORT: The proposed amendments were submitted by staff. A draft of proposed amendment package was sent to an ordinance amendment contact list of 60± persons and groups; including staff, citizen groups and neighborhood coalitions, design and development professionals and sign companies. Those contacted were asked to submit comments and responses to staff to be forwarded to the commission. After the initial package was sent, two additional “clean-up” items were added; one set of changes to reflect language change in the Granite Mountain DOD since Confederate Blvd. has now been renamed Springer Blvd. and an amendment to the home occupation section of the Code to create a process whereby the Commission can revoke a home occupation. The initial package of amendments was reviewed by the Plans Committee on October 14, 2015. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Ordinance Amendments. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 5, 2015) Staff presented each of the proposed amendments. There were no questions and no discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and o absent. PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS DRAFT 2 DATE November 5, 2015 ISSUE: The definition of Bed and breakfast house contains regulatory language that is not needed to be in the definition. CURRENT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE: ( ) Bed and breakfast house means an owner occupied single-family residence which contains not more than five (5) guest rooms which for a fee may be occupied by a guest for no longer than fourteen (14) consecutive days. This activity must obtain a special use permit in the permitted districts of R-1, R-2, and R-3 single-family and R-4 two-family districts. STAFF REPORT: ( ) The last sentence in the definition is not appropriate for inclusion in the definition and can lead to confusion. Each zoning district contains use regulations specifying what uses are permitted by-right, special use or conditional use. SUGGESTED TEXT: ( ) Amend the definition to eliminate the last sentence to then read as follows: Bed and breakfast house means an owner occupied single-family residence which contains not more than five (5) guest rooms which for a fee may be occupied by a guest for no longer than fourteen (14) consecutive days. Page 1 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS DRAFT 2 DATE November 5, 2015 ISSUE: There is currently no code requirement that a sign be erected within any specific time once a sign permit has been obtained. CURRENT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE: ( Section 36-342.1 (d)(1) ) Section 36-545 contains the sign permit requirements but does not include any language regarding when the sign needs to be erected. STAFF REPORT: ( ) The Code does not currently contain any language requiring that a sign be erected within a specific timeframe once a sign permit has been obtained. This could lead to difficulties if a sign permit is issued, in effect “locking up” a site or area and prohibiting another business from being able to obtain a sign permit. SUGGESTED TEXT: ( ) Amend Section 36-545 to add another Subsection (k) to read as follows: (k) Any sign for which a sign permit has been issued must be erected within one-hundred eighty (180) days of the issuance of the permit, otherwise the sign permit shall be voided and the permit fee shall not be refunded. Page 2 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS DRAFT 2 DATE November 5, 2015 ISSUE: New temporary sales devices that violate the City’s sign code but are not satisfactorily noted in the Code as prohibited. CURRENT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE: ( ) Section 36-543 lists prohibited signs and sales promotion devices. STAFF REPORT: ( ) The use of banner type devices that do not comply with the code and yet are not specifically noted has become a problem. The language needs to be more inclusive; specifically adding feather flag banners and bow flag banners. Additionally, the Code needs to specifically address prohibited inflatable devices which incorporate movement; dancing tubes. SUGGESTED TEXT: ( ) Amend Section 36-543 (2) to add feather flag banners and bow flag banners. Amend Section 36-543 to add Subsection (10) to add inflatable devices which incorporate movement; i.e. dancing tube. Page 3 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS DRAFT 2 DATE November 5, 2015 ISSUE: The listing of commercial vehicles prohibited from being parked in residential zones does not include mobile canteen units. CURRENT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE: ( ) Section 36-512 (b) lists the commercial vehicles prohibited from being parked on residential properties. STAFF REPORT: ( ) Staff has had occasion to respond to complaints regarding mobile canteen units being parked on residential properties. The Code specifically lists a variety of prohibited commercial vehicles but does not specifically list mobile canteen units. At the time this section of the code was drafted, the Code did not have mobile canteen units as a defined use. SUGGESTED TEXT: ( ) Amend Section 36-512 (b) to add a new Subsection (9) to read as follows: (9) Mobile Canteen Units. Page 4 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS DRAFT 2 DATE November 5, 2015 ISSUE: Requiring rezoning of a property through the PZD process when a variance is requested from the underlying zoning, not a specific provision of the Design Overlay District. CURRENT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE: ( ) The various DOD’s include a statement that the DOD regulations overlay all other zoning districts so that any parcel of land lying in the overlay district shall also lie within one of the underlying zoning districts and will have requirements of both the DOD and the underlying zoning district. STAFF REPORT: ( ) Under the current ordinance language, a variance from the underlying zoning district requires rezoning the property to a PZD, even though the variance is not from a specific DOD requirement. This leads to an unnecessary and difficult process for what may be a very simple variance. The Hillcrest DOD and River Market DOD were previously revised to allow for Board of Adjustment review of minor variances and variances that are not from the specific provisions of the DOD. SUGGESTED TEXT: ( ) Amend the exceptions section of each DOD to read as follows: Property, if for any reason, that cannot be developed without violating the standards of the Design Overlay District shall be reviewed through the Planned Zoning District (PZD) section of the Zoning Ordinance, with the intent to devise a workable development plan which is consistent with the purpose and intent of the overlay standards. All variances to the underlying zoning requirements shall be reviewed as per Article II, Division 2 Board of Zoning Adjustment. Page 5 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS DRAFT 2 DATE November 5, 2015 ISSUE: The Zoning Ordinance does not currently have specific definitions for or allowable zoning districts listed for small breweries or microbrewery-restaurants. CURRENT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE: ( ) There is no current ordinance language. STAFF REPORT: ( ) City Code does not have specific zoning definitions or use listings for small brewery or microbrewery- restaurants, a growing small business industry in Little Rock. Although staff has thus far addressed the several locations by interpreting the Code, it is best to have those uses defined and placed in the appropriate zoning districts. SUGGESTED TEXT: ( ) Staff recommends placing in the Code two new defined terms “small brewery” and “microbrewery restaurant” and then placing those uses in specific districts. The definitions will be modeled after the State of Arkansas regulations covering such uses as per ACA Title 3 (ACA § 3-1-101 et seq) Proposed New Defined Terms Microbrewery or Microbrewery Restaurant means an establishment operated under the definitions, terms and provisions of Arkansas Code ACA Title 3 (ACA § 3-1-101 et seq) which manufactures beer, malt and hard cider up to 20,000 barrels per year and which may sell products produced on site for on premises and off premises consumption. The establishment may include a restaurant (eating place inside as defined in this chapter). Brewery means an establishment operated under the definitions, terms and provisions of Arkansas Code ACA Title 3 (ACA § 3-1-101 et seq) which manuf actures beer, malt and hard cider up to 45,000 barrels per year and which may sell products produced on site for on premises and off premises consumption. The establishment may include a restaurant (eating place inside as defined in this chapter). Suggested Zoning Districts for Microbrewery or Microbrewery restaurant: By right in UU, C-2, C-3, C-4 and I-2 Conditional use in C-1 and O-3 Suggested Zoning Districts for Brewery: By right in I-2 Conditional use in O-3, C-1, C-2, C-3, C-4 and UU Page 6 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS DRAFT 2 DATE November 5, 2015 ISSUE: The Granite Mountain Corridor Design Overlay District contains references to standards for properties which front onto Confederate Blvd. which has now been renamed. CURRENT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE: ( ) Throughout the Granite Mountain Corridor Design Overlay District Section of the Code Section 36-434.1._ 36-434.9., there are references to the previous street name. STAFF REPORT: ( ) The Granite Mountain Corridor Design Overlay District has design criteria for properties fronting on Confederate and Springer, from Roosevelt Road south to the city limits. The criteria vary in some areas for properties fronting on Confederate or on Springer. On October 20, 2015 the Board of Directors renamed Confederate Blvd. to Springer Blvd. The Code needs to be amended to reflect the change in Street Name without changing any of the existing criteria. SUGGESTED TEXT: ( ) Make changes to the various sections of the Design Overlay District to reflect the change in Street Name. Indicate what is now indicated as “Confederate Blvd.” as “north of the railroad crossing located south of East 30 th Street” and what is now indicated as “Springer Blvd.” as “South of the railroad crossing located south of East 30 th Street” where there is a distinction in design criteria and Delete references to Confederate, leaving Springer where the reference includes both streets. Page 7 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS DRAFT 2 DATE November 5, 2015 ISSUE: There is currently no language in the Zoning Ordinance providing for the revocation of a home occupation found to be in violation of the Code. CURRENT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE: ( ) NONE STAFF REPORT: ( ) Staff has had occasion to be involved in enforcement matters related to a home occupation that is being operated in violation of the Code – established criteria for such uses. There is no procedure to allow for revocation of the home occupation meaning the only enforcement tool available is to issue notices and citations and to take the offender to court. SUGGESTED TEXT: ( ) Amend the home occupation provisions of Chapter 36, Section 36-253. (b) (6) to add a procedure where the Planning Commission may revoke the home occupation. Page 8 [Page 1 of 10] ORDINANCE NO. 1 2 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 36 OF THE 3 CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LITTLE 4 ROCK, ARKANSAS, TO PROVIDE FOR THE 5 MODIFICATION OF VARIOUS PROCEDURES, 6 DEFINITIONS, LAND USE REGULATIONS; AND FOR 7 OTHER PURPOSES. 8 9 WHEREAS, it has been determined by the Little Rock Planning Commission 10 that a regular review of this Chapter is appropriate; and 11 12 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that several 13 modifications are appropriate at this time; and 14 15 WHEREAS, at its 2015, meeting, the 16 Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of these proposed amendments; 17 18 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF 19 DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS: 20 21 SECTION 1. That various provisions of Chapter 36 of the Code of 22 Ordinances of the City of Little Rock, Arkansas, be amended as follow: 23 24 Subsection (a). That Chapter 36, Section 36-3. definition of “bed and 25 breakfast house” be amended to delete certain text and to then read as follows: 26 27 Bed and breakfast house means an owner occupied single-family 28 residence which contains not more than five (5) guest rooms which for a fee 29 may be occupied by a guest for no longer than fourteen (14) consecutive days. 30 31 [Page 2 of 10] Subsection (b). That Chapter 36, Section 36-545. be amended to 1 provide for the addition of a new subsection (m) to read as follows: 2 3 (m) Any sign for which a sign permit has been issued must be erected 4 within one-hundred eighty (180) days of the issuance of the permit, otherwise 5 the sign permit shall be voided and the permit fee shall not be refunded. 6 7 Subsection (c). That Chapter 36, Section 36-543. (2) be amended to 8 provide for the addition of new text and to then read as follows: 9 10 (2) Banners, feather flag banners, bow flag banners, pennants, 11 festoons, searchlights, except as allowed in Section 36-557., subsection (d). 12 13 Subsection (d). That Chapter 36, Section 36-543. be amended to 14 provide for the addition of a new subsection (10) to read as follows: 15 16 (10) Inflatable or semi-inflatable devices which incorporate 17 movement; i.e. dancing tubes. 18 19 Subsection (e). That Chapter 36, Section 36-512. (b) be amended to 20 provide for the addition of a new subsection (9) to read as follows: 21 22 (9) Mobile Canteen Units. 23 24 Subsection (f). That Chapter 36, Section 36-348. be deleted in its 25 entirety and replaced with new text to read as follows: 26 27 Section 36-348. Exceptions. 28 Property, if for any reason, that cannot be developed without violating the 29 standards of the Design Overlay District shall be reviewed through the 30 Planned Zoning District (PZD) section of the Zoning Ordinance, with the 31 [Page 3 of 10] intent to devise a workable development plan which is consistent with the 1 purpose and intent of the overlay standards. All variances to the 2 underlying zoning requirements shall be reviewed as per Article II, 3 Division 2 Board of Zoning Adjustment. 4 5 Subsection (g). That Chapter 36, Section 36-349. (e) be deleted in its 6 entirety and replaced with new text to read as follows: 7 8 (e) Exceptions 9 Property, if for any reason, that cannot be developed without violating the 10 standards of the Design Overlay District shall be reviewed through the 11 Planned Zoning District (PZD) section of the Zoning Ordinance, with the 12 intent to devise a workable development plan which is consistent with the 13 purpose and intent of the overlay standards. All variances to the 14 underlying zoning requirements shall be reviewed as per Article II, 15 Division 2 Board of Zoning Adjustment. 16 17 Subsection (h). That Chapter 36, Section 36-390. be deleted in its 18 entirety and replaced with new text to read as follows: 19 20 Section 36-390. Exceptions. 21 22 Property, if for any reason, that cannot be developed without violating the 23 standards of the Design Overlay District shall be reviewed through the 24 Planned Zoning District (PZD) section of the Zoning Ordinance, with the 25 intent to devise a workable development plan which is consistent with the 26 purpose and intent of the overlay standards. All variances to the 27 underlying zoning requirements shall be reviewed as per Article II, 28 Division 2 Board of Zoning Adjustment. 29 30 31 [Page 4 of 10] Subsection (i). That Chapter 36, Section 36-421. be deleted in it s 1 entirety and replaced with new text to read as follows: 2 3 Section 36-421. Exceptions. 4 5 Property, if for any reason, that cannot be develop ed without violating the 6 standards of the Design Overlay District shall be reviewed through the 7 Planned Zoning District (PZD) section of the Zoning Ordinance, with the 8 intent to devise a workable development plan which is consistent with the 9 purpose and intent of the overlay standards. All variances to the 10 underlying zoning requirements shall be reviewed as per Article II, 11 Division 2 Board of Zoning Adjustment. 12 13 Subsection (j). That Chapter 36, Section 36-434.9. be deleted in its 14 entirety and replaced with new text to read as follows: 15 16 Section 36-434.9. Exceptions. 17 18 Property, if for any reason, that cannot be develop ed without violating the 19 standards of the Design Overlay District shall be reviewed through the 20 Planned Zoning District (PZD) section of the Zoning Ordinance, with the 21 intent to devise a workable development plan which is consistent with the 22 purpose and intent of the overlay standards. All variances to the 23 underlying zoning requirements shall be reviewed as per Article II, 24 Division 2 Board of Zoning Adjustment. 25 26 Subsection (k). That Chapter 36, Section 36-434.34. be deleted in its 27 entirety and replaced with new text to read as follows: 28 29 30 31 [Page 5 of 10] Section 36-434.34. Exceptions. 1 2 Property, if for any reason, that cannot be developed without violating the 3 standards of the Design Overlay District shall be reviewed through the 4 Planned Zoning District (PZD) section of the Zoning Ordinance, with the 5 intent to devise a workable development plan which is consistent with the 6 purpose and intent of the overlay standards. All variances to the 7 underlying zoning requirements shall be reviewed as per Article II, 8 Division 2 Board of Zoning Adjustment. 9 10 Subsection (l). That Chapter 36, Section 36-3. be amended to provide 11 for the addition of two (2) new use definitions “Brewery” and “Microbrewery 12 or Microbrewery Restaurant” to be placed in the alphabetically appropriate 13 locations in Section 36-3. to read as follows: 14 15 Brewery means an establishment operated under the definitions, terms and 16 provisions of Arkansas Code ACA Title 3 (ACA § 3-1-101 et seq) which 17 manufactures beer, malt and hard cider up to 45,000 barrels per year and 18 which may sell products produced on site for on premises and off premises 19 consumption. The establishment may include a restaurant (eating place 20 inside as defined in this chapter). 21 22 Microbrewery or Microbrewery Restaurant means an establishment 23 operated under the definitions, terms and provisions of Arkansas Code 24 ACA Title 3 (ACA § 3-1-101 et seq) which manufactures beer, malt and 25 hard cider up to 20,000 barrels per year and which may sell products 26 produced on site for on premises and off premises consumption. The 27 establishment may include a restaurant (eating place inside as defined in 28 this chapter). 29 30 31 [Page 6 of 10] Subsection (m). That Chapter 36, Section 36-281. (b) (3) be amended 1 to add and separately list “Brewery” and “Microbrewery or Microbrewery 2 Restaurant” to the listing of conditional uses. 3 4 Subsection (n). That Chapter 36, Section 36-299. (c) (2) be amended 5 to add and separately list “Brewery” and “Microbrewery or Microbrewery 6 Restaurant” to the listing of conditional uses. 7 8 Subsection (o). That Chapter 36, Section 36-300. (c) (1) be amended 9 to add “Microbrewery or Microbrewery Restaurant” to the listings of 10 permitted uses. 11 12 Subsection (p). That Chapter 36, Section 36-300. (c) (2) be amended 13 to add “Brewery” to the listing of conditional uses. 14 15 Subsection (q). That Chapter 36, Section 36-301. (c) (1) be amended 16 to add “Microbrewery or Microbrewery Restaurant” to the listing of permitted 17 uses. 18 19 Subsection (r). That Chapter 36, Section 36-301. (c) (2) be amended 20 to add “Brewery” to the listing of conditional uses. 21 22 Subsection (s). That Chapter 36, Section 36-302. (c) (1) be amended 23 to add “Microbrewery or Microbrewery Restaurant” to the listing of permitted 24 uses. 25 26 Subsection (t). That Chapter 36, Section 36-302. (c) (2) be amended to 27 add “Brewery” to the listing of conditional uses. 28 29 30 31 [Page 7 of 10] Subsection (u). That Chapter 36, Section 36-320. (c) (1) be amended to 1 add “Brewery” and “Microbrewery or Microbrewery Restaurant” to the listing of 2 permitted uses. 3 4 Subsection (v). That Chapter 36, Section 36-434.2. be amended to delete 5 certain text and to then read as follows: 6 7 Sec. 36-434.2. Boundaries. 8 The district shall include all parcels located on Springer Blvd. to a 9 distance of three hundred (300) feet of each side of the right-of-way of 10 Highway 365, from the city limits on the south and east to Roosevelt 11 Road on the north and west. 12 13 Subsection (w). That Chapter 36, Section 36-434.4. be deleted in its 14 entirety and replaced with new text to then read as follows: 15 16 Sec. 36-434.4. Setback. 17 North of the railroad crossing located south of East 30 th Street, the 18 setback shall be fifteen (15) feet. 19 South of the railroad crossing located south of East 30 th Street, the 20 setback shall be twenty-five (25) feet. 21 22 Subsection (x). That Chapter 36, Section 36-434.6. (1) and (2) be 23 amended to delete certain text and to add new text to then read as follows: 24 25 (1) North of the railroad crossing located south of East 30 th Street. 26 Sidewalk shall be eight (8) feet wide and may be constructed at the 27 curb. All walks, curbs, gutters and tree grate frames shall be 28 concrete. 29 30 31 [Page 8 of 10] Rather than a green strip along the road, there shall be a paved 1 “tree zone” with minimum 4 X 4 foot tree well including grate. 2 The remaining four (4) feet are to be kept clear for pedestrian 3 movement. 4 5 (2) South of the railroad crossing located south of East 30 th Street. 6 Pedestrian/bike path rather than sidewalk shall be constructed at 7 the property line. Path paved width shall be eight (8) feet. 8 9 Swales along Springer Blvd. shall be at a 3:1 slope and designed to 10 retain (hold) water during large storm events. The swale shall be 11 vegetated with “cells” to reduce water velocity. Swale design and 12 construction shall be reviewed and approved by the State Highway 13 Department. 14 15 Subsection (y). That Chapter 36, Section 36-434.7. (2) be amended to 16 provide for the deletion of certain a text and to then read as follows: 17 18 (2) Surface parking is to be located behind or adjacent to the structure, 19 never between the building and abutting street. Service/loading areas 20 shall not be located facing Springer Blvd. They shall be designed on 21 the side or rear of buildings. 22 23 Subsection (z). That Chapter 36, Section 36-253. (b) (6) be amended to 24 provide for the addition of a new subsection “e” to read as follows: 25 26 e. Revocation procedure. 27 Any approved home occupation may, upon review and action by the 28 planning commission, be revoked. Revocation proceedings may be 29 initiated by staff. The planning commission may revoke the home 30 occupation if it is determined that the use approved under the home 31 [Page 9 of 10] occupation is being conducted in a manner contrary to the original 1 approved application, being conducted in a manner in violation of the 2 provisions of this chapter or contrary to any other laws of the city. 3 4 Notice shall be delivered to the business operator, either by delivery in 5 person or by certified mail, giving notice of the alleged violation and 6 setting a time and date to appear before the planning commission to 7 show cause why the approved home occupation should not be revoked. 8 9 The planning commission shall have final authority. Appeals from the 10 action of the planning commission shall be filed with the board of 11 directors through the office of the city clerk. The content of the appeal 12 filing shall consist of: 13 14 (1) A cover letter addressed to the mayor and board of directors setting 15 forth the request. 16 17 This filing shall occur within thirty (30) days of the action by the 18 planning commission. 19 20 Once an approved home occupation is revoked, notice of the 21 revocation shall be sent to the city finance depart ment and the business 22 license shall be revoked. 23 24 SECTION 2. Severability . In the event any title, section, paragraph, item, 25 sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this ordinance is declared or adjudged to be invalid 26 or unconstitutional, such declaration or adjudication shall not affect the remaining 27 portions of the ordinance which shall remain in full force and effect as if the portion so 28 declared or adjudged invalid or unconstitutional was not originally a part of the 29 ordinance. 30 31 [Page 10 of 10] SECTION 3. Repealer . All laws, ordinances, resolutions, or parts of the 1 same that are inconsistent with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed to 2 the extent of such inconsistency. 3 4 PASSED: ___________________ 5 6 ATTEST: APPROVED: 7 8 9 10 City Clerk Mayor 11 12 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: 13 14 15 16 City Attorney 17 // 18 // 19 // 20 November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: LA-0067 NAME: Landmark Apartments Advance Grading Variance LOCATION: SW corner of Capitol Hill Blvd. and Rushmore Ave. APPLICANT: Sam Alley APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATIVE: William Wiedower AREA: Approximately 8.5 acres CURRENT ZONING: PDR VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from the Land Alteration Regulations to advance grade by clearing and grading approximately 8.5 acres. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Applicant is requesting a variance from the Land Alteration Regulations to advance grade by clearing and grading approximately 8.5 acres located at the southwest corner of Capitol Hill Blvd. and Rushmore Ave. with the issuance of a grading permit for construction of phase 1 of the Landmark Apartments. The variance would allow staff to issue a grading permit for the advance grading activities without imminent construction. The subject property is requested to be advance graded to balance the cut and fill material from the proposed Landmark Apartments site located directly to the east of the subject property. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The 8.5 acre property is covered with trees and steep slopes. The property is zoned PDR. The subject property is located within the Little Rock city limits. The property is bounded by Capitol Hill Blvd. on the north and Rushmore Ave. on the east. Capitol Hills Apartments is located on the west. East of the subject property is the proposed phase 1 of Landmark Apartments which is zoned PDR. East of Rushmore Ave. is undeveloped property zoned PD-R. On the north side of Capitol Hill Blvd. are two (2) single family subdivisions. West of the subject property is Capitol Hill Apartments also zoned PDR. South of the subject property is undeveloped R2 zoned property. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of the time of writing, staff has not been provided proof of notifications being mailed by the applicant to all adjacent property owners including those across streets and alleys. As of the time of writing, staff has received several telephone inquiries or emails about the application from members of the Spring Valley POA. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0067 2 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: 1. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) & (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Other than residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 2. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property to be provided in accordance with Chapter 29, Article IV. Design Criteria and Performance standards. 3. If disturbed area is 1 or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 4. Damage to public and private property due to hauling operations or operation of construction related equipment from a nearby construction site shall be repaired by the responsible party prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 5. Per Sec. 29-197(2), the grading shall be expeditiously completed in a time frame not to exceed one (1) year in duration from the time work commences to installation of all final erosion control measures and vegetation. 6. Per Sec. 29-197(3) provide line of sight illustrations from adjacent street(s) and properties for review by the Planning Commission. An illustration should be provided from Capitol Hill Blvd and an illustration provided from the property on the west. 7. Per Sec. 29-197(11), a permanent vegetative cover of suitable perennial grass shall be established over all disturbed areas. Where indicated by soil tests, pH adjustments and addition of fertilizer may be required. 8. Per Sec. 29-197(12), all erosion and stabilization controls, including permanent vegetation and plantings and stormwater detention systems are to be maintained by the responsible part for a period of 2 years following completion of site grading. 9. Per Sec. 29-197(12), periodic mowing, generally two (2) times per year or more often if required by CLR shall be provided to encourage perennial grass growth. 10. Per Sec. 29-197(13), maintenance for the 2 year period shall be guaranteed through posting of cash, surety bond or letter of credit as referenced in Sec. 31-431(2) at the time of final inspection of the grading activities. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0067 3 11. Per Sec. 29-197(14), all required federal, state, and local permits and approvals shall be obtained prior to commencement of land alteration activities. 12. Public Works staff must be contacted for inspection for final approval of site stabilization prior to acceptance and relinquishment of the maintenance bond. 13. Staked orange fencing must be installed along the open space undisturbed buffer areas during construction to prevent access to these buffer areas. 14. A temporary berm is not required to be constructed adjacent to Phase 1 if construction of building foundations will commence at the time grading activities conclude without delay. With disturbed areas extending to the west property line, a temporary berm must be provided along the west property line to obstruct views. 15. Grading for the access road in Phase 2 should not occur until building construction begins in Phase 1. 16. If retaining walls will not be constructed with advance grading of Phase 2, the grading and drainage plan should be modified to show the slopes graded out to a maximum 3:1 slope. 17. Per Section 29-197(5), undisturbed areas designated for temporary buffers shall be kept undisturbed except for reasonable access to the site. The minimum width of the buffer shall be 50 ft where the subject property is adjacent to other properties, residential streets, collector streets, and industrial streets. A minimum 50 ft undisturbed buffer should remain along the south property line. E. PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS: No comments F. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE: William Wiedower and Ray Hickey of Central Arkansas Engineering were present representing the applicant. Staff presented an overview of the variance application along with staff’s comments. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. G. ANALYSIS: The applicant is proposing to clear and grade approximately 8.5 acres. Grading for phase 1 of Landmark Apartments will disturb approximately 13.4 acres for a total of 21.9 disturbed acres. The subject property is proposed to be used to balance the cut and fill material with phase 1 of Landmark Apartments and located to the east. Due to the site conditions, staff believes excavated material will still be required to be hauled out. November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0067 4 Access to the site should be taken from a gravel construction entrance from Rushmore Ave. through phase 1 of Landmark Apartments property. The applicant has agreed that grading will occur expeditiously and the site will be stabilized prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for Landmark Apartments, Phase 1. Any damage to city streets or infrastructure will be repaired by the applicant prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for Landmark Apartments, Phase 1. Mud, dirt or any debris tracked on paved surfaces must be periodically removed. Erosion control devices will be used during grading operations. The property will be graded to sheet flow stormwater and not pond on the property except in the constructed temporary detention facilities. Maintenance of erosion controls, detention facilities, and construction entrances will occur as needed during the grading period. Within 14 days of completion of the final grading, the disturbed area will be seeded and vegetated with native grasses. Top soil should be installed to establish vegetative growth. When vegetation is established, the erosion control devices can then be removed. The applicant is proposing to maintain 50 ft undisturbed buffers along the west and south property lines and an 80 ft undisturbed buffer along the north property line. The undisturbed buffers will consist of mature trees to obstruct views of the advance graded area. Temporary stormwater detention ponds are proposed to be installed on north and south sides of the subject property. H. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the advance grading of the subject property with the grading of phase 1 of Landmark Apartments and compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraph D of the agenda staff report. In addition, 6 inches of top soil should be installed across the advanced graded area to establish vegetative growth. Prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy on Landmark Apartments, Phase 1, the subject property must be stabilized and vegetation established. I. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (November 5, 2015) The applicant revised the Landmark Apartments Advance Grading Application for Phase 2. The applicant now proposes to remove the temporary detention pond located in the southeast corner of Phase 2 within the 50 ft. temporary undisturbed buffer and the 30 ft. permanent undisturbed buffer. To compensate for the loss in stormwater detention storage volume from the southeast pond, the temporary detention pond located on the north side of Phase 2 adjacent to Capitol Hills Blvd. will be oversized and detain more stormwater than required by the CLR Stormwater Drainage Manual to compensate for the lost volume. Staff recommends approval of the advance grading of the subject property with the grading of phase 1 of Landmark Apartments and compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraph D of the agenda staff report. The advance grading variance approval allows staff to issue an advance grading November 5, 2015 ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LA-0067 5 permit for phase 2 at the time plans are approved and construction is imminent for phase 1. The variance approval does not approve any site plans or grading and drainage plans of the proposed development. The proposed development plans for phase 1 and 2 will be reviewed by staff for conformance with previous approvals at the time the grading permit and building permit applications are provided. The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval on the request to advance grade Phase 2 with imminent construction of Phase 1 as amended for Landmark Apartments. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION VOTE RECORD DATE 1V'�'1 a`I %§tai MEMBER ,t-} �. z-: % ®mmmmmmmm_ >" 1-7 v BELT, JENNIFER MARTINEZ BERRY, CRAIG BROCK, TOM BUBBUS, ALAN mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm BYNUM, BUELAH mmmmmmm®mmmmmmmm COX, KEITH m®mommmmmmmmmmmm �. DILLON, JANET mmmommmmmmmmmmmm ' FINNEY, REBECCA HAMILTON, SCOTT LATTU R E, PAUL mom'mmmommmmmmmm� MAY, BILL B. M®MWM®MnMMMMMMMM� f'16- ✓ 4 A c- / 4 -1- i-,, Meeting Adjourned 5i !� P.M. AYE NAYE ABSENT' ABSTAIN RECUSE mmmmm m ®mmmmmmmm_ BROCK, TOM :: mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmm®mmmmmmmm COX, KEITH m®mommmmmmmmmmmm DILLON, mmmommmmmmmmmmmm •,, mom'mmmommmmmmmm� M®MWM®MnMMMMMMMM� Meeting Adjourned 5i !� P.M. AYE NAYE ABSENT' ABSTAIN RECUSE November 5, 2415 There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 5:50 p.m. Date 1 e reta hairma