Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpc_03 15 2012 LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING – REZONING – CONDITIONAL USE HEARING MINUTE RECORD MARCH 15, 2012 4:00 P.M. I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present being ten (10) in number. II. Members Present: William Changose Janet Dillon J. T. Ferstl Rebecca Finney Keith Fountain Dan Harpool Troy Laha Obray Nunnley, Jr. Amy Pierce Bill Rector Members Absent: Tom Brock City Attorney: Cindy Dawson III. Approval of the Minutes of the February 2, 2012 Meeting of the Little Rock Planning Commission. The Minutes were approved as presented. LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING – REZONING – CONDITIONAL USE HEARING MARCH 15, 2012 4:00 P.M. I. OLD BUSINESS: Item Number: File Number: Title: A. Z-8734 Lee Boarding Facility – Special Use Permit 122 Pleasant Valley Drive II. NEW BUSINESS: Item Number: File Number: Title: 1. Z-8749 Rezoning from R-2 to C-4 12800 Interstate 30 2. LU12-20-01 Land Use Plan Amendment Pinnacle District from Residential Low Density to Residential Medium Density 2.1 Z-5099-F Rezoning from R-2 to MF-12 South side of The Divide Parkway 3. Z-4285-B Catholic High School Athletic Field and Facilities – Conditional Use Permit 4. Z-4343-Z The Ranch Tract I Nursing Home – Conditional Use Permit East side of Ranch Blvd., south of Saratoga Drive 5. Z-6026-A Copas Accessory Dwelling – Conditional Use Permit 15 Hickory Hills Circle 6. Z-6042-H American Tower Corp./Cricket Tower Use Permit 10700 Colonel Glenn Road 7. Z-8736-A The Floating Lotus Yoga Studio and Day Spa – Conditional Use Permit 900 N. University Avenue, Suite 4 Agenda, Page Two II. NEW BUSINESS: Item Number: File Number: Title: 8. MSP12-01 Master Street Plan Amendment adding Chester Street North of La Harpe as a Minor Arterial (to Arkansas River) 9. MSP12-02 Master Street Plan Amendment modifying the Design Standard from Pinnacle Valley Road from County Farm Road to Cantrell Road. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: Z-8734 Name: Lee Boarding Facility – Special Use Permit Location: 122 Pleasant Valley Drive Owner: Kichang and Grace Lee Applicant: Dan F. Bufford Proposal: A Special Use Permit is requested to allow a rooming, lodging and boarding facility to be operated in the single-family residence located on the R-2 zoned property at 122 Pleasant Valley Drive. STAFF UPDATE: On January 9, 2012, the applicant submitted a letter to staff requesting this application be deferred to the March 15, 2012 Planning Commission agenda. The applicant is requesting the deferral to allow time to meet with the Pleasant Valley Property Owners’ Association to discuss the proposal for the property. Staff supports the requested deferral. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 2, 2012) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter on January 9, 2012 requesting this application be deferred to the March 15, 2012 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the March 15, 2012 Agenda with a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted a letter to staff on February 14, 2012 requesting this application be deferred to the April 26, 2012 Agenda. The applicant is in the process of working out issues with the neighborhood association. Staff supports the deferral request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 15, 2012) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter on February 14, 2012 requesting this application be deferred to the April 26, 2012 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8734 2 The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the April 26, 2012 Agenda with a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 1 FILE NO.: Z-8749 Owner: Mountain Investment, LLC Applicant: Rick Middleton Location: 12800 Interstate 30 Area: 2.75 Acres Request: Rezone from R-2 to C-4 Purpose: Stone business in addition to existing uses Existing Use: Cabinet shop and equipment storage SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North – Undeveloped property (floodway); zoned R-2 South – Mixed commercial/light industrial uses (across I-30); zoned C-4 and PCD East – Undeveloped property; zoned C-4 West – Motel and undeveloped property; zoned R-2 and C-4 A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1. Show floodplain delineation on the survey. The FIRM effective date is incorrect. A LOMR was approved in this area on March 17, 2010. 2. At the time of construction, 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. 3. A special Grading Permit for Flood Hazard Areas will be required per Sec. 8-283 prior to construction. 4. In accordance with Section 31-176, floodway areas must be shown as floodway easements or be dedicated to the public. In addition, a 25-foot wide access easement is required adjacent to the floodway boundary. B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT: The site is not located on a CATA bus route. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8749 2 C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION: All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, and the Alexander Road, Otter Creek and SWLR United for Progress Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. D. LAND USE ELEMENT: This request is located in the Otter Creek Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Commercial Industrial (MCI) for this property. This category provides for a mixture of commercial and industrial uses to occur. Acceptable uses are commercial or mixed commercial and industrial. A Planned Zoning District is required if the use is mixed commercial and industrial. The applicant has applied for a rezoning from R-2 (Single Family) to C-4 (Commercial Open Display) for future commercial development/use. Master Street Plan: Interstate 30 is a Freeway. Freeways are meant to service long-distance trips and have full access control (no direct access). Bicycle Plan: There is a Class I, Bike Path, proposed along Fourche Creek north of the site. 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. E. STAFF ANALYSIS: Mountain Investment, LLC, owner of the 2.75 acre property located at 12800 Interstate 30, is requesting to rezone the property from “R-2” Single Family District to “C-4” Open Display District. The rezoning is proposed to allow C-4 use of the property, with possible future development. The property contains a two-story metal and block building located within the north half of the property, along the east property line. A large area of gravel parking and drives is located on the south side of the building, between the building and I-30. A gravel drive from I-30 at the southwest corner of the property serves a vehicular access. The general area contains a mixture of uses and zoning. The R-2 zoned property to the north is undeveloped floodway area. There is undeveloped C-4 zoned property to the west, with a large church facility further west. A motel March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8749 3 (Z Motel) and undeveloped property (zoned C-4) are located to the west. The Pulaski Technical school campus and a large mobile home park are located further west. A mixture of commercial and light industrial use is located across I-30 to the south, with property designated as R-2, C-4, PCD and I-2 zoning. The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property as “MCI” Mixed Commercial Industrial. The proposed rezoning to C-4 does not require a change to the Land Use Plan. Staff is supportive of the requested C-4 rezoning. Staff views the request as reasonable. The property is located along Interstate 30, with additional C-4 zoning to the east, west and south. The proposed C-4 zoning represents a continuation of the zoning pattern in this area. Staff believes rezoning this property to C-4 will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested C-4 rezoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 15, 2012) The applicants were present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: LU12-20-01 Name: Land Use Plan Amendment - Pinnacle Planning District Location: The Divide Parkway Request: Residential Low Density to Residential Medium Density Source: Tim Daters, White Daters PROPOSAL / REQUEST: Land Use Plan amendment in the Pinnacle Planning District from Residential Low Density to Residential Medium Density. This category 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. The owner plans to develop the property as multi-family. EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING: The property is undeveloped (wooded) and currently zoned R-2 and is 34 acres ± in size. Immediately south of the application area on Chenal Parkway is 12± acres of C-3 CUP for mini-storage. Northeast of that property is 9± acres of undeveloped O-3 land. Continuing along Chenal Parkway to the north west is 12± acres of MF-18 property built for apartments. West of it is 26± acres of undeveloped O-3 land. Directly west and north of the project area is land zoned R-2 in large tracts that is undeveloped. Next to the site on the east is 19± acres zoned MF-18 that is under construction as apartments. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN AND RECENT AMENDMENTS: Many changes have been made to the Future Land Use Plan in the area as well as the Cantrell corridor. The following are the latest of those changes in the immediate vicinity. April 5, 2005, multiple changes were was made along Cantrell Road from the Pinnacle Valley Road intersection to Highway 300. In this vicinity, PK/OS and Single Family that bordered Chenal And Cantrell was changed to Commercial three-eights of a mile southeast of the site. Areas from Single Family were changed to Public Institutional to the five-eights of a mile east of the application. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU12-20-01 2 February 17, 2004, multiple changes were made from Office and Single Family to Commercial, from Single Family to Multi-Family, Single Family to Office, and Single Family to Commercial to the southeast of the site with some changes abutting that application and some up to one-half mile away. January 20, 2004, a change from Single Family to Commercial at 19240 Cantrell Road one-quarter mile to the southeast. July 21, 1998, a change was made from Single Family to Office at the intersection of Chenal Parkway and Highway 300 bordering the application to the west. There is a large amount of Commercial (in excess of 110 acres) is located at the intersection of Cantrell and Chenal Parkway. Proceeding north of the Commercial on Chenal Parkway on property that abuts the southern border of the application area are three areas of Office and High Density Residential (respectively, 27± acres and 16± acres.) Proceeding north of the Commercial on The Divide Parkway, there is one area each of Office (8± acres) and High Density Residential (14± acres). The proposed change to Residential Medium Density would abut the two area of Residential High Density. To the north and west of the application is all Residential Low Density. MASTER STREET PLAN: The Divide Parkway is shown on the Master Street Plan as a Local Street. It is build to varying standards in two, three, and four lane sections. It intersects Cantrell Road, a Principal Arterial, on the southeast and intersects Chenal Parkway, a Minor Arterial, on the northeast. The primary function of a Local Street is to provide access to adjacent properties. Local Streets which are abutted by non-residential zoning/use or more intensive zoning than duplexes are considered as “Commercial Streets”. These streets have a design standard the same as a Collector. BICYCLE PLAN: Class I - A Class I bikeway is built separate from or alongside a road. Additional paving and right of way may be required. A Class I is shown along Cantrell Road and on Chenal Parkway south of Cantrell. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU12-20-01 3 Class II - A Class II bikeway is located on the street as either a 5’ shoulder or six foot marked bike lane. Additional paving and right of way may be required. A Class II is shown along Highway 300. Class III - A Class III bikeway is a signed route on a street shared with traffic. No additional paving or right-of-way is required. Class III bicycle route signage may be required. A Class III is shown along Chenal Parkway north of Cantrell. PARKS: According to the Master Parks Plan, this property is not within eight blocks of a park facility; it is in a service deficit area. It is approximately two miles from Pinnacle Mountain State Park and approximately three miles from Taylor Loop Park, a city park. HISTORIC DISTRICTS: There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this amendment. ANALYSIS: This application for a change from Residential Low Density to Residential Medium Density for the development of multi-family housing is currently an undeveloped tract of land. The closest area of Residential Medium Density is immediately east of Joe T. Robinson High School three quarters of a mile to the southeast. It is approximately 6 acres and is currently undeveloped. The next closest area of Residential Medium Density is at the intersection of Cantrell and Ferndale Cutoff, two miles away and has a total of 41 acres located on both sides of Cantrell. The next closest area after that is at Ferndale Cutoff and Denny Road more than two and one-half miles away to the southwest with 62 acres. The latter of these two areas are underdeveloped with single family houses on the sites. Also all three of those areas mentioned are outside the city limits, so infrastructure has not been provided to those areas. In general, there is a shortage of Residential Medium Density in the area because of the lack of infrastructure to the three areas outside the city limits. This application is adjacent to a major node of non-residential uses. Residential Medium Density could provide housing for those individuals that work locally or in the Cantrell Road corridor. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: LU12-20-01 4 Two areas of Residential High Density border the site and are developed as multifamily. Of those areas of Residential High Density within one and one half mile, two of the three are being developed as multifamily. The site at Valley Ranch and Patrick Country Road is being partially developed with a nursing home. While there are areas of higher density in the area, this category would serve a different market than the Residential Medium Density uses would. There is an express CATA bus route that serves this area. The #25 Pinnacle Mountain Express that extends from Roland to downtown has a stop at Highway 10 and Chenal. This application would mean the loss of 34 acres of Residential Low Density. Demand over past few years for single family homes and other residential uses in Residential Low Density has fallen off and is still below norms established before the housing boom. With this proposed change, there is still an ample supply of Residential Low Density in the general area to supply the need at normal to heavier demand. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the following neighborhood associations: Maywood Manor, Duquesne Place, Aberdeen and the Coalition of West Little Rock Neighborhoods. Staff has received one comment from a neighborhood association in opposition to the request. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is appropriate. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 15, 2012) The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. By a vote of 10 for, 0 against and one absent the consent agenda was approved. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 2.1 FILE NO.: Z-5099-F Owner: PDC, LLC (Eugene M. Pfeifer, III) Applicant: Tim Daters, White-Daters and Associates Location: South side of The Divide Parkway Area: 34.51 Acres Request: Rezone from R-2 to MF-12 Purpose: Multifamily Existing Use: Undeveloped SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North – Undeveloped property and single-family residences (across The Divide Parkway); zoned R-2 South – Multifamily development, mini-warehouse development and undeveloped property (along north side of Chenal Parkway); zoned MF-18, C-3 and O-3 East – Multifamily development and undeveloped property; zoned MF-18 and R-2 West – Undeveloped property (across The Divide Parkway); zoned R-2 and O-3 A. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1. The dedication of The Divide Parkway has not been accepted by staff due to a lack of a maintenance bond being provided for the work. B. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT: The site is not located on a CATA bus route. Bus Route #25 (Pinnacle Mountain Express) runs along Highway 10 to the south. C. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION: All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, and the Aberdeen Court, DuQuesne Place and the Coalition of West Little Rock Neighborhoods Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 2.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5099-F 2 D. LAND USE ELEMENT: This request is located in the Pinnacle Mountain Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Residential Low Density (RL) for this property. This category provides 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 R-2 (Single-Family) to MF-12 (Multifamily 12 units per acre) to allow for future development of the property. There is a separate Land Use Plan Amendment on this item. Master Street Plan: The Divide Parkway is a Local Street on the Master Street Plan. A Local Street is to provide access to adjacent property. Local Streets abutting non-single family zoning are considered Commercial Streets. Commercial Streets have a design standard the same as a Collector. 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. E. STAFF ANALYSIS: PDC, LLC, owner of the 34.51 acre property located along the south side of The Divide Parkway (east of Chenal Parkway), is requesting to rezone the property from “R-2”, Single Family District to “MF-12” Multifamily District. The rezoning is proposed to allow future multifamily development of the property. The property is currently undeveloped and wooded. The property has varying degrees of slope. The high point of the property is near the center of the tract, sloping downward in all directions. The property is located in an area, which contains a mixture of zoning and uses. The property immediately north (across The Divide Parkway) is undeveloped and zoned R-2. Single-family residences are located further north. There is an enclosed sewer treatment plant to the northeast. The properties to the south, along the north side of Chenal Parkway are zoned MF-18, O-3 and C-3, and contain multifamily and mini-warehouse uses. The properties to the east are zoned R-2 and MF-18. A multifamily development is currently under construction March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 2.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-5099-F 3 on the MF-18 property. Undeveloped R-2 and O-3 zoned property is located to the west. The City’s Future Land Use Plan designates this property on “RL” Residential Low Density. The applicant has filed a Land Use Plan Amendment for a change to “RM” Residential Medium Density, which is a separate item on this agenda. Staff is supportive of the requested MF-12 rezoning. Staff views the request as reasonable. The proposed medium density multifamily zoning will serve as an area of transition from the Office and Commercial zoned property to the south to the single family zoning to the north. The vast majority of the multifamily zoning of similar density in this general area has been developed or is in the process of being developed. Staff believes the rezoning of this property to MF-12 will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested MF-12 rezoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 15, 2012) The applicants were present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 3 FILE NO.: Z-4285-B NAME: Catholic High School Athletic Field and Facilities – Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: 6300 Father Tribou Drive OWNER/APPLICANT: Catholic Diocese of Little Rock/Wittenburg, Delony and Davidson PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow the addition of an athletic field and associated facilities to this R-2 zoned school campus. 1. SITE LOCATION: The campus is located on the north side of Father Tribou Drive, west of N. University Avenue. The proposed athletic field is to be located on the east side of the campus, near University Avenue. 2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: The school has been a part of this neighborhood for many years. North University in this area is lined with office and institutional uses. Commercial development, including Park Plaza and Mid Town, are located one block to the south. Office and Institutional use are located across Father Tribou Drive to the south. Single-family residences are located adjacent to the north. They have a rear yard relationship to this site. Care must be taken to mitigate any possible impact on those residential properties from noise and light generated by the athletic field. If that is done, the school campus and new athletic facilities can continue 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 Hillcrest and Evergreen Neighborhood Associations. The school was scheduled to hold an open house on March 1, 2012 for interested parties to view the proposed development. 3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: The parking requirement for a school is determined by the age of the students, the number of classrooms and the number of employees. None of those elements are changing. The campus currently contains 397 parking spaces in lots taking access off of Father Tribou Drive. A small parking lot containing 6 ADA parking spaces and 1 parking space for an ambulance is being proposed adjacent to the new athletic field. Access March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4285-B 2 will be through the existing parking area. No new driveways onto the street are proposed. 4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS: Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinance is required. A forty-two (42) foot wide land use buffer is required along the site’s north perimeter where adjacent to single-family residential properties. Seventy (70) percent of this buffer must remain undisturbed. The area appears to be encroached upon with a driveway and reflects grading within this area too; a variance is required. A small amount of building landscaping is required between the building and the parking lot. A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the northern perimeter of the site. Credit towards fulfilling this requirement can be given for existing trees and undergrowth that satisfied this year-around requirement. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped area will be required. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this tree-covered site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when properly preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. 5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1. At time of construction, University Avenue is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial. Dedication of right-of-way to fifty-five (55) feet from centerline will be required. 2. At time of construction, due to the proposed use of the property, the Master Street Plan specifies that Father Tribou Street for the frontage of this property must meet commercial street standards. Dedicate right-of-way to thirty (30) feet from centerline. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4285-B 3 3. At time of construction, a twenty (20) foot radial dedication of right-of- way is required at the intersection of University Avenue and Father Tribou Street. 4. At the time of construction, obtain a franchise agreement from Public Works (Bennie Nicolo, 371-4818) for the private improvements located in the right-of-way. 5. At time of construction, repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 6. At time of construction, 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. 7. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location of the detention facility. 8. At time of construction, if disturbed area is one or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 9. At time of 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: Wastewater: Sewer available to this project. Private sewer system on site. Entergy: Easements will be required for service entrance. Centerpoint Energy: No comment received. AT&T (SBC): No comment received. 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. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4285-B 4 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. 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 (10) 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 Department: Approved as submitted. Install Fire hydrants per Code; maintain access. County Planning: No Comments. CATA: The site is located on a CATA bus route. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (FEBRUARY 22, 2012) The applicants were present. Staff presented the item and noted little additional information was needed. Staff asked that the applicant indicate the speakers on the plan and describe measures to eliminate noise impact on adjacent residences. Public Works and Landscape Comments were noted and discussed. Staff noted there would be a variance to allow an encroachment into the buffer on the north side of the property. Utility and outside agency comments were noted. The applicants described the proposed lighting and stated at the north edge of the property, the lighting “spillover” would be equivalent to moonlight. They stated there would be a meeting for the neighborhood and interested parties on March 1 where the plan would be presented. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4285-B 5 The Committee determined there were no other issues and forwarded the item to the full Commission. STAFF ANALYSIS: Catholic High School for Boys is located on the R-2 zoned property located at 6300 Father Tribou Drive. The school building and parking lots are located on the west side of the campus. An athletic field is located on the east side of the site. An existing field house is located on the north side of the athletic field. The school is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow for construction of a new, permanent athletic field to replace the existing, informal field. Associated with the new field are a new field house and small parking lot. The school will be installing a synthetic turf football field, also sized for soccer, with an eight lane running track around the perimeter of the field. The new turf field will be used for football and soccer practices, freshman and junior varsity games. Varsity football games will remain at War Memorial for the foreseeable future. The field will have new lighting and bleacher style seating for 500 fans on the west side. Concessions and toilets will remain in the existing field house until the new two story field house is constructed in the northwest corner of the existing field area, in the summer of 2013. An 8 ft. high chain link fence will be installed on three sides of the facility for security and control access. An 8 ft. high decorative aluminum picket fence will be installed along Father Tribou Street from near the school sign on University Ave. to the first existing parking lot entrance drive. In this Conditional Use Permit application, the school is requesting a variance from the required 70% buffer on the northwest side of the property to allow for the planned improvements to the existing access road and grading necessary for the new track. Both improvements encroach into a portion of the required 39 ft. buffer. The access road is necessary to connect an existing parking lot to the new required ADA parking area near the field and provide ambulance access to the athletic field area. The access road will be gated for limited use by maintenance and service vehicles and ADA parking during athletic events on the field. The disturbed areas of the buffer will be mitigated by installing enhanced evergreen planting at 15 ft. minimum, as shown in the clouded area on the attached site plan. This will provide landscape screening in the re-graded buffer area and between the ADA parking and adjacent property. The 39 ft. buffer is being maintained on all of the other sides of the property along with a large undisturbed area of the property fronting University Avenue. To minimize the disturbed area and maintain the 50 ft. buffer along University Ave., a segmented concrete block wall, varying from two to ten feet height will be installed on the east side of the track. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4285-B 6 This athletic facility will primarily be used after regular school hours, evenings and some weekends during football and soccer seasons. The campus currently has 397 existing parking spaces plus Handicap parking spaces. The initial bleacher capacity is 500 with provisions being made for an additional 1000 seats in the future if needed. Lighting for the field will be pole mounted energy efficient, "night-sky" type fixtures. The lights will be installed to focus directly on the field and track area only, minimizing light spillover. The light spillover is expected to be less than .5 foot candles at the property line, which is equivalent to moonlight. To staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues. The applicant responded to issues raised at Subdivision Committee and stated the school will comply with all staff comments. The public address system will be directed toward the fans in the bleachers and away from neighboring properties. 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. Staff recommends approval of the requested buffer variance subject to the disturbed and remaining area of the buffer being replanted with enhanced evergreen plantings. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 15, 2012) The applicants were present. There were 4 registered objectors present. Chairman Ferstl recused on the item. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval, subject to compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in the “staff recommendation” above, included the buffer variance. Wallie Sprick addressed the Commission on behalf of the School and described the proposed project. He noted the proposed buffer variance and stated the area would be planted and replanted to provide screening. He presented a planting plan showing the proposed landscaping in the buffer area. He stated the proposed athletic building had not yet been designed but he anticipated it to have an eave height of about 25 feet. Mr. Sprick stated a lighting study had been competed and, using 80 foot tall poles, lighting spillover at the property boundary adjacent to the residential properties would be equivalent to moonlight. He stated speakers would be mounted on the light poles and aimed directly at the stands so there would be no noise spilling over onto the residential properties. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4285-B 7 He concluded by stating he thought they had done a good job of addressing issues for this type of development in an urban setting. David Rieger, of 6306 Ridgecrest, addressed the Commission and presented a petition signed by neighborhood residents opposed to the project. He expressed concerns about the proposed intrusion in to the buffer and asked if the School could design the project so that the buffer was not impacted. Monica Issitt, of 6201 Ridgecrest, stated the neighborhood had generally positive feelings about the school but she also had concerns about the buffer variance. She stated an appraiser had told her the proposed change could negatively impact property values in her neighborhood. She stated she wanted one more meeting with the school and wanted to get timely updates as the project progressed. Ms. Issitt showed the Commission a photograph of the school property taken from her back yard. She expressed concern about the height and color of the proposed chain link fence to be placed along her property, the size and height of the athletic building and the sound and light from the athletic field. Kathy Naylor, of 6305 Ridgecrest, also expressed concerns about the buffer. She stated the previous owner of her home had an agreement with catholic high whereby he planted a rose garden on the school property just behind her home. She stated she wanted a buffer. Mr. Sprick stated the school did not want to alienate any of their neighbors. He said the proposed plantings would be a bonus for the neighbors and would provide better landscaping screening than they currently had. He said a neighborhood meeting had been held at the school and some of those now present had not attended that meeting. In response to a question from Commissioner Nunnley, Mr. Sprick said notice of he neighborhood meeting had gone out to the individual property owners. He said a letter from the school had also been sent. Commissioner Nunnley asked what plan was in place if the buffer variance was denied. Mr. Sprick responded that the school could look at moving the entire project further to the south, away from the neighbors. In response to a question from Commissioner Finney, Mr. Sprick further described the measures to be taken to reduce the impact of lighting and noise on the neighbors. There was further discussion of the possibility of moving the project about 20 feet to the south, greatly reducing the amount of any intrusion into the required buffer. During the discussion, Cynthia Lemley, of 6111 Ridgecrest, expressed her concerns about the buffer. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4285-B 8 When asked, Mr. Sprick agreed to amend the application to move the project 20 feet to the south. Staff stated they would support the buffer variance on the south rather in lieu of a variance on the north. Discussion continued and the neighbors still had questions. It was agreed to defer the item to allow for further discussions. A motion was made to defer the item to the April 26, 2012 meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 recusing (Ferstl). March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 4 FILE NO.: Z-4343-Z NAME: The Ranch Tract I Nursing Home – Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: East side of Ranch Blvd., south of Saratoga Drive OWNER/APPLICANT: Ranch Properties/White Daters and Associates PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the construction of a 54 bed nursing home/Alzheimer’s care facility on this vacant, MF-18 zoned, 3.9 acre tract. 1. SITE LOCATION: The site is located on the east side of Ranch Blvd., south of Saratoga Drive. 2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: The property is located in an area of mixed zoning and uses, where the uses transition from the residential lots in The Ranch to the Institutional, Office and Commercial uses along Ranch Drive and Cantrell Road. The residential neighborhood extends to the east and north. Arkansas Baptist High School is located across Ranch Blvd. to the west. Office uses are located to the southwest. Commercial and Office Uses are located along Cantrell and Ranch Drive to the south. The Leisure Arts facility is located to the southeast. Allowing this 3.9± acre parcel of MF-18 zoned property to be developed for a 54 bed nursing home/Alzheimer’s care facility appears to be an appropriate use for this site and should be compatible with uses and zoning in the area. All owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site, all residents within 300 feet who could be identified and the Johnson Ranch, Chevaux and Coalition of West Little Rock Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request. 3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: A 54 bed nursing home requires 54 on-site parking spaces based on a requirement of 1 space per each bed. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow for a 40-space parking lot with a single driveway off of Ranch Blvd. A second driveway is to provide access to the dumpster and service area. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-Z 2 4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS: Compliance with the City’s Landscape and Buffer Ordinance is required. A twenty-three (23) foot wide land use buffer is required along the site’s east perimeter where adjacent to single family residential properties. Seventy (70) percent of this buffer must remain undisturbed. The area appears to be allocated for this minimal requirement. Interior landscaping must be no less than eight (8) percent of the vehicular use area. Each landscape island must be no less than one hundred fifty (150) square feet in area and seven and one half (7.5) feet in width. A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the eastern perimeter of the site. Credit towards fulfilling this requirement can be given for existing trees and undergrowth that satisfies this year-around requirement. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this tree-covered site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when properly preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. 5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1. At time of construction, sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. 2. At time of construction, repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 3. At time of construction, 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. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-Z 3 4. At time of construction, storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. 5. At time of construction, if disturbed area is one or more acres, obtain a NPDES storm water permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior the start of construction. 6. At time of construction, on site striping and signage plans should be forwarded to Public Works, Traffic Engineering for approval with the site development package. 7. Driveway locations do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The driveway locations are required to be located at least 125 feet from the property line. A variance must be requested for the driveways to be located as shown. 8. At the time of construction, 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. 9. Retaining walls designed to exceed fifteen (15) feet in height are required to seek a variance for construction. Provide proposed wall elevations. 10. 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: Wastewater: Sewer available to this project. Capacity Analysis required for this project prior to connection to Little Rock Wastewater System. Entergy: No comment received Centerpoint Energy: No comment received. AT&T (SBC): No comment received. 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 March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-Z 4 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. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding the size and location of the water meter. 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. 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 (10) 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 Department: Approved as submitted. Install Fire hydrants per Code; maintain access. County Planning: No Comments. CATA: The site is not located on a CATA bus route. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (FEBRUARY 22, 2012) Joe White was present, representing the application. Staff presented the item and noted additional information was needed regarding building height and design, signage, fencing and the height of the proposed retaining wall. Staff noted the requested parking variance and asked Mr. White to provide justification, including the number of employees by shift and days. Mr. White was asked to locate the mechanical equipment. Staff noted any roof-mounted March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-Z 5 equipment would need to be screened from the residential properties located above the site to the east. Public Works and Landscape Comments were noted and discussed. Mr. White was advised to request a driveway spacing variance. Utility and outside agency comments were noted. The applicant was advised to submit responses to staff by February 29, 2012. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission. STAFF ANALYSIS: On April 22, 2010, the Planning Commission approved a conditional use permit to allow for the development of the MF-18 zoned tract for a 54 bed nursing home/Alzheimer’s care facility. The approved development consisted of a one- story building built around a central courtyard and a 54 space parking lot to be located between the building and Ranch Blvd. The building was to have a residential appearance, utilizing materials which complied with the covenants and restrictions at The Ranch. A 30-foot wide undisturbed buffer, with screening, was to be located along the east perimeter, where the site abuts single family. Dumpster service was limited to daylight hours and signage was limited to a single ground-mounted sign and to exceed 6 feet in height and 24 square feet in area and a wall sign not to exceed 32 square feet in area. The item was approved on the consent agenda. The project has not been constructed. The applicant is now requesting approval of a revised CUP to allow construction of the 54 bed nursing home/Alzheimer’s care facility. The building design has been changed but is still a one-story building built around a central courtyard. The area of the site has been increased slightly from 3.8 acres to 3.9 acres. Parking is now proposed to be located adjacent to the building rather than in front of the building. A second, service driveway is proposed on the south side of the site to provide access to the dumpster and service area. The facility will still be, “cut into” the hillside from Ranch Blvd., with a retaining wall not to exceed 15 feet in height. The 30-foot undisturbed buffer on the east side is still proposed with a 6-foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence or dense evergreen plantings, to be placed on the property line adjacent to the single family properties. A single ground sign is proposed. The exterior of the structure will be residential in nature. It is a one-story building with a sloped architectural shingle roof. The exterior will be a combination of brick and siding to match the architectural style of The Ranch. The building will not exceed 30 feet in height. Dumpster service will be limited to daylight hours. The only proposed fencing is located on the east perimeter as an option to March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-Z 6 provide screening where the site is adjacent to residential properties. Screening will be either the fence or dense evergreen plantings. Two variances are requested. Neither driveway meets the requirement of spacing of 125 feet from the property line. Staff expects the use to be a relatively low traffic generator. One driveway is for access to the dumpster and service area only. Staff supports a driveway spacing variance. The facility typically requires 54 parking spaces based on a ratio of one space per bed. The applicant is proposing 40 spaces. This applicant operates other similar facilities and has found that a lesser number of parking spaces are sufficient. They typically have 10-15 employees on staff on two shifts. Shift times are staggered to provide continuity of care. The applicant states as an assisted living Alzheimer’s care facility, the ratio of staff to patients is not as high as in a conventional skilled care nursing home. Additionally, there is sufficient space on the site to expand the parking lot if it is later determined that additional parking is needed. To staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues. The Ranch Commercial bill of assurance contains the following statement: “Properties shall be developed, used or occupied in compliance with the applicable zoning and subdivision codes and regulations of the City of Little Rock.” STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit 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. The undisturbed buffer area is to be marked with orange construction fencing prior to any site work and is to be protected throughout construction. 3. Signage is to be limited to a wall sign on the façade facing Ranch Blvd. and a single ground-mounted sign not to exceed 6 feet in height and 24 square feet in area. 4. No delivery trucks are to stop on Ranch Blvd. and back into the service drive. Nor are they to back out of the service drive onto Ranch Blvd. 5. Any roof-mounted mechanical equipment is to be screened from the residential properties to the east. Staff recommends approval of the driveway spacing and parking variances. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-4343-Z 7 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 15, 2012) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the Commission that on March 15, 2012 the applicant had requested deferral of the item to allow for possible changes to the site plan. Staff recommended approval of the deferral request. A motion was made to waive the bylaws to allow for the late deferral request. The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. The item was then placed on the consent agenda and approved for deferral to the April 26, 2012 meeting by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: Z-6026-A NAME: Copas Accessory Dwelling – Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: 15 Hickory Hills Circle OWNER/APPLICANT: John Copas PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for the construction of a guest house (accessory dwelling) on this R-2 zoned lot. 1. SITE LOCATION: The property is located on Hickory Hills Circle, off of Pebble Beach Drive, west of Hinson Road. 2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: This gated residential neighborhood contains large, single-family residences on larger lots. The bill of assurance for the neighborhood allows guest houses. The POA has approved the proposal. The proposed use appears to be compatible with the area. Notice of the public hearing was sent to all owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site. There is no neighborhood association in the area. The subdivisions POA has reviewed and approved the proposal. 3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: The principal dwelling and accessory dwelling are each required one on-site parking space. The site has a single driveway and a large pad, which will accommodate several vehicles. The proposed accessory structure will have a two-car garage. 4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS: No Comments. 5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1. 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. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6026-A 2 6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS: Wastewater: Sewer available to this project. Entergy: No comment received. Centerpoint Energy: No comment received. AT&T (SBC): No comment received. Water: No Objections – All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. 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: Approved as submitted. Maintain access. County Planning: No Comments. CATA: The site is not located on a CATA bus route. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (FEBRUARY 22, 2012) The applicant, John Copas, was present. Staff presented the item and noted there were no outstanding issues. Staff noted separate utilities were requested, if it was later determined that they would be needed. In response to a question, Mr. Copas stated the POA president had approved the plans. Mr. Copas stated he had a meeting scheduled with the POA on February 27, 2012. Public Works Comments were discussed. Mr. Copas stated he had an engineer’s certification of the design for the retaining wall. Staff discussed the review and certification procedure, both prior to and after construction of the wall. The Committee determined there were no other issues and forwarded the item to the full Commission. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6026-A 3 STAFF ANALYSIS: The large, R-2 zoned lot located at 15 Hickory Hills Circle contains a two-story, brick, single family residence. Hickory Hills is a gated community located off of Pebble Beach Drive, west of Hinson Road. On September 16, 1995, the Commission approved a conditional use permit to allow a previous property owner to construct a two-story guest house (accessory dwelling). That structure was not built. The current property owners are now requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow for construction of a two-story guest house. The proposed accessory dwelling will be design to match the principal dwelling; with the same brick, stone and windows. The ground floor will contain a two-car garage, hobby room, personal office, half bath and storage. The second floor will contain the accessory dwelling; 1 bedroom, kitchen, bath and sitting area. The Code permits two-story construction for accessory buildings with an accessory dwelling as long as the accessory dwelling occupies only the second floor and the ground floor contains a garage and storage space. The proposed accessory dwelling will be used only as a guest house and not for any other purpose. Separate utilities are requested if it is determined that the existing service to the principal dwelling is insufficient to accommodate the addition of the new structure. To staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues. The applicant states approval from the Hickory Hills POA will be obtained prior to construction. The bill of assurance contains the following statement, which implies the allowance of guest houses: LAND USE AND BUILDING TYPE: Said land herein platted shall be held, owned, and used only as residential building sites. No structure shall be erected, altered, placed or permitted to remain on any building site other than a single detached single-family dwelling which shall not exceed two and one-half stories in height, private garages, guest house, servant quarters, and other out buildings incidental and related to residential use of the premises. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit subject to compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in Sections 5 and 6 of the agenda staff report. Staff recommends approval of the request to allow separate utilities, if it is determined that they are necessary. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6026-A 4 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 15, 2012) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval, subject to compliance with the comments and conditions 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 by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 6 FILE NO.: Z-6042-H NAME: American Tower Corp./Cricket Tower Use Permit LOCATION: 10700 Colonel Glenn Road OWNER/APPLICANT: Central Arkansas Water/American Tower Corp. PROPOSAL: A revision to a previously approved Tower Use Permit is requested to allow the existing cellular tower on this R-2 zoned utility site to be increased in height from 130 feet to 144 feet. 1. SITE LOCATION: The tower is located adjacent to a Central Arkansas Water tank, north of Colonel Glenn Road, just east of I-430. 2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: The tower is located on a Central Arkansas Water Tank site overlooking the Colonel Glenn entrance ramp onto I-430. The area around the tower is wooded and currently undeveloped. A strip commercial center, restaurants and the Clear Channel Metroplex and broadcasting studios are located on Colonel Glenn Road; south of the site. Allowing the minor increase in tower height will have no effect on the surrounding uses. Notice of the public hearing was sent to all owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site and the John Barrow Neighborhood Associations. 3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: Access to the site is via a gravel service driveway off of Colonel Glenn Road. The driveway provides access to the CAW parent tract which contains a CAW water tank and two cell towers. There is sufficient parking and driveway space to accommodate service of the tower and water tank. 4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS: No comments, a deferral of landscape and screening requirements was previously approved until a “major change in circumstance” as defined by the Code. The proposed change in tower height is not a major change in circumstance. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6042-H 2 5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: No Comments. 6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS: Wastewater: Sewer not required for this project. Entergy: Easement will be required for new electrical service. Centerpoint Energy: No comment received. AT&T (SBC): No comment received. Water: No Objections – All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. 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. 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. 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 (10) days of installation and annually March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6042-H 3 thereafter. Contact the Cross Connection Section at 377-1226 if you would like to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this project. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No Comments. CATA: Not on a CATA bus route. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (FEBRUARY 22, 2012) Jerry Feathers was present representing American Tower. Staff presented the item and stated there were no outstanding issues. Mr. Feathers stated there would be no change to the tower compound or lease area, just an increase in tower height to accommodate another carrier. The Committee determined there were no issues and forwarded the item to the full Commission. STAFF ANALYSIS: A tower use permit is requested to allow the height of this existing cellular tower to be increased from 130 feet to 144 feet to accommodate an additional carrier. The tower was approved as a conditional use permit on October 31, 1995, prior to adoption of the Ordinance criteria for Wireless Communication Facilities (January 20, 1998). There are currently two carriers with antennae on the tower and equipment within the lease area. The tower and associated equipment are located in a 40’ X 60’ fenced lease area that is itself located in a 2.5 acre Central Arkansas Water tract. The CAW property is fenced and contains a large tank and two cellular towers. On December 20, 1999, an amendment to the Code was approved which required the addition of landscaping and screening around the base of each tower site and which required that existing sites be brought into compliance within 2 years. On May 21, 2002, the Code was further amended to allow the Commission to approval a deferral of those requirements until such time as a “major change in circumstance”. On June 26, 2003, the Commission approved such a deferral for this site. Allowing the proposed 14 foot height increase for this existing tower is not a major change in circumstance as defined by the Code. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6042-H 4 The Code allows a maximum tower height of 150 feet. The tower must be setback from any adjacent residentially zoned property a distance at least equal to the height of the tower. In this case, the site does abut R-2 zoned property, the AHTD owned I-430 right-of-way. The tower has a setback of approximately 26 feet from the right-of-way containing the north-bound entrance ramp for Colonel Glenn Road onto I-430. Abutting properties to the north, east and south are zoned O-2 and C-3. To staff’s knowledge, there are no issues. Allowing the minor increase in tower height should have no impact on other properties. Allowing the tower height increase to accommodate an additional carrier is preferable to having to construct an additional tower. There is no bill of assurance for this acreage tract. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the tower use permit subject to compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in Section 6 of the agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 15, 2012) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval, subject to compliance with the comments and conditions 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 by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 recusing (Rector). March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 7 FILE NO.: Z-8736-A NAME: The Floating Lotus Yoga Studio and Day Spa – Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: 900 N. University Avenue, Suite 4 OWNER/APPLICANT: LARS Land Company/Cassandra Smith PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow a yoga studio and day spa to occupy one bay of the multi-tenant building located on this O-3 zoned property. 1. SITE LOCATION: The site is located on the north side of “H” Street, west of N. University Avenue. 2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: This portion of University Avenue is primarily characterized by office and institutional uses. There are a few non-office type uses located within some of the buildings in the area including a school supply store and another salon. The proposal is to allow a yoga studio and day spa within one bay of this strip center. It does not appear the proposed use will have an impact on any other properties. Notice of the public hearing was sent to all owners of properties located within 200 feet of the site and the Evergreen and Hillcrest Neighborhood Associations. 3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: The site contains a 54-space parking lot with access off of N. University Avenue and “H” Street. The total building area is 9,474 square feet divided into five (5) suites. The yoga studio and day spa is to occupy suite 4, which contains 1,800 square feet, requiring 9 parking spaces (1/200). That leave 45 parking spaces for the remaining uses. There appears to be sufficient parking to accommodate the uses. 4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS: No comments on this use-only issue. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8736-A 2 5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: 1. No right-of-way dedication is required at this time. If the site is redeveloped in the future, right-of-way will be required to be dedicated to meet the Master Street Plan standards. 6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS: Wastewater: Sewer available to this project. Entergy: No comments received. Centerpoint Energy: No comment received. AT&T (SBC): No comment received. Water: No Objections - All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional water meter(s) are required. 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 (10) 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 Department: Approved as submitted. Maintain access at least twenty (20) foot wide. County Planning: No Comments. CATA: The site is located on two CATA bus routes. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (FEBRUARY 22, 2012) The applicant was not present. Staff presented the item and noted there were no outstanding issues. Utility and outside agency comments were noted. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 7 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8736-A 3 The Committee determined there were no outstanding issues and forwarded the item to the full Commission. STAFF ANALYSIS: A conditional use permit is requested to allow a yoga studio and day spa to occupy one 1,800 square foot bay of this multi-tenant, 9,474 square foot, O-3 zoned building. The yoga studio itself is a permitted use in O-3. The day spa aspect of the business requires the CUP. The applicant relocated to this site from another location. When she then came in to get a City privilege license for the new location, she was advised that the CUP was required. Days of activity are seven days a week with hours typically ranging from 9:00 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. at the latest. There are yoga classes at various times during the day with 10 to 15 students per class. The applicant states the yoga classes generate approximately 80% of the business’ income with the spa services generating a small, part-time additional source of income. There are two to three employees. The day spa offers the typical services such as facials, body wraps, massage and herbal treatment. The two spa rooms are 100 square feet each. There appear to be no outstanding issues. The principal use, yoga studio, is permitted in O-3. The day spa aspect is a small portion of the business, both in revenue generated and square footage used. It does not appear that the proposed use will have a negative impact on other properties in the area. Signage will consist of wall signage. The bill of assurance does not address use issues. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit to allow the yoga studio and day spa as proposed subject to compliance with the comments and conditions outlined in Sections 5 and 6 of the agenda staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 15, 2012) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval, subject to compliance with the comments and conditions 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 by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: MSP12-01 Name: Master Street Plan Amendment – Add Chester north of LaHarpe Location: Chester Street and extension, north of LaHarpe crossing the Arkansas River Request: Add Minor Arterial classification north of LaHarpe Source: Staff PROPOSAL / REQUEST: Master Street Plan amendment in the Downtown District to add a Minor Arterial. Chester Street south of LaHarpe is a Minor Arterial south to Wright Avenue. The request would be to continue this classification north of LaHarpe then across the Arkansas River to connect with the Arterial street system in North Little Rock. This would then provide a fourth bridge across the Arkansas River in downtown. MASTER STREET PLAN: Currently, the Master Street Plan shows Chester as a Minor Arterial from LaHarpe to south to Wright Avenue. North of LaHarpe, Chester is a Local Commercial street and goes for one block. LaHarpe is a Principal Arterial. It is State Highway 10 and goes from Interstate 30 west to Fort Smith. There are currently three connections across the Arkansas River: Broadway Bridge (Principal Arterial), Maine Street Bridge (Minor Arterial) and Interstate 30 Bridge (Freeway). BICYCLE PLAN: The bicycle plan shows a Class I - Bike Path along the River (the medical mile, a portion of the Arkansas River Trail). It shows a Class III Bike Route along Markham crossing Chester. However no bike path, lane or route is shown along Chester. PARKS: The Arkansas River Trail is shown on the Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan as an open space. The Plan indicates there is park or open space within eight-blocks of the alignment. HISTORIC DISTRICTS: There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this amendment. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: MSP12-01 2 ANALYSIS: There have been discussions of a fourth bridge over the Arkansas River in or near downtown Little Rock for years. In fact, until 1995, a fourth vehicular bridge had been proposed. This was the Midtown Expressway and it had a bridge just west of the current railroad bridge. It was to connect Interstate 30 to Interstate 40, with a new road paralleling the Union Pacific Railroad tracks. The Broadway Bridge and Interstate 30 Bridge are at, to over capacity currently and Main Street Bridge is around half to two-thirds capacity. Metroplan has indicated an additional 25,000 to 40,000 trips a day are expected by 2030. This would put all the facilities well over capacity. Currently, Chester Street is an Arterial south of LaHarpe to Wright Avenue. The service volume on a four-lane arterial is 18,000 ADT (average daily trips). At LaHarpe, Chester has an ADT of around 8000 and at Interstate 630 around 13,000 ADT. Metroplan estimates that, if built, the new bridge would have 15,000 to 20,000 trips in 2030. These are projected to not be new trips but trips that would have used one of the three existing bridges. Thus the impacts to Chester beyond Capitol should be minimal. Some of the trips could already be on Chester or could return to their current routes prior to getting beyond Capitol Avenue. A Master Street Plan amendment is needed to reclassify Chester Street north of LaHarpe to an Arterial. This would allow regional transportation money to be used for further review of the alignment and fully develop transportation impacts and costs for construction of a new bridge. The North Little Rock Planning Commission has recommended the connection to their City Council. The City of Little Rock’s action would complete the connection across the Arkansas River, so that the alignment may be put on the regional transportations plan. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the four adjacent property owners and the Downtown Neighborhood Association as well as the Downtown Partnership. Staff has received two contacts on this request indicating their concern with it. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is appropriate. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: MSP12-01 3 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 15, 2012) Walter Malone, Planning Staff reviewed the request. Mr. Malone referred to the graphic and explained the street designations. He indicated the Metroplan as the regional planning organization who does the transportation planning for Central Arkansas and as part of this work they have indicated that the currently three bridges downtown will all be over capacity by the year 2030 and a fourth bridge will be needed. The North Little Rock Planning Commission has recommended an amendment to their Master Street Plan. If both cities place the connection on their Plans then the regional agency will be able to use federal funding to further study the bridge to determine the full impacts at this location. Mr. Malone turned the presentation over to Mr. Jim McKenzie, Executive Director of Metroplan. Mr. McKenzie provided some history of studies in the area from the 1980s thru 2003. Most of these had centered on the Midtown Freeway or expressway. He described the alignment of the Midtown route and noting that Interstate 630 had been constructed such that the Midtown could be built under it along the railroad tracts. The City of Little Rock removed this route from its plan in the 1990s. Mr. McKenzie described several developments that are currently on the former alignment of this route making that location less possible to construct. The location connecting Chester across the Arkansas River is one of the few remaining locations where a bridge could be constructed due to development. The most recent study of the river crossings recommended improvements to Broadway, Interstate 30 and the need for another bridge. The Highway Department is moving forward with replacing the Broadway Bridge but due to constraints (buildings) along Broadway this road can not be widened to the needed six lanes. A fourth bridge could provide this needed capacity. After the Broadway Bridge is completed the Highway Department plans to widen Interstate 30, thus for years there will be reduced access across the Arkansas River. There is a well documented need for a fourth bridge. By placing this on the Plan, moneys will be available to fully study the impacts to the area and the transportation system of adding this bridge. Hal Kemp, representing 100 North Street Q1 LLC, addressed the Commission and talked about planning processes used by the City for various proposes – Land Use, Overlays, and Transportation. He noted how citizen involvement and participation has been ‘key’ and there has been an attempt to build consensus on the issues. This has been the process used by the Planning Commission and City in the past. The Commission continues to do this through its review of development plans. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: MSP12-01 4 Mr. Kemp indicated that his client had purchased this land in 2006 to build an office building on one of the last river front properties in Little Rock. Currently, there is a one-story building in the alignment of where an extension of Chester Street would proceed. If this amendment is made, it would stop development of this site and adds uncertainty over the development potential of the land. Once the road is placed on the Plan it affects the entire neighborhood. (Mr. Kemp described the immediate neighborhood and compared to other neighborhoods in Little Rock.) He indicated the bridge was a new idea to this Commission. The uncertainty caused by adding this bridge to the Plan would cause this neighborhood to go into decline. He proposed that a study committee be formed to review the idea of the bridge. The affects on the surrounding area and other uses should be considered and reviewed. This committee should involve citizens and the Commission. Citizens should be asked if the need is for this or other capital issues – drainage and roads. (He provided various examples.) The Planning Commission has a role in this and should exercise that role. If the Commission votes yes today, you are not allowing citizen input and considering traffic impacts. Ask that additional studies be done and input received priory to approving a major change in use such as this bridge connection. Mr. Scott Schallhorm, representing Don Henderson and others (the property at 217 North Chester), addressed the Commission. He indicated they seconded Mr. Kemp’s comments. This action puts a ‘Mark’ on the property and devalues it. The uncertainty affects the value banks and potential buyers might consider for the property. This property is along Chester and is narrow in the east-west direction, any additional right-of-way along the western edge for Chester would have an impact on the developability of the land and could make it unusable. Based on the discussion there would be another study on what to do, then we would still have to figure out where to get the money to build anything. This forces the property into a purgatory of waiting. It would be better to first see if the bridge is needed and cost affective, then only after that to discuss adding the bridge crossing. Ruth Bell, League of Women Voters, next addressed the Commission. Ms. Bell indicated the League supported planning but there is a feeling of lack of information about ‘need’ for this. It is hard to understand the impacts on other efforts, such as the River Trail, etc. This might be okay but we just do not know at this point. If the Commission does approve this, there does need to be additional planning. It is still worthy of additional study with the involvement of the Commission, property owners and citizens. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: MSP12-01 5 Martha Miller, Department of Heritage, indicated they were also in the neighborhood along Chester. The building that houses the State’s collections is very close to Chester along the western right-of-way. They are very concerned about any impacts this change might have on the building and property. There should be a study done on the location to see if this is the best place or one closer to the railroad bridge a little to the west. She recommended delay in action at this time. Steve Hoffman, 1010 North Street, addressed the Commission. He indicated they had moved to this location due to the construction of the Interstate 30 Bridge. He did not know if this would take any of their property or would be immediately to the east of their property. But their parking is along the property line and they could not afford to lose any parking. That would make their property unusable. Mr. McKenzie returned to address the Commission. Mr. McKenzie stated that the road must be on the Plan in order to justify putting money toward study of the impacts. He noted that several of the speakers are aware that if they submit a development plan for their land, the City must within a year purchase their land or allow them to complete their project. This would reduce the uncertainty period. He also wants this to be a transparent process and to involve the owners, neighbors, Commissioners and others. But it must be on the Plan in order to get these answers everyone is asking. Mr. Don Henderson, property owner, stated that as a small property owner there will be an impact on the property. Commissioner Bill Rector stated how uncertainty had affected a property near the airport. There needs to be a way to get some certainty on the issue or shorten the period of uncertainty. Mr. McKenzie indicated the work year starts July 1 and that he would put it in to start then, if approved. The study would take six to nine months. If there is no amendment, then there would be no study and there would be no bridge. There was a discussion about financing the bridge. Mr. McKenzie stated that if the bridge was not at least under construction in five years it was not likely to happen at all. There was a question about why this was an issue now. In part, the studies and reviews of the other three bridges have re-surfaced the issue of a fourth bridge. As to the timing of this amendment, the Metroplan Board will be voting on the work program for July 2012 –June 2013 at their May meeting. It was agreed the study work could be done without the amendment but was the only way to use federal money to pay for the study. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: MSP12-01 6 There was discussion about deferring the item and a motion was made to defer. Commissioner Nunnley stated a Chester Bridge had been mentioned by Metroplan previously. He also noted that on many applications owners state there will be an impact on values that does not mean there will be. There was more discussion about the uncertainty issue and a need to limit that or provide some certainty. There was further discussion about funding. Mr. McKenzie stated a deferral would not be the end of the world. He did note that there had been numerous planning level studies that all recommended a fourth bridge. It was now time to study a location and the impacts that would have on the immediate area and the general traffic pattern on both sides of the river. Mr. Kemp stated all Mr. McKenzie needed was some reasonable assurance that both cities supported this. A letter from the Mayor and City Manager might suffice. But based on previous actions and inactions by the City, they wanted an ordinance. The question should be: Do we as a City want this location for a bridge; Do we want to spend our money on this; Do we have the full impacts? A motion to defer for six weeks was made. There was discussion about whether it should be moved up to the Board of Directors and if that were a better place to address this or if the Planning Commission had the duty to more fully address it first. It was noted by Staff there would not be a citizen committee formed in this six week period. The six weeks would be use to try to address some of the issues and concerns raised. The Commission voted to defer the item by a vote of 9 for, 1 against and 1 absent. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 9 FILE NO.: MSP12-02 Name: Master Street Plan Amendment – Modifying the design standards for Pinnacle Valley Road Location: Pinnacle Valley Road from Cantrell Road to County Farm Road Request: Modifying the Design Standard Source: Pinnacle Valley Neighborhood Association and Staff PROPOSAL / REQUEST: Master Street Plan amendment in the River Mountain for an Alternate Design Standard. An Alternate Design Standard is shown on the Plan when it is desired to build to a different cross-section than that recommended in the Plan. The alternative can be different rights-of-way, or number of lanes or shoulders rather than curbs, etc. Rather than a 5-lane or 4-lane with median section, the proposed design section for Pinnacle Valley Road from Cantrell Road to County Farm Road is 22-foot wide pavement for two-travel lanes, two 7-foot paved shoulders and open ditches on both sides. The right-of-way for 90 feet is not proposed to change. The requested alternate will bring the City’s Master Street Plan into alignment with the Pulaski County Master Street Plan. MASTER STREET PLAN: Pinnacle Valley Road is shown on the Plan as a Minor Arterial. Currently the design standard would be a 90-foot right-of-way with two travel-lanes in each direction and a 14-foot median in the center. Pinnacle Valley Road connects Cantrell Road to State Highway 300. From County Farm Road to the east boundary of Pinnacle State Park, there is an alternate design standard using the industrial street open drainage standard section in the Master Street Plan. This provides for 28-foot pavement with 6-foot paved shoulders, 4-foot street shoulders, with ditches on both sides and a 10-foot utility easement. Through the State Park property and to the east of Highway 300, the alternate design section is 20-foot side paving with two 6-foot paved shoulders, two 2-foot green shoulders with a 10-foot utility corridor, open drainage with ditches at a 3 to 1 slope. March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: MSP12-02 2 BICYCLE PLAN: The Bicycle Plans shows a Class II, Bike Lane along Pinnacle Valley Road. Bike Lanes provide a portion of the pavement for the sole use of bicycles. PARKS: The Little Rock Parks and Recreation Master Plan shows this area as currently not meeting the eight-block strategy (a park or open space within eight-blocks). The Plan does propose a linear open space along the Little Maumelle Creek (which crosses Pinnacle Valley Road just north of the City Limits). With this addition the area would meet the eight-block strategy goal. HISTORIC DISTRICTS: There are no city recognized historic districts that would be affected by this amendment. ANALYSIS: The proposal is to change the design section for Pinnacle Valley Road from Cantrell Road to County Farm Road from a 5-lane or 4-lane with median section to one with 22-foot wide pavement for two-travel lanes, two 7-foot paved shoulders and open ditches on both sides. The right-of-way for 90 feet is not proposed to change. The requested alternate will bring the City’s Master Street Plan into alignment with the Pulaski County Master Street Plan. The area is rural in nature and the proposed change would enhance the rural feel. The Park/Open Space on the Future Land Use Plan is reflective of the creek and floodway that parallels Pinnacle Valley Road in the City Limits. The floodways proximity to the road prohibits most development to the west of the road that is not already developed. The subdivisions that have been built have had driveways that are internal to the subdivision, not with driveways that enter onto Pinnacle Valley Road. Large lot development is more likely in the areas beyond the rail tracks due to the low nature of the property. (Flooding issues from the Little Maumelle, Maumelle and Arkansas Rivers.) With the Two Rivers Park, Maumelle Park and Pinnacle Valley State Park, recreational uses are likely to continue in the area. Thus the Pinnacle Valley area is likely to continue with large-lot (acreage lots) and recreational uses. Traffic volumes along Pinnacle Valley Road have ranged from 3400 to 3900 ADT since 2005. From 1995 through 2005 traffic ranged from 2200 to 2500 ADT. With the limitations on the land and currently development pattern significant March 15, 2012 ITEM NO.: 9 (Cont.) FILE NO.: MSP12-02 3 volume increases are not likely. A two-lane road with limited turns can easily carry volumes well over those currently on the road. Bicycle traffic does use Pinnacle Valley Road and with the connection to the River Trail with Two Rivers Bridge is likely to increase. For safety, a road with shoulders where bicycles could have their own lane (on the shoulder) would be an improvement. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Notices were sent to the forty-seven adjacent property owners as well as the Pinnacle Valley and River Valley Neighborhood Associations. Staff has received informational calls from area residents as well as several supportive contacts. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes the change is appropriate. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 15, 2012) The item was placed on the consent agenda for approval. By a vote of 10 for, 0 against and one absent the consent agenda was approved. �Y r� 0 ' 6� L a w LJ 0 0 in 1 U a 0 0 Z J (I. A t.r W d O_. r7z::�, 70 as L Q ■ 1 m nW) W rWr C� ) Lu -N I. S1. 9 r �i W tI7 a Q_ W d W { 'J ti c [r�p- LU mc�z�c~W�a_ W 0 m w co 0 0 w = C ? z J �- � LL I Z = LL uj �� d © LL < < 3 <-2f _ m 0 >: W < t]' W E C� W ct�- W 0 0 } � Lij ~ Lu m LLJ Z < 2 J C C7 d< � J � Z ` —j-0 }-- < W C7C CIO Q U7 W z W CY .� 27 Z C) W QE� U W M[ 0� T U °a o uj LL LL © LL d = d 7) Z — W w t1' O_. r7z::�, 70 as L Q ■ 1 m nW) W rWr C� ) Lu -N I. S1. 9 r �i W tI7 a Q_ W d W [r�p- LU mc�z�c~W�a_ W 0 m w co 0 0 w = C ? z J �- � LL I Z = LL uj �� d © LL < < 3 <-2f _ m 0 >: W < t]' W E C� W ct�- O_. r7z::�, 70 as L Q ■ 1 m nW) W rWr C� ) Lu -N I. S1. 9 r �i W tI7 a Q_ W d W March 15, 2012 There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 5.44 p.m. Date % t e reta In